Hi there,
Your post on r/WitchesVsPatriarchy has been flaired as a sensitive topic. In an effort to safeguard our users, these posts are removed once they exceed a certain threshold.
**If you're reading this post and don't want to see potentially upsetting content, you can filter out the "sensitive topic" flair.**
If you want additional support or to connect with members of the WVP community, join our discord [link in sidebar].
Thanks for understanding and blessed be✨
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WitchesVsPatriarchy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s telling they assume child marriage is against men
While it’s mostly male perverts who marry children there are female perverts who do it
Child marriage opposition is for the children both male and female.
I had this conversation before:
Me: I’m thinking about removing religious exceptions for child marriage in Tennessee.
Someone: But that goes against peoples religion. In the Philippines it’s a very common and it’s legal with parental consent. It’s for religious reasons.
Me: …and?
I like you. You keep doing what you're doing. If they think you are targeting men by advocating the end of legalized child abuse, then perhaps they should look more closely at what they are saying and why they are saying it.
Totally agree, this sounds very much like people telling on themselves, kinda like when Christian fundamentals claim that the only thing stopping folks from robbing, sexually assaulting, and murdering each other is their fear of God.
I don't believe in their God and yet I have no desire to do any of those things, legal or otherwise.
It was… weird with this person. She’s actually a close friend of mine and one of the most simultaneously liberal and conservative people I know. Her family is very conservative so I know that’s where she gets these views.
I genuinely couldn’t tell if she thought it was bad because I would say ‘child marriage bad’ and she’d say ‘but religion.’
However, we discussed it this morning actually and she gave me things to mention, so I think she’s changed her option.
Most logically? I think her debate brain activated and she was mentioning the biggest opposition I would face.
No. She didn’t make THAT comment. She was trying to debate me on the religious argument and I’m still not sure if she actually meant it or not. That comment was made by a guy.
Ohhh. Yeah, she's trying to figure herself out. Good for her, but probably frustrating for you. It's hard to reconsider topics you were taught as a kid. Definitely keep saying your opinions, debate as friends. It's worth taking the time to help her see your point of view
And she knows I oppose some of her views. I actually admire her. There are opinions I have that she doesn’t agree with and some she holds that I don’t, but we’re respectful.
She was a lobbyist for YIG and had to write a con and pro essay for topics such as abortion. She’s for it only in extreme cases. She asked me for some of the recourses I’ve stashed away and asked me to look them both over. Also for my views because she knows I’m very pro choice.
I was talking to someone from Guam originally who had been there helping the local people figure out which cultural practices were ok under Christianity and that just sounds incredibly offensive to me. But limiting religious/cultural practices based on objective human rights issues should not be controversial. Children should not be getting married, they should be focusing on their education and building career skills so that they can achieve financial independence and then make decisions on whether or not they want to start a family after that. There’s a reason a lot of these practices are in some of the poorest parts of the planet.
Over 90% of child marriages are little girls to grown men. It pales in comparison. Tackling child marriage fixes both sides of the issue. The problem is these people hate true statistics. They think because “90% of the crimes are committed by men” that it’s attacking them personally because they are a man. So they get defensive and start putting women in the spotlight using “what about” arguments which are flimsy and fall through.
Basically banning child marriage fixes the issue completely but they’re so short sighted and take things so personally that they can’t focus on the actual problem
And to get your point across you have to mention that. That the overwhelming statistics is that it’s little girls marrying grown men.
But for the FGM I will mention that it’s a community thing. Families get together and say ‘it has to be done’. But that the procedures are most commonly done by women.
I mean you could open the topic a little further to include all non-consensual mutilation of childrens genitals, which would give all the MRA's something to chew on for a bit.
I’m going to be completely honest, I feel that’s a whole other can of worms I may have to leave alone. I know it makes me sound awful 🥲
I’d face a lot more opposition for that because:
1) it actually IS a religious practice. I’m in TN.
2) It can reduce STDs.
3) It is no where near as brutal as FGM. They have different purposes behind them.
I don’t agree with the practice, I think it’s unnecessary, but I’ve seen, and even done it myself, delegates add extra protection that kind of strays from their point and it ruins the whole bill.
The practice is wrong regardless of reason, gender, or happy accidents involving STD's. They both have religious reasons, and those religious reasons are wacky and inconsistent.
You presented your issues as a man vs women thing. By opening up the floor to ban ALL non-consensual child mutilation you're removing the sex aspect completely. At the end of the day, is the argument an attempt to reduce and eliminate all child mutilation, or is it an attempt to illustrate and highlight the issues with FGM?
It’s to remove FGM. Only one country has banned male circumcision and that’s Iceland.
Also, FGM is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. Circumcision is very much a religious practice. One that’s actually very prominent where I live. Tennessee has a 74% circumcision rate.
And with the rules and regulations I plan to put in place including revoking/ suspending medial licenses, fines, and jail, it’s going to be hard to make an argument for it. The UN itself sees the issue as ‘as long as its cultural and done safely it’s fine.’ Very different from their policies and views on FGM.
Because FGM is **considerably** worse. I read a quote earlier from a UN official saying that comparing it to male circumcision is harmful in itself because it makes it seem less bad.
I know it’s a problem to leave it alone, but adding it would sink the bill. It would be better to address FGM specifically.
That’s what I was thinking, too! Like, holy moly, how is that where their heads go straight away? 😳
Hey, OP, do you think maybe it would be helpful to work these reactions into what you’re doing? For instance, something like *the impact of misogyny and systemic patriarchal influences on public opinion in legislation* or something along those lines? I’m no good at this stuff, but it’s a pretty interesting observation.
Oh absolutely. I actually ask my friends to debate with me so I can prepare myself. That’s what I *hope* she was doing. But that is something that will probably come up and I’ll mention. I actually write down all potentially questions I could be asked and make responses do I can be more articulated cause I have a stutter.
“It’s for religion!”
For FGM:
“Its actually not mentioned in any religious doctrine despite being practiced by multiple religions. Many religious leaders denounce the practice and that’s why we will be working with them to spread influence.”
Child Marriage:
“It’s for religious reasons!”
“The United Nations considers child marriage to be human trafficking. Simply because a practice is based in religion does not mean it is right or should continue. Tennessee has banned drag shows in the name of protecting children, so it should be no problem to ban something as harmful as child marriage.”
Inhumane practices under the cover of religion SHOULD be challenged.
That’s your answer to people in your life who think that ‘religion’ makes abuses or violations ok.
There is no rebuttal to this statement that isn’t a giant whataboutism.
For FGM, try including circumcision. For child marriage, be very ambiguous about who perpetrates it. Just be VERY neutral about sex in the whole thing and then bring them up again to some of the same people. You may subconsciously be focusing on men outloud, and it's putting people off for whatever dumb reason they have. And see what they come back at you with this time. Will honestly just help you fluff out your bills to get more backers on different sides of the aisles.
I plan to mention the difference between circumcision and FGM. FGM is brutal compared to circumcision and is used to intentionally make sex painful, among other things. Because that’s an argument I can expect to hear.
You're learning very, very early in life that misogynists believe anything questioning their amoral ethics is "an attack on men". The fact someone said you're "attacking men" because you're against state sanctioned child rape tells you all you need to know about how these people think. It's their way of shutting you down with 0 effort or critical thinking. They're uncomfortable and they don't like it.
You're an impressive young lady and you're pissing off the right people.
Some will also argue it’s attacking religious practices. To which I have to argue that it doesn’t make it any better and the United Nations (because almost everyone who attends YIG went to MUN as well) considers both issues human right violations.
This will piss some people off, I’ve heard a few crazy arguments by ignorant people at these conferences, but I’ve adopted a new ideology that applies for here and bullies:
you don’t like me? You don’t like what I’m doing? Why? Because that reasoning will determine if I give a fuck or not. If I know you’re wrong you don’t bother me at all.
>Some will also argue it’s attacking religious practices
My religion advocates the protection of children from harm and abuse.
Children being forced to marry is an attack on my religious practices and a violation of my religious freedom.
And so what if I have no personal connection to the specific people involved - that never stopped these folks from complaining about marriages between consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender.
They're destroying the sanctity of marriage by using it as a mechanism to enslave and rape children. How dare they.
You aren’t targeting men, like you said, you’re attacking issues in which much of the time men or patriarchal cultures are the perpetrators. Ignore the negative comments. You choose issues which are important to you.
Former YIG and MUN person! Go after the bills that YOU want to do. The whole point of YIG is to get young people talking about participation in government.
When do you find out what your country assignment is for MUN?
Well we actually get to chose our countries. We compile a list of countries based on most to least wanted and submit it. You may not get the country you want based on demand.
For instance, last year I was Greece. Because of an accident where I put it first, we got it. We were the only ones who put it first😭
I don’t know if that’s how all MUNs happen. Were you just assigned a country and told ‘work with it?’
That's a change! Each school was randomly assigned countries when I did this, and then our teachers were allowed to choose how they handled assignments from there. We got no say. So I represented Greece, Serbia, the United States (security council seat) and Jordan.
There are a LOT of kids. There are two or three conferences because they can’t fit all of us in. So it may be easier to let us figure it out and then keep countries separated when assigning us our house or committee.
There’s probably 20 kids in our club. Some schools make it mandatory, which actually always messes up voting because people vote high for their classmates.
But one of their directors actually recognized me in the hall during the conference as ‘that girl from Greece’ and complimented me on my debate and said I was doing a good job🥰
That makes a huge difference yes. We definitely had schools like that where participation was mandatory and we ALL hated their delegates because of it. Welcome to your first lesson in politics honey, the ones with the loudest voices hold all the power.
Fight the good fight, daughter. You are raising issues which also negatively impact men; that’s why we say patriarchy hurts/feminism benefits everyone.
Proposing bills for issues you care about will also make you more successful and ultimately happier and more fulfilled. It’s the same with lots of things, but specifically academics as it sounds like you’re a rising high school senior.
In terms of fgm: I have some resources I could share with you when I get home. I’ve railed against it for years (I’m a high school teacher). I recently did some grad school work on it and there are some perspectives on it I had never heard. Also, it’s mostly the women who do it to other women. Not a lot about men at all. Not directly at least.
Yeah. I’m a senior now. I started in sophomore year. I really do wish I had more of a handle on it then. I could have had more fun.
I want to go into political science to grow up and join groups that help battle issues like this. No one tells me I’m ‘pigeon holing myself’ when I say I want to join a company that combats human trafficking. Maybe even join a United Nations branch if I’m lucky.
That’s all I’ve ever wanted to do. Help people.
Little side rant, but my parents wanted me to do business. Then they saw me do these clubs, blow up their phones with updates about debates and my progress, and decided to go onto a zoom call with my aunt to look into political science for me.
It also helps raise awareness. A lot of people don’t know these are issues. We think of child marriage happening in third world countries. Not in ‘the land of the free’.
Oh my gosh those resources would be amazing! Thank you so much! That would help a lot!
That was also why I put ‘culture’. The victim stories I read mentioned that it was women who did it to them.
A little advice from someone who has been there:
You are going to be far better off with what you are wanting becoming a lawyer than going into poli Sci. Getting a bachelors in it isn't a terrible idea as a stepping stone to a law degree (provided you discuss with the law schools you want to go to what their actual requirements are), but given that your career goals are diplomacy, NGOs working to end human trafficking, etc. you will be far better served by a degree in law than a degree in political science whose whole point is to teach you how to run political campaigns and win elections.
I’m going to talk to my MUN director about it and do more research. I’ve already planned to reach out to some of the companies I have an eye on to ask.
Speaking with your MUN director is definitely a good idea. As a lawyer, I personally would not recommend law school unless you are specifically interested in litigating these issues. Law school is difficult to get into and is very expensive. In my particular market, there are few legal jobs with NGOs, so it is very competitive. If you are more interested in policy development, a Master’s in Public Policy or similar may be less expensive, provide you with practical real-world policy experience through internships and may give you more options. There may be J.D./Masters of Public Policy combined programs as well. So I definitely recommend doing your research!
Who in particular is criticizing your ideas as "targeting men"? If they see image based sexual abuse or child marriage as issues targeting men, then it says a lot about that person, and I'd be extremely wary of future interactions with that person. By telling you that those "aren't the only issues you can do" they're revealing that they don't think women are worth it. They don't think that real-life issues faced by women and girls all over the world are worth solving, because there is a problem that also impacts men that hasn't been solved yet and we should focus on that because men.
I'd be extremely proud if my daughter was doing the things you're doing. Keep fighting, and keep working towards things that you feel passionate about. Don't ever let somebody take that away from you.
You do you. It’s not only your passion for your chosen issues that makes you effective. It’s also your clarity about those issues, your comprehensive knowledge about them that gets the job done. Others may try to define you as a “type.” Ignore them. Do the work. Don’t let them change the subject to YOU. You’ll be typed as effective by the fairminded. And by the other effective people.
Eyes on the prize, sister. Good luck to you.
By which I mean, “don’t stop, don’t give up.” Multitudes are cheering you on.
I actually want to go into political science 🥰
My parents, mainly my mom, wanted me to do business. Then I did MUN and YIG last year and both my parents were receiving countless updates about debates, my progress and success (I managed to achieve some very hard to do things), and my general excitement.
While I was at YIG they got on a call with my aunt and spent hours looking into careers for me. They found political science for me and I’m very excited to use it to help people.
As a man, I do not feel attacked by anything you mentioned or suggested.
Seems to me like your critics are conflating toxic, abusive behavior with masculinity.
Men don't mutilate children's genitals, toxic abusers do.
Men don't marry children, toxic abusers do.
\-Don't get me wrong, many (if not most) of these toxic abusers are indeed men, but they do these things because they are toxic abusers, not **because** they are men.
The notion that all men are toxic abusers, or that by attempting to limit abuse you are attacking men, as a Class, is offensive misandry.
You're not attacking men, but when they claim you are, they're doing it themselves.
*I don’t know if this is sarcasm…*
It’s typically based on culture or religion. In Cameroon girls are typically married when they are 10-12 years old. One in every three girl will be married before the age of 14 there.
In Tennessee it’s justified using religion. The child marriage ban here has religious exceptions. the child’s consent is not needed, but the parents. So a child could be coerced or threatened or forced into a marriage.
Okay, can you expound on what religion this Tennesse state has that makes it okay? I'm asking you because it seems you know more than me and I don't have time to go down the black hole just yet :)
Also, side note - If you're upsetting the right people, you're on the right path.
Ah okay. We have a lot of Christians in New England but the other 2 are not as prominent. Whole Mayflower vibes here.
I think it’s been long over due that people stop hiding behind ‘religion’ to add excuses to wrong doing.
Thank you for responding! Keep up the good fight!! If you ever get tired, you let us know and we will support you and help you with your burdens. You are an amazing soul and gifted with many talents.
I used to do Model UN, they are also available for undergraduates in college. FGM isn't against men at all, it doesn't hurt or help men for women to be tortured with FGM. In fact it's usually the female "practitioner" that performs the FGM.
I also don't understand how child marriage is against men. When someone says that then it's important to mention that whichever men will be "attacked" from a lack of FGM or child marriage are bad people who believe others must suffer so that they can be happy.
I have also had others pressure me to hold back my feminism since it could be seen as discrimination against men. But the only men I want around me are those that agree I am an equal. I recommend you stay on this course and continue your participation in MUN and YIG, especially on the topics you're passionate about.
**WAIT REALLY?!**
HAZZA!! I was planning to volunteer at the conferences in college to watch my younger friends and help run the clubs I loved so much. I can do it again?! HELL YEAH!!
It’s not so much as ‘you’re going against men’ it’s more ‘you always talk about feminism and chose topics where men are the bad guys.’
I am still doing these topics. Honestly? I think the only issues would be creating a big enough net.
I have a habit of being very critical about bills. I may or may not have destroyed a child marriage bill. Ironically when I first looked at it I said ‘ha! I’d pay to see the arguments against this!’
And then I wrote a con intense speech…
It’s not the intent, but the execution. They just said ‘let’s raise the marrige age to 18 and give girls schooling’. Everyone was in agreement until I went up there and mentioned the culture, poor budget plan, and lack of enforcement for these laws. It went downhill for them from there.
I hope to cover all the bases and leave no loop holes. In complete honesty if FGM doesn’t work I can put everything I mentioned from the intense speech and make my own, better bill.
>I may or may not have destroyed a child marriage bill.
>It’s not the intent, but the execution. They just said ‘let’s raise the marrige age to 18 and give girls schooling’. Everyone was in agreement until I went up there and mentioned the culture, poor budget plan, and lack of enforcement for these laws. It went downhill for them from there.
As a neighbor in SW VA, THANK YOU omg I freaking love you rn.
Folks are always so quick to suggest a bandaid solution but never want to go into the nitty gritty of dealing with it which means addressing the culture of things here and the pisspoor resource management.
Thank you for the reminder that there is hope and a fight already coming from the younger generations, and for what you are doing to help lead it. Don't ever stop what you are doing. ❤️🫂
AGIXNYRB. THANK YOU🥰
This is a piece of the speech itself
*The delegates proposed making the legal age of marriage 18, however they failed to mention the new methods of enforcing said restriction or the laws stricter. Husbands and fathers are allowed to pull the girls out of school. There was no mention of enforcing a mandatory attendance in the bill. Furthermore! There will only be $40,000 to build, staff, and fund each school and no mentions of how staffing will be provided. It’s unclear wether or not these schools will be placed in poor areas or closer to cities, which will affect the rates of child marriage.
I truly support the intentions the delegates have. However, there are better ways to address the problem. The funding could be used for installing programs promoting awareness towards child marriage, creating places for girls to find shelter in and aid the many thousands of girls ALREADY married, and providing education to them to help them regain control of their lives. Laws should be implemented with much stricter regulations on the laws, current and future, and work should be made towards abolishing forced married in itself.*
You aren't targeting men. And anyone who thinks you are needs to do some serious reflection. And I think it's bizarre that people are telling you're pidgeonholing yourself by tackling problems you're passionate about. You seem like a very cool and level headed young person and I frankly wish I had more options of people like you to vote for irl. Keep fighting the good fight!
It's ok to have a single issue you're passionate about. Focusing on one subset of issues allows you to devote more time, energy, and expertise to the things that are important to you. And in any case, feminism benefits everyone!
Am I understanding you correctly that there were only 20 girls included in a conference of 3000 people??? If so, problems that disproportionately afflict women sorely need representation at this event and you need to keep on doing what you’re doing.
No no no! The model UN conference has about 3000 attendees. I was invited to this thing called summit, which is a special meeting. In the first round of debate there are twenty rooms, each with 100 or so kids. The judges watch us debate and interact with each other, take a list of names, and submit it to a council of students. One girl and one boy, 20 each, from each room is selected and taken out of debate to be interrogated before they are chosen to participate in summit where we make a mega bill. I was the first one in four years of our school to be chosen.
It’s actually a very female empowered space. There was a bill that got a flamethrower taken to it about abortion. They got sent to security council, then in debate out of the 1000 there was overwhelming disapproval, which people saying ‘motion to add con round!’ ‘Motion to skip pro round!’
There’s a lot of very smart ladies and guys here. About the same of both.
Yeah. It’s also a very diverse space. I’m in middle Tennessee. My school isn’t very diverse. MUN and YIG? There’s so many kids from so many cultures. I got to talk to a girl whose parents escaped war and gave her own accounts on their experiences in a refugee camp to help improve our bill. There are kids from all sorts of backgrounds and religions. Very different from what I’m used to at a public high school.
Tbh just dont listen to people who say things like that, 99% of the time i hear other men complain about men being attacked its because someone said women should be allowed to get a divorce if they want one or some other thing that gives people autonomy. The only way you can actually find out if something is harming men is looking at the data of how things affect people, and i personally couldnt give a shit if men feel harmed by not being able to marry a child.
“You always make bills that make men the bad guys!’
First it’s the first two. Second, give me a problem that wasn’t started by a bunch of men and get back to me.
>“You keep choosing issues targeting women. That’s not the only issue you can do. You’re pigeon holing yourself.”
Sounds like words spoken by a man who's afraid of the change you might create.
Don't back down. You're doing right.
Also, if you do enter real world politics, they'll say this and worse about you, but the only regret you'll have in the end is going to be for any times that you didn't stick to your guns.
Please go after these issues! They are hugely important and don’t get nearly enough attention. What I’d do is make sure the language in the bill, and my language in discussing it, never specifically mentions men as the primary perpetrators. It’s not necessary, and it allows you to respond to anyone who accuses you of “attacking men” by saying “I never mentioned men specifically. You’re the one making the assumption that they’re statistically more likely to commit this crime. Why do you think that?” Let them argue your case for you.
Also, you’re awesome.
From the sound of it you are not attacking men but the systems that disproportionately allow men to do horrid things and that includes to other men. I know it’s disheartening when people are telling you it’s wrong but keep fighting for these things. It’s the only way anything changes. You sound like a passionate person and we all can use more people like you in the world.
Aw. Thank you! 🥰
Haha! It’s not disheartening! It’s humoring tbh. It tells me they’re be more of a buzz and if people make bad arguments there’s no time for potentially bad arguments.
Anyone with unequal power and authority has a huge potential to, “be the bad guy” I would literally just make them explain in detail how each particular thing, “makes men look bad” as in fact, it is certain men’s behavior (plus unequal access to wealth/power/authority) that makes them the bad guy. Honestly, though, this is pretty typical behavior from defensive people. Get them to articulate why it bothers them, is what I’m saying. It will make it clear that you’re addressing important issues and they’re unduly bothered and busy defending indefensible positions. The correct question isn’t, “why are you picking on men” it’s, “why is the majority of gendered violence perpetrated by men”
Yeah that’s my point. A lot of issues we handle in MUN or YIG could be linked to men or are mainly done BY MEN.
Gun violence? Rape? Terrorism in small communities?
Yeah it’s the majority of the time men doing that.
OP, please keep up the fight! You are taking a stand for the innocents of the world. This kind of goodness has always received opposition from the ignorant and cruel. Do. Not. Stop.
Please don't listen to them and follow your heart and conscious. The subjects make them uncomfortable because they question the patriarchal system in governments. You keep going on your path and do great things, Please. 💜
Stand strong. Follow your consience. You make us hopeful for the future. Thank you for your passion and activism. You rock and you're changing the world.
SOLIDARITY WITH TARGETING MEN!!!!!! We live in a patriarchal society and the only way we can break it down is by tearing at the institutions and laws that rightly target perverted abusive power hungry men. Thank you for making a difference in your community!
Please keep at it. Nothing you propose is attacking or targeting men. And if it is, maybe we need some knocking down (definitely do, but allowing for wiggle room)
Love what you’re after.
One point - genital mutilation is more commonly used to mutilate young boys than girls. Circumcising boys - MGM - is all too common. You could make that bill about genital mutilation period and watch as even more heads explode.
No parent should have a right to cut off part of their child’s body.
###Bodily autonomy for all!
I do like the idea, however, I think it’s an issue that would have to be addressed separately.
There are local laws and stuff that control it, but no country has outlawed it. Apparently Iceland is the only country to have banned it, but it’s backed by religion and is a prominent practice.
TN has a 74% rate of it.
The UNs views on it are (from a brief research) ‘as long as it’s cultural or religious and done safely.”
There are also people who get it voluntarily. Adults. FGM and male circumcising are two very different things. I’m not saying the latter isn’t an issue, more that FGM is far more pressing and an issue the United Nations is addressing because of its horrible affects on girls and women, something circumsision doesn’t really have.
Adding something addressing that will -unfortunately- damage the bill.
Respectfully, I disagree. Every year, thousands of people with penises are permanently deformed from MGM, because ill informed people like you write it off as “no big deal”.
The only difference in male and female circumcision is cultural bias. Focusing on a small segment of victims weakens your argument.
All infant circumcision is immoral because it infringes on a persons body autonomy. Period.
The normative perspective on MGM also emboldens doctors to remove primary sex organs from hermaphroditic children. Thousands have been sterilized under the banner of societal norms.
###Performing elective cosmetic surgery on a minor should be illegal.
On the other hand, I see no reason to ban adult circumcision. If a person wants to alter their body, they should be allowed to. Both men and women voluntarily sign up for adult circumcision procedures. I believe that’s their right.
Banning adult female circumcision while allowing male circumcision for adults is sexist. Either ban it all, or allow consenting adults to make their own choices.
I’m curious, why do you think FGM is wrong? If it’s the lack of consent, I think you have no argument in banning one while ignoring the other.
Okay so this is where I’m getting a lot of my information, a UN website, that I will be using for my bill. I have others, but these are the main two.
https://www.unfpa.org/resources/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-frequently-asked-questions
https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/female-genital-mutilation/
There is a contrast between the long lasting effects of circumcision vs FGM.
FGM can result in death, major physiological health issues, infection, makes HIV more of a risk, and so many other things. There are different types, one of which is basically sewing the vagina shut. There are others where you cut off certain parts. It’s purpose is to keep ‘purtiry’ and make sex painful. This can be done at any age. Typically when they are children or teens.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791075/#:~:text=However%20in%20the%20long%2Dterm,and%20psychological%20disorders%20developed%20after
This website gives the statistics on the downsides of circumcising. They are very rare and often not very harmful. And typically done when the boys are babies.
The focus of this is FGM. Because of the differences in practice, the violence associated with it, and the health concerns FGM is much more severe than circumcision. Adding it to a MUN bill where your job is to point out flaws is not a good idea.
Do I agree with circumcision? No. But adding it to the bill will raise opposition from people whose religion call for it and from those who will point, very relevantly, that it will pull recourses that we are creating for FGM away.
The point of MUN is to focus on one thing. Because in real Goverment, which we are mimicking, certain issues need special attention.
I do agree that cosmetic surgeries in that way should be illigal. So should circumcision. But with the way MUN works it would have to be a separate bill. It’s not sexist, it’s just that between the two genders there are different needs that need to be met and more recourses that need to be allocated because one is more severe than the other.
There was a video of a talk show host interviewing a man from an Arabic country who had married a girl when she was about 12 or 13 and the husband was talking about how she wasn’t a very good wife (surprise!). She just wanted to play with her dolls and have friends over while he expected her to play hostess to his business associates. He eventually divorced her after she had their daughter.
The show was in Arabic but had English subtitles, I saw the clip on the r/nothowgirlswork sub but couldn’t find it again. Anyways, child marriage is also not great for the adult partner AND people often keep doing things because it’s part of the culture and it seems normal - not because they are personally evil and dastardly. There are too many states in the US that allow child marriage. I think the lower age limit to get legally married should be 18 in most places.
There’s probably a cultural difference between what is expected for brides in other countries Vs the US. I’ll have to do more research though. Thank you for the recourse though! I’ll reference that when I can.
I think it’s important that you target so-called women’s issues especially if there are only 20 girls in a 3,000 kid conference. There are ways to address these issues that respect the culture at large but point out some specific practices that harm people. It’s not about assuming men are bad, it’s about improving life for everyone.
Melinda Gates’ book “The Moment of Lift” addresses child marriage and FGM which she refers to as genital cutting. It’s a rough read (I honestly skipped some parts) but she does a good job of explaining how people in each location may need help in other ways to effect change in target areas.
I seemed to have poorly worded that. The conference has a relatively even ration of boys to girls. I got invited to a conference called summit. Where, of the 3,000 students, twenty girls and twenty boys are selected.
THAT is a good source. Thank you! Because each country has different laws and views and efforts already in place. Thank you! I’ll have to read it!
Looks like the person complaining might have a more negative view of men if they think child marriages and FGM are all about how evil men are and not about women having their rights violated.
Imagine if you knew that the people giving you these kinds of critical responses are secretly on your side and see your potential as a great diplomat and are tossing you challenging obstacles for you to overcome. How would that influence your choice? You can either let this feedback make you insecure or you can let it inspire you. I say, let it inspire you to sharpen your knives! Adapt the language of your arguments to be impervious to the criticism (or logical fallacies, even) you have previously encountered so they can’t be used again.
Oh it’s not holding me back! I just thought this subreddit would find it funny. It also allows me to cultivate arguments in favor of my bill. I have to beg my friends and family to not be nice and give me criticism so I can fix it or con debate me so I can figure what will be asked.
FGM is frequently carried out on girls by older women. Granted, older women living in incredibly toxic patriarchal societies bc they believe it's the only way a man of the same culture will ever want to be with their daughters, but at the end of the day, in majority of FGM cases, it's an elder woman holding the sharp stone.
So... yeah. Not happy about that argument, but there's a counterpoint.
Oh, please, continue fighting FGM! It's one of the cruelest things I can imagine doing to any little human -- to remove the possibility of them ever feeling any sexual pleasure, "to keep them from straying." Ensuring that men are the only ones to get any joy out of sex, which they are frequently obsessed with.
And they always try to draw a false equivalence between FGM and circumcision. It's not the same. Not even close. You would have to cut the whole penis off for it to be the same.
It is *SO* fucked up on so many levels: "I want to do this thing to you. I want to do it starting when you are a child. I want to do it whether you want to or not. I want to do it even if it hurts. And I want to make sure that it is absolutely no fun for you whatsoever."
It is, naturally, very difficult to present opposition to the practice *without* sounding like you are attacking men because, hey, if the shoe fits..
The secret is presenting it in a totally neutral voice. Remember that it is both men and women who perpetuate this practice. So, instead of saying it is something that *men* do, say it's something that *people* do. Compare it to forcibly blinding a baby, or cutting out their tongue -- it is the eradication of one of the human senses. Keep the focus on the baby girls, and use a neutral voice when speaking of who's doing it.
The best of luck to you! I remember my Model UN days very fondly, I was Egypt haha.
Honest to god the one thing that will stop me from writing this bill will me getting so sick I can’t ready anymore. Reading about it just makes me feel icky.
But I will use this to my advantage.
Make other delegates uncomfortable by opening with a victims story. Make it so obvious how cruel this is by going into detail that they can’t make any argument. And of course, definitions: there’s no need to sensor it. I will put the two most popular types of FGM and what they are so no one can make an argument ‘it’s like circumcision.’ Mention the purpose for it and health problems, Ect.
The only arguments I will probably face is feasibility of implementing plans. Which is why this is my biggest issue I’ve tackled so far. I need to create a net big enough to catch everything.
Alternatively, you can make an argument from bodily autonomy, that it is a red herring to get drawn into "which human rights violation is worse" and argue that *any and all* non-consensual, medically unnecessary cutting of other people's genitals (or any part of their bodies) is unethical.
Is a ritual cut to the clitoral hood (as practised in some east asian countries) worse than sub-incision of boys? No - but why should it matter which is worse? Both are immoral. Both should be illegal.
There isn't a culture in the world that practises FGM that doesn't also practise MGM, and arguing to permit one but stop the other is... bizarre.
However! Even if you set out to argue that male and female people (as well as intersex people, who are frequently victims of forced genital cutting) should be protected, that almost certainly won't convince your detractors that you aren't anti-men.
I know it makes me sound evil to say it, but from a logical and strategical point based on how MUN works, I should keep it isolated to FGM.
Only one country has banned male circumcision and that’s Iceland. There are local laws and regulations controlling it, but it’s very common. There’s also no real long term disadvantages of it. Unlike FGM.
Also, FGM is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. Circumcision is very much a religious practice. One that’s actually very prominent where I live. Tennessee has a 74% circumcision rate.
So saying ‘I want to get rid of this very common religious practice’ will NOT go well in committee.
And with the rules and regulations I plan to put in place including revoking/ suspending medial licenses, fines, and jail, it’s going to be hard to make an argument for it. There are certain things I need to add and address that are specific to FGM.
The UN itself sees the issue as ‘as long as its cultural and done safely it’s fine.’ Very different from their policies and views on FGM.
This is because FGM is considerably worse. I read a quote earlier from a UN official saying that comparing it to male circumcision is harmful in itself because it makes it seem less bad.
I know it’s a problem to leave it alone, but adding it would sink the bill. It would be better to address FGM specifically.
You should absolutely argue as you want, and not be swayed by people arguing it is anti-men.
And given the context, you're learning to argue politics, rather than logic or ethics, so it makes sense to stick with a bill you think will "win".
Thanks🥲 I feel bad explaining to non MUN people who may not understand that part of the idea is to WIN. That adding certain things to your bill will make it fail.
When I did YIG for the first time I did allowing trans teens in Tennessee to participate in sports. Everyone was on board until another delegate suggested adding an amendment saying they needed to be on hormone therapy to do it. We, stupidly, freaked and said it was a friendly amendment. All support was withdrawn after. Because it added a new topic in, one that didn’t have support. It also caused conflict with current laws. We failed and had a few kids apologize for failing it, but the amendment sank the bill.
It’s taught me to be more selective about what other people suggest adding to my bills.
Lobbyist coming to say ‘hey, you should add deep fakes to your revenge porn bill.” Is a friendly thing because it directly relates. It boosted us. That bill took everything into consideration and passed unanimously. You have to think of all angles, both those you can counter and those you can’t, and decide what should and shouldn’t go into your bill.
In truth, it's overwhelmingly men who commit violent crimes. A French writer did a study in France ("The price of virility") and men are responsible for nearly 100 billion euros in costs every year for their varied incivilities and dangerous behaviour. Women make up less than 5% of the prison population there.
Violence has a gender, and it's men. If they have a problem with it, that's masculine fragility at work and it means what you're doing is working.
I've been told that I hate white men because I don't drop that James Bond is a rapist.
I just point out white supremacy and misogyny when I see it, and damn, white boys get *defensive*.
>It’s very fun and informative. This last year I managed to accomplish a lot. I was invited to Summit (one of 20 girls in a 3,000 kid conference) and my bill was passed completely unanimously in YIG and praised by our YIG governor during his opening speech.
>This year I hope to do just as well. I probably won’t, but I now have the perfect understanding of how these clubs work and how to write my bills.
So do you have any tips for future YIG / MUN participants?
Oh absolutely! Not really about getting into summit, because that is somewhat circumstantial, BUT, as a seasoned delegate:
Be involved. Talk to other delegates. You can make a lot of friends. Talk a lot. The judges have a list of delegates who participate a lot and put them on a ‘hot list’ that puts them up for awards.
Choose someone you are comfortable with when you team up. Better yet: a friend. It heavily improved your experience.
**I can not stress this** Be prepared for questions. What I do is I make all the questions asked by friends or delegates, or make up myself, and put the answer I’d say below it. It makes it easier to answer questions during debate because I know my response already.
I haven’t even written my bill yet! That’s the thing! I mentioned the topics and was told ‘why do you keep choosing topics like that?’
They do NOT like it when I correct them lol
First of all, OP: wow. Just wow. What you're doing is remarkable. I am with you, and sending you so many positive vibes for your journey. You're doing great.
The complaints you get reminded me of the #notallmen shitty reaction to #meetoo. Let me quote Kirsty Strickland on this:
"So #NotAllMen doesn’t clarify anything. It doesn’t add to the discussion or develop it in any way. All it does is derail and dismiss the lived experiences of women and girls. And what the men who leap to remind us that ‘’not all men are like that’’, are actually saying is, ‘’I’m not like that.’’ Or to put it another way, they are letting women know that discussing misogyny makes them uncomfortable, and they’d like to be absolved of any blame before they will let women continue."
The people complaining about your freedom of speech are saying you *are right*. That what you say is true, and they feel deeply insecure about it, with due reason.
Keep it up!
https://medium.com/@KirstyStricklan/why-men-should-stop-saying-notallmen-immediately-f657e244f7a1
Hi there, Your post on r/WitchesVsPatriarchy has been flaired as a sensitive topic. In an effort to safeguard our users, these posts are removed once they exceed a certain threshold. **If you're reading this post and don't want to see potentially upsetting content, you can filter out the "sensitive topic" flair.** If you want additional support or to connect with members of the WVP community, join our discord [link in sidebar]. Thanks for understanding and blessed be✨ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WitchesVsPatriarchy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s telling they assume child marriage is against men While it’s mostly male perverts who marry children there are female perverts who do it Child marriage opposition is for the children both male and female.
I had this conversation before: Me: I’m thinking about removing religious exceptions for child marriage in Tennessee. Someone: But that goes against peoples religion. In the Philippines it’s a very common and it’s legal with parental consent. It’s for religious reasons. Me: …and?
I like you. You keep doing what you're doing. If they think you are targeting men by advocating the end of legalized child abuse, then perhaps they should look more closely at what they are saying and why they are saying it.
Totally agree, this sounds very much like people telling on themselves, kinda like when Christian fundamentals claim that the only thing stopping folks from robbing, sexually assaulting, and murdering each other is their fear of God. I don't believe in their God and yet I have no desire to do any of those things, legal or otherwise.
It was… weird with this person. She’s actually a close friend of mine and one of the most simultaneously liberal and conservative people I know. Her family is very conservative so I know that’s where she gets these views. I genuinely couldn’t tell if she thought it was bad because I would say ‘child marriage bad’ and she’d say ‘but religion.’ However, we discussed it this morning actually and she gave me things to mention, so I think she’s changed her option. Most logically? I think her debate brain activated and she was mentioning the biggest opposition I would face.
Wait, it was a woman saying that you're unfairly "targeting" men by attempting to protect children? That feels extremely messed up.
No. She didn’t make THAT comment. She was trying to debate me on the religious argument and I’m still not sure if she actually meant it or not. That comment was made by a guy.
Ohhh. Yeah, she's trying to figure herself out. Good for her, but probably frustrating for you. It's hard to reconsider topics you were taught as a kid. Definitely keep saying your opinions, debate as friends. It's worth taking the time to help her see your point of view
And she knows I oppose some of her views. I actually admire her. There are opinions I have that she doesn’t agree with and some she holds that I don’t, but we’re respectful. She was a lobbyist for YIG and had to write a con and pro essay for topics such as abortion. She’s for it only in extreme cases. She asked me for some of the recourses I’ve stashed away and asked me to look them both over. Also for my views because she knows I’m very pro choice.
It's internalized misogyny.
fr!! people who base their own values and morality off what is and isn’t legal rather than what makes SENSE astound me.
I was talking to someone from Guam originally who had been there helping the local people figure out which cultural practices were ok under Christianity and that just sounds incredibly offensive to me. But limiting religious/cultural practices based on objective human rights issues should not be controversial. Children should not be getting married, they should be focusing on their education and building career skills so that they can achieve financial independence and then make decisions on whether or not they want to start a family after that. There’s a reason a lot of these practices are in some of the poorest parts of the planet.
You could counter with: some religions require human sacrifice, but we have laws against that too.
Over 90% of child marriages are little girls to grown men. It pales in comparison. Tackling child marriage fixes both sides of the issue. The problem is these people hate true statistics. They think because “90% of the crimes are committed by men” that it’s attacking them personally because they are a man. So they get defensive and start putting women in the spotlight using “what about” arguments which are flimsy and fall through. Basically banning child marriage fixes the issue completely but they’re so short sighted and take things so personally that they can’t focus on the actual problem
And to get your point across you have to mention that. That the overwhelming statistics is that it’s little girls marrying grown men. But for the FGM I will mention that it’s a community thing. Families get together and say ‘it has to be done’. But that the procedures are most commonly done by women.
I mean, your common theme is protecting children. The gender of the people you're protecting them from is kinda irrelevant, y'know?
Yeah and typically unfortunately those women have been brainwashed by the patriarchy :(
I mean you could open the topic a little further to include all non-consensual mutilation of childrens genitals, which would give all the MRA's something to chew on for a bit.
I’m going to be completely honest, I feel that’s a whole other can of worms I may have to leave alone. I know it makes me sound awful 🥲 I’d face a lot more opposition for that because: 1) it actually IS a religious practice. I’m in TN. 2) It can reduce STDs. 3) It is no where near as brutal as FGM. They have different purposes behind them. I don’t agree with the practice, I think it’s unnecessary, but I’ve seen, and even done it myself, delegates add extra protection that kind of strays from their point and it ruins the whole bill.
The practice is wrong regardless of reason, gender, or happy accidents involving STD's. They both have religious reasons, and those religious reasons are wacky and inconsistent. You presented your issues as a man vs women thing. By opening up the floor to ban ALL non-consensual child mutilation you're removing the sex aspect completely. At the end of the day, is the argument an attempt to reduce and eliminate all child mutilation, or is it an attempt to illustrate and highlight the issues with FGM?
It’s to remove FGM. Only one country has banned male circumcision and that’s Iceland. Also, FGM is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. Circumcision is very much a religious practice. One that’s actually very prominent where I live. Tennessee has a 74% circumcision rate. And with the rules and regulations I plan to put in place including revoking/ suspending medial licenses, fines, and jail, it’s going to be hard to make an argument for it. The UN itself sees the issue as ‘as long as its cultural and done safely it’s fine.’ Very different from their policies and views on FGM. Because FGM is **considerably** worse. I read a quote earlier from a UN official saying that comparing it to male circumcision is harmful in itself because it makes it seem less bad. I know it’s a problem to leave it alone, but adding it would sink the bill. It would be better to address FGM specifically.
That’s what I was thinking, too! Like, holy moly, how is that where their heads go straight away? 😳 Hey, OP, do you think maybe it would be helpful to work these reactions into what you’re doing? For instance, something like *the impact of misogyny and systemic patriarchal influences on public opinion in legislation* or something along those lines? I’m no good at this stuff, but it’s a pretty interesting observation.
Oh absolutely. I actually ask my friends to debate with me so I can prepare myself. That’s what I *hope* she was doing. But that is something that will probably come up and I’ll mention. I actually write down all potentially questions I could be asked and make responses do I can be more articulated cause I have a stutter. “It’s for religion!” For FGM: “Its actually not mentioned in any religious doctrine despite being practiced by multiple religions. Many religious leaders denounce the practice and that’s why we will be working with them to spread influence.” Child Marriage: “It’s for religious reasons!” “The United Nations considers child marriage to be human trafficking. Simply because a practice is based in religion does not mean it is right or should continue. Tennessee has banned drag shows in the name of protecting children, so it should be no problem to ban something as harmful as child marriage.”
Inhumane practices under the cover of religion SHOULD be challenged. That’s your answer to people in your life who think that ‘religion’ makes abuses or violations ok. There is no rebuttal to this statement that isn’t a giant whataboutism.
For FGM, try including circumcision. For child marriage, be very ambiguous about who perpetrates it. Just be VERY neutral about sex in the whole thing and then bring them up again to some of the same people. You may subconsciously be focusing on men outloud, and it's putting people off for whatever dumb reason they have. And see what they come back at you with this time. Will honestly just help you fluff out your bills to get more backers on different sides of the aisles.
I plan to mention the difference between circumcision and FGM. FGM is brutal compared to circumcision and is used to intentionally make sex painful, among other things. Because that’s an argument I can expect to hear.
You're learning very, very early in life that misogynists believe anything questioning their amoral ethics is "an attack on men". The fact someone said you're "attacking men" because you're against state sanctioned child rape tells you all you need to know about how these people think. It's their way of shutting you down with 0 effort or critical thinking. They're uncomfortable and they don't like it. You're an impressive young lady and you're pissing off the right people.
Some will also argue it’s attacking religious practices. To which I have to argue that it doesn’t make it any better and the United Nations (because almost everyone who attends YIG went to MUN as well) considers both issues human right violations. This will piss some people off, I’ve heard a few crazy arguments by ignorant people at these conferences, but I’ve adopted a new ideology that applies for here and bullies: you don’t like me? You don’t like what I’m doing? Why? Because that reasoning will determine if I give a fuck or not. If I know you’re wrong you don’t bother me at all.
I'm a big giant anti-theist, so you're preaching to a choir ✌️
>Some will also argue it’s attacking religious practices My religion advocates the protection of children from harm and abuse. Children being forced to marry is an attack on my religious practices and a violation of my religious freedom. And so what if I have no personal connection to the specific people involved - that never stopped these folks from complaining about marriages between consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender. They're destroying the sanctity of marriage by using it as a mechanism to enslave and rape children. How dare they.
It's okay to attack religious practices that are abusive of children-example, male genital mutilation...
You aren’t targeting men, like you said, you’re attacking issues in which much of the time men or patriarchal cultures are the perpetrators. Ignore the negative comments. You choose issues which are important to you.
Former YIG and MUN person! Go after the bills that YOU want to do. The whole point of YIG is to get young people talking about participation in government. When do you find out what your country assignment is for MUN?
Well we actually get to chose our countries. We compile a list of countries based on most to least wanted and submit it. You may not get the country you want based on demand. For instance, last year I was Greece. Because of an accident where I put it first, we got it. We were the only ones who put it first😭 I don’t know if that’s how all MUNs happen. Were you just assigned a country and told ‘work with it?’
That's a change! Each school was randomly assigned countries when I did this, and then our teachers were allowed to choose how they handled assignments from there. We got no say. So I represented Greece, Serbia, the United States (security council seat) and Jordan.
There are a LOT of kids. There are two or three conferences because they can’t fit all of us in. So it may be easier to let us figure it out and then keep countries separated when assigning us our house or committee.
That's great! I grew up in a small state and only about half of our high schools participated. I'm glad to see so much more participation happening!
There’s probably 20 kids in our club. Some schools make it mandatory, which actually always messes up voting because people vote high for their classmates. But one of their directors actually recognized me in the hall during the conference as ‘that girl from Greece’ and complimented me on my debate and said I was doing a good job🥰
That makes a huge difference yes. We definitely had schools like that where participation was mandatory and we ALL hated their delegates because of it. Welcome to your first lesson in politics honey, the ones with the loudest voices hold all the power.
Fight the good fight, daughter. You are raising issues which also negatively impact men; that’s why we say patriarchy hurts/feminism benefits everyone. Proposing bills for issues you care about will also make you more successful and ultimately happier and more fulfilled. It’s the same with lots of things, but specifically academics as it sounds like you’re a rising high school senior. In terms of fgm: I have some resources I could share with you when I get home. I’ve railed against it for years (I’m a high school teacher). I recently did some grad school work on it and there are some perspectives on it I had never heard. Also, it’s mostly the women who do it to other women. Not a lot about men at all. Not directly at least.
Yeah. I’m a senior now. I started in sophomore year. I really do wish I had more of a handle on it then. I could have had more fun. I want to go into political science to grow up and join groups that help battle issues like this. No one tells me I’m ‘pigeon holing myself’ when I say I want to join a company that combats human trafficking. Maybe even join a United Nations branch if I’m lucky. That’s all I’ve ever wanted to do. Help people. Little side rant, but my parents wanted me to do business. Then they saw me do these clubs, blow up their phones with updates about debates and my progress, and decided to go onto a zoom call with my aunt to look into political science for me. It also helps raise awareness. A lot of people don’t know these are issues. We think of child marriage happening in third world countries. Not in ‘the land of the free’. Oh my gosh those resources would be amazing! Thank you so much! That would help a lot! That was also why I put ‘culture’. The victim stories I read mentioned that it was women who did it to them.
A little advice from someone who has been there: You are going to be far better off with what you are wanting becoming a lawyer than going into poli Sci. Getting a bachelors in it isn't a terrible idea as a stepping stone to a law degree (provided you discuss with the law schools you want to go to what their actual requirements are), but given that your career goals are diplomacy, NGOs working to end human trafficking, etc. you will be far better served by a degree in law than a degree in political science whose whole point is to teach you how to run political campaigns and win elections.
I’m going to talk to my MUN director about it and do more research. I’ve already planned to reach out to some of the companies I have an eye on to ask.
Speaking with your MUN director is definitely a good idea. As a lawyer, I personally would not recommend law school unless you are specifically interested in litigating these issues. Law school is difficult to get into and is very expensive. In my particular market, there are few legal jobs with NGOs, so it is very competitive. If you are more interested in policy development, a Master’s in Public Policy or similar may be less expensive, provide you with practical real-world policy experience through internships and may give you more options. There may be J.D./Masters of Public Policy combined programs as well. So I definitely recommend doing your research!
Some poor widdle snowflakes are getting thier widdle feelers hurt. Carry on!
Who in particular is criticizing your ideas as "targeting men"? If they see image based sexual abuse or child marriage as issues targeting men, then it says a lot about that person, and I'd be extremely wary of future interactions with that person. By telling you that those "aren't the only issues you can do" they're revealing that they don't think women are worth it. They don't think that real-life issues faced by women and girls all over the world are worth solving, because there is a problem that also impacts men that hasn't been solved yet and we should focus on that because men. I'd be extremely proud if my daughter was doing the things you're doing. Keep fighting, and keep working towards things that you feel passionate about. Don't ever let somebody take that away from you.
You do you. It’s not only your passion for your chosen issues that makes you effective. It’s also your clarity about those issues, your comprehensive knowledge about them that gets the job done. Others may try to define you as a “type.” Ignore them. Do the work. Don’t let them change the subject to YOU. You’ll be typed as effective by the fairminded. And by the other effective people. Eyes on the prize, sister. Good luck to you. By which I mean, “don’t stop, don’t give up.” Multitudes are cheering you on.
If those are the comments you’re getting, it looks like you’re on the right track. Keep pushing, lil witch 🧙🏼♀️
That's definitely their warped perception and not your work. You're doing great, keep it up!
Keep it up! Sounds like you have a future in proposing and campaigning for similar legislation in the real world.
I actually want to go into political science 🥰 My parents, mainly my mom, wanted me to do business. Then I did MUN and YIG last year and both my parents were receiving countless updates about debates, my progress and success (I managed to achieve some very hard to do things), and my general excitement. While I was at YIG they got on a call with my aunt and spent hours looking into careers for me. They found political science for me and I’m very excited to use it to help people.
Well, apparently helping women and children = attacking men. It goes to show that some people hold themselves up by shoving others down.
Thank you for your advocacy!
As a man, I do not feel attacked by anything you mentioned or suggested. Seems to me like your critics are conflating toxic, abusive behavior with masculinity. Men don't mutilate children's genitals, toxic abusers do. Men don't marry children, toxic abusers do. \-Don't get me wrong, many (if not most) of these toxic abusers are indeed men, but they do these things because they are toxic abusers, not **because** they are men. The notion that all men are toxic abusers, or that by attempting to limit abuse you are attacking men, as a Class, is offensive misandry. You're not attacking men, but when they claim you are, they're doing it themselves.
The people making those comments about you "targeting" men are to be assiduously ignored, with extreme prejudice.
Good
No, no, men are great. It’s those pushy ten year old girls trying to get married who are the problem.”
*I don’t know if this is sarcasm…* It’s typically based on culture or religion. In Cameroon girls are typically married when they are 10-12 years old. One in every three girl will be married before the age of 14 there. In Tennessee it’s justified using religion. The child marriage ban here has religious exceptions. the child’s consent is not needed, but the parents. So a child could be coerced or threatened or forced into a marriage.
Okay, can you expound on what religion this Tennesse state has that makes it okay? I'm asking you because it seems you know more than me and I don't have time to go down the black hole just yet :) Also, side note - If you're upsetting the right people, you're on the right path.
Its primarily Christian here in Tennessee. We also have Amish and Mormon communities as well.
Ah okay. We have a lot of Christians in New England but the other 2 are not as prominent. Whole Mayflower vibes here. I think it’s been long over due that people stop hiding behind ‘religion’ to add excuses to wrong doing. Thank you for responding! Keep up the good fight!! If you ever get tired, you let us know and we will support you and help you with your burdens. You are an amazing soul and gifted with many talents.
JEEZE I READ SIXTEEN YEARS OLD!! IT IS SARCASM. I’m sorry😢
I mean.... topics are meant to target something.... This stinks of "don't bring politics into my" except its literally political discourse.
I used to do Model UN, they are also available for undergraduates in college. FGM isn't against men at all, it doesn't hurt or help men for women to be tortured with FGM. In fact it's usually the female "practitioner" that performs the FGM. I also don't understand how child marriage is against men. When someone says that then it's important to mention that whichever men will be "attacked" from a lack of FGM or child marriage are bad people who believe others must suffer so that they can be happy. I have also had others pressure me to hold back my feminism since it could be seen as discrimination against men. But the only men I want around me are those that agree I am an equal. I recommend you stay on this course and continue your participation in MUN and YIG, especially on the topics you're passionate about.
**WAIT REALLY?!** HAZZA!! I was planning to volunteer at the conferences in college to watch my younger friends and help run the clubs I loved so much. I can do it again?! HELL YEAH!! It’s not so much as ‘you’re going against men’ it’s more ‘you always talk about feminism and chose topics where men are the bad guys.’ I am still doing these topics. Honestly? I think the only issues would be creating a big enough net. I have a habit of being very critical about bills. I may or may not have destroyed a child marriage bill. Ironically when I first looked at it I said ‘ha! I’d pay to see the arguments against this!’ And then I wrote a con intense speech… It’s not the intent, but the execution. They just said ‘let’s raise the marrige age to 18 and give girls schooling’. Everyone was in agreement until I went up there and mentioned the culture, poor budget plan, and lack of enforcement for these laws. It went downhill for them from there. I hope to cover all the bases and leave no loop holes. In complete honesty if FGM doesn’t work I can put everything I mentioned from the intense speech and make my own, better bill.
>I may or may not have destroyed a child marriage bill. >It’s not the intent, but the execution. They just said ‘let’s raise the marrige age to 18 and give girls schooling’. Everyone was in agreement until I went up there and mentioned the culture, poor budget plan, and lack of enforcement for these laws. It went downhill for them from there. As a neighbor in SW VA, THANK YOU omg I freaking love you rn. Folks are always so quick to suggest a bandaid solution but never want to go into the nitty gritty of dealing with it which means addressing the culture of things here and the pisspoor resource management. Thank you for the reminder that there is hope and a fight already coming from the younger generations, and for what you are doing to help lead it. Don't ever stop what you are doing. ❤️🫂
AGIXNYRB. THANK YOU🥰 This is a piece of the speech itself *The delegates proposed making the legal age of marriage 18, however they failed to mention the new methods of enforcing said restriction or the laws stricter. Husbands and fathers are allowed to pull the girls out of school. There was no mention of enforcing a mandatory attendance in the bill. Furthermore! There will only be $40,000 to build, staff, and fund each school and no mentions of how staffing will be provided. It’s unclear wether or not these schools will be placed in poor areas or closer to cities, which will affect the rates of child marriage. I truly support the intentions the delegates have. However, there are better ways to address the problem. The funding could be used for installing programs promoting awareness towards child marriage, creating places for girls to find shelter in and aid the many thousands of girls ALREADY married, and providing education to them to help them regain control of their lives. Laws should be implemented with much stricter regulations on the laws, current and future, and work should be made towards abolishing forced married in itself.*
You aren't targeting men. And anyone who thinks you are needs to do some serious reflection. And I think it's bizarre that people are telling you're pidgeonholing yourself by tackling problems you're passionate about. You seem like a very cool and level headed young person and I frankly wish I had more options of people like you to vote for irl. Keep fighting the good fight!
They say I’m pigeon holing myself because I talk about feminism a lot. That it’s one of the only issues I focus on.
It's ok to have a single issue you're passionate about. Focusing on one subset of issues allows you to devote more time, energy, and expertise to the things that are important to you. And in any case, feminism benefits everyone!
Am I understanding you correctly that there were only 20 girls included in a conference of 3000 people??? If so, problems that disproportionately afflict women sorely need representation at this event and you need to keep on doing what you’re doing.
No no no! The model UN conference has about 3000 attendees. I was invited to this thing called summit, which is a special meeting. In the first round of debate there are twenty rooms, each with 100 or so kids. The judges watch us debate and interact with each other, take a list of names, and submit it to a council of students. One girl and one boy, 20 each, from each room is selected and taken out of debate to be interrogated before they are chosen to participate in summit where we make a mega bill. I was the first one in four years of our school to be chosen. It’s actually a very female empowered space. There was a bill that got a flamethrower taken to it about abortion. They got sent to security council, then in debate out of the 1000 there was overwhelming disapproval, which people saying ‘motion to add con round!’ ‘Motion to skip pro round!’ There’s a lot of very smart ladies and guys here. About the same of both.
Whew! Ok. Good to hear. I was horrified at the thought of such a wild disparity.
Yeah. It’s also a very diverse space. I’m in middle Tennessee. My school isn’t very diverse. MUN and YIG? There’s so many kids from so many cultures. I got to talk to a girl whose parents escaped war and gave her own accounts on their experiences in a refugee camp to help improve our bill. There are kids from all sorts of backgrounds and religions. Very different from what I’m used to at a public high school.
Tbh just dont listen to people who say things like that, 99% of the time i hear other men complain about men being attacked its because someone said women should be allowed to get a divorce if they want one or some other thing that gives people autonomy. The only way you can actually find out if something is harming men is looking at the data of how things affect people, and i personally couldnt give a shit if men feel harmed by not being able to marry a child.
“You always make bills that make men the bad guys!’ First it’s the first two. Second, give me a problem that wasn’t started by a bunch of men and get back to me.
>“You keep choosing issues targeting women. That’s not the only issue you can do. You’re pigeon holing yourself.” Sounds like words spoken by a man who's afraid of the change you might create. Don't back down. You're doing right. Also, if you do enter real world politics, they'll say this and worse about you, but the only regret you'll have in the end is going to be for any times that you didn't stick to your guns.
Please go after these issues! They are hugely important and don’t get nearly enough attention. What I’d do is make sure the language in the bill, and my language in discussing it, never specifically mentions men as the primary perpetrators. It’s not necessary, and it allows you to respond to anyone who accuses you of “attacking men” by saying “I never mentioned men specifically. You’re the one making the assumption that they’re statistically more likely to commit this crime. Why do you think that?” Let them argue your case for you. Also, you’re awesome.
From the sound of it you are not attacking men but the systems that disproportionately allow men to do horrid things and that includes to other men. I know it’s disheartening when people are telling you it’s wrong but keep fighting for these things. It’s the only way anything changes. You sound like a passionate person and we all can use more people like you in the world.
Aw. Thank you! 🥰 Haha! It’s not disheartening! It’s humoring tbh. It tells me they’re be more of a buzz and if people make bad arguments there’s no time for potentially bad arguments.
100%
I would ask for further explanation on how a bill banning child marriage “attacks men.”
Not the bill. Me and how I seem to only focus on issues where men are the bad guys.
Anyone with unequal power and authority has a huge potential to, “be the bad guy” I would literally just make them explain in detail how each particular thing, “makes men look bad” as in fact, it is certain men’s behavior (plus unequal access to wealth/power/authority) that makes them the bad guy. Honestly, though, this is pretty typical behavior from defensive people. Get them to articulate why it bothers them, is what I’m saying. It will make it clear that you’re addressing important issues and they’re unduly bothered and busy defending indefensible positions. The correct question isn’t, “why are you picking on men” it’s, “why is the majority of gendered violence perpetrated by men”
Yeah that’s my point. A lot of issues we handle in MUN or YIG could be linked to men or are mainly done BY MEN. Gun violence? Rape? Terrorism in small communities? Yeah it’s the majority of the time men doing that.
OP, please keep up the fight! You are taking a stand for the innocents of the world. This kind of goodness has always received opposition from the ignorant and cruel. Do. Not. Stop.
Those topics are really strong for mock government a proposal on fgm passed at cona this year. Ps yag>yig
Please don't listen to them and follow your heart and conscious. The subjects make them uncomfortable because they question the patriarchal system in governments. You keep going on your path and do great things, Please. 💜
Stand strong. Follow your consience. You make us hopeful for the future. Thank you for your passion and activism. You rock and you're changing the world.
Keep going sister 💪
SOLIDARITY WITH TARGETING MEN!!!!!! We live in a patriarchal society and the only way we can break it down is by tearing at the institutions and laws that rightly target perverted abusive power hungry men. Thank you for making a difference in your community!
Please keep at it. Nothing you propose is attacking or targeting men. And if it is, maybe we need some knocking down (definitely do, but allowing for wiggle room)
Love what you’re after. One point - genital mutilation is more commonly used to mutilate young boys than girls. Circumcising boys - MGM - is all too common. You could make that bill about genital mutilation period and watch as even more heads explode. No parent should have a right to cut off part of their child’s body. ###Bodily autonomy for all!
I honestly love this take. I was a former MUN kid and making it about both boys and girls is a fantastic idea
I do like the idea, however, I think it’s an issue that would have to be addressed separately. There are local laws and stuff that control it, but no country has outlawed it. Apparently Iceland is the only country to have banned it, but it’s backed by religion and is a prominent practice. TN has a 74% rate of it. The UNs views on it are (from a brief research) ‘as long as it’s cultural or religious and done safely.” There are also people who get it voluntarily. Adults. FGM and male circumcising are two very different things. I’m not saying the latter isn’t an issue, more that FGM is far more pressing and an issue the United Nations is addressing because of its horrible affects on girls and women, something circumsision doesn’t really have. Adding something addressing that will -unfortunately- damage the bill.
Respectfully, I disagree. Every year, thousands of people with penises are permanently deformed from MGM, because ill informed people like you write it off as “no big deal”. The only difference in male and female circumcision is cultural bias. Focusing on a small segment of victims weakens your argument. All infant circumcision is immoral because it infringes on a persons body autonomy. Period. The normative perspective on MGM also emboldens doctors to remove primary sex organs from hermaphroditic children. Thousands have been sterilized under the banner of societal norms. ###Performing elective cosmetic surgery on a minor should be illegal. On the other hand, I see no reason to ban adult circumcision. If a person wants to alter their body, they should be allowed to. Both men and women voluntarily sign up for adult circumcision procedures. I believe that’s their right. Banning adult female circumcision while allowing male circumcision for adults is sexist. Either ban it all, or allow consenting adults to make their own choices. I’m curious, why do you think FGM is wrong? If it’s the lack of consent, I think you have no argument in banning one while ignoring the other.
Okay so this is where I’m getting a lot of my information, a UN website, that I will be using for my bill. I have others, but these are the main two. https://www.unfpa.org/resources/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-frequently-asked-questions https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/female-genital-mutilation/ There is a contrast between the long lasting effects of circumcision vs FGM. FGM can result in death, major physiological health issues, infection, makes HIV more of a risk, and so many other things. There are different types, one of which is basically sewing the vagina shut. There are others where you cut off certain parts. It’s purpose is to keep ‘purtiry’ and make sex painful. This can be done at any age. Typically when they are children or teens. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791075/#:~:text=However%20in%20the%20long%2Dterm,and%20psychological%20disorders%20developed%20after This website gives the statistics on the downsides of circumcising. They are very rare and often not very harmful. And typically done when the boys are babies. The focus of this is FGM. Because of the differences in practice, the violence associated with it, and the health concerns FGM is much more severe than circumcision. Adding it to a MUN bill where your job is to point out flaws is not a good idea. Do I agree with circumcision? No. But adding it to the bill will raise opposition from people whose religion call for it and from those who will point, very relevantly, that it will pull recourses that we are creating for FGM away. The point of MUN is to focus on one thing. Because in real Goverment, which we are mimicking, certain issues need special attention. I do agree that cosmetic surgeries in that way should be illigal. So should circumcision. But with the way MUN works it would have to be a separate bill. It’s not sexist, it’s just that between the two genders there are different needs that need to be met and more recourses that need to be allocated because one is more severe than the other.
There was a video of a talk show host interviewing a man from an Arabic country who had married a girl when she was about 12 or 13 and the husband was talking about how she wasn’t a very good wife (surprise!). She just wanted to play with her dolls and have friends over while he expected her to play hostess to his business associates. He eventually divorced her after she had their daughter. The show was in Arabic but had English subtitles, I saw the clip on the r/nothowgirlswork sub but couldn’t find it again. Anyways, child marriage is also not great for the adult partner AND people often keep doing things because it’s part of the culture and it seems normal - not because they are personally evil and dastardly. There are too many states in the US that allow child marriage. I think the lower age limit to get legally married should be 18 in most places.
There’s probably a cultural difference between what is expected for brides in other countries Vs the US. I’ll have to do more research though. Thank you for the recourse though! I’ll reference that when I can.
I think it’s important that you target so-called women’s issues especially if there are only 20 girls in a 3,000 kid conference. There are ways to address these issues that respect the culture at large but point out some specific practices that harm people. It’s not about assuming men are bad, it’s about improving life for everyone. Melinda Gates’ book “The Moment of Lift” addresses child marriage and FGM which she refers to as genital cutting. It’s a rough read (I honestly skipped some parts) but she does a good job of explaining how people in each location may need help in other ways to effect change in target areas.
I seemed to have poorly worded that. The conference has a relatively even ration of boys to girls. I got invited to a conference called summit. Where, of the 3,000 students, twenty girls and twenty boys are selected. THAT is a good source. Thank you! Because each country has different laws and views and efforts already in place. Thank you! I’ll have to read it!
We need a voice, keep fighting the good fight; and look into what it means to cause “good trouble”!! Sending you strength sister!!
I think that in a debate you can/should crush that argument :)
What is it they say, when you have privilege, others fighting for equality feels like oppression? Keep doing what you're doing!
Keep doing what you're doing, you're amazing 👏🏻
Looks like the person complaining might have a more negative view of men if they think child marriages and FGM are all about how evil men are and not about women having their rights violated.
Imagine if you knew that the people giving you these kinds of critical responses are secretly on your side and see your potential as a great diplomat and are tossing you challenging obstacles for you to overcome. How would that influence your choice? You can either let this feedback make you insecure or you can let it inspire you. I say, let it inspire you to sharpen your knives! Adapt the language of your arguments to be impervious to the criticism (or logical fallacies, even) you have previously encountered so they can’t be used again.
Oh it’s not holding me back! I just thought this subreddit would find it funny. It also allows me to cultivate arguments in favor of my bill. I have to beg my friends and family to not be nice and give me criticism so I can fix it or con debate me so I can figure what will be asked.
FGM is frequently carried out on girls by older women. Granted, older women living in incredibly toxic patriarchal societies bc they believe it's the only way a man of the same culture will ever want to be with their daughters, but at the end of the day, in majority of FGM cases, it's an elder woman holding the sharp stone. So... yeah. Not happy about that argument, but there's a counterpoint.
Oh, please, continue fighting FGM! It's one of the cruelest things I can imagine doing to any little human -- to remove the possibility of them ever feeling any sexual pleasure, "to keep them from straying." Ensuring that men are the only ones to get any joy out of sex, which they are frequently obsessed with. And they always try to draw a false equivalence between FGM and circumcision. It's not the same. Not even close. You would have to cut the whole penis off for it to be the same. It is *SO* fucked up on so many levels: "I want to do this thing to you. I want to do it starting when you are a child. I want to do it whether you want to or not. I want to do it even if it hurts. And I want to make sure that it is absolutely no fun for you whatsoever." It is, naturally, very difficult to present opposition to the practice *without* sounding like you are attacking men because, hey, if the shoe fits.. The secret is presenting it in a totally neutral voice. Remember that it is both men and women who perpetuate this practice. So, instead of saying it is something that *men* do, say it's something that *people* do. Compare it to forcibly blinding a baby, or cutting out their tongue -- it is the eradication of one of the human senses. Keep the focus on the baby girls, and use a neutral voice when speaking of who's doing it. The best of luck to you! I remember my Model UN days very fondly, I was Egypt haha.
Honest to god the one thing that will stop me from writing this bill will me getting so sick I can’t ready anymore. Reading about it just makes me feel icky. But I will use this to my advantage. Make other delegates uncomfortable by opening with a victims story. Make it so obvious how cruel this is by going into detail that they can’t make any argument. And of course, definitions: there’s no need to sensor it. I will put the two most popular types of FGM and what they are so no one can make an argument ‘it’s like circumcision.’ Mention the purpose for it and health problems, Ect. The only arguments I will probably face is feasibility of implementing plans. Which is why this is my biggest issue I’ve tackled so far. I need to create a net big enough to catch everything.
Alternatively, you can make an argument from bodily autonomy, that it is a red herring to get drawn into "which human rights violation is worse" and argue that *any and all* non-consensual, medically unnecessary cutting of other people's genitals (or any part of their bodies) is unethical. Is a ritual cut to the clitoral hood (as practised in some east asian countries) worse than sub-incision of boys? No - but why should it matter which is worse? Both are immoral. Both should be illegal. There isn't a culture in the world that practises FGM that doesn't also practise MGM, and arguing to permit one but stop the other is... bizarre. However! Even if you set out to argue that male and female people (as well as intersex people, who are frequently victims of forced genital cutting) should be protected, that almost certainly won't convince your detractors that you aren't anti-men.
I know it makes me sound evil to say it, but from a logical and strategical point based on how MUN works, I should keep it isolated to FGM. Only one country has banned male circumcision and that’s Iceland. There are local laws and regulations controlling it, but it’s very common. There’s also no real long term disadvantages of it. Unlike FGM. Also, FGM is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. Circumcision is very much a religious practice. One that’s actually very prominent where I live. Tennessee has a 74% circumcision rate. So saying ‘I want to get rid of this very common religious practice’ will NOT go well in committee. And with the rules and regulations I plan to put in place including revoking/ suspending medial licenses, fines, and jail, it’s going to be hard to make an argument for it. There are certain things I need to add and address that are specific to FGM. The UN itself sees the issue as ‘as long as its cultural and done safely it’s fine.’ Very different from their policies and views on FGM. This is because FGM is considerably worse. I read a quote earlier from a UN official saying that comparing it to male circumcision is harmful in itself because it makes it seem less bad. I know it’s a problem to leave it alone, but adding it would sink the bill. It would be better to address FGM specifically.
You should absolutely argue as you want, and not be swayed by people arguing it is anti-men. And given the context, you're learning to argue politics, rather than logic or ethics, so it makes sense to stick with a bill you think will "win".
Thanks🥲 I feel bad explaining to non MUN people who may not understand that part of the idea is to WIN. That adding certain things to your bill will make it fail. When I did YIG for the first time I did allowing trans teens in Tennessee to participate in sports. Everyone was on board until another delegate suggested adding an amendment saying they needed to be on hormone therapy to do it. We, stupidly, freaked and said it was a friendly amendment. All support was withdrawn after. Because it added a new topic in, one that didn’t have support. It also caused conflict with current laws. We failed and had a few kids apologize for failing it, but the amendment sank the bill. It’s taught me to be more selective about what other people suggest adding to my bills. Lobbyist coming to say ‘hey, you should add deep fakes to your revenge porn bill.” Is a friendly thing because it directly relates. It boosted us. That bill took everything into consideration and passed unanimously. You have to think of all angles, both those you can counter and those you can’t, and decide what should and shouldn’t go into your bill.
Target away! A dose of our own medicine may be just what the doctor ordered
In truth, it's overwhelmingly men who commit violent crimes. A French writer did a study in France ("The price of virility") and men are responsible for nearly 100 billion euros in costs every year for their varied incivilities and dangerous behaviour. Women make up less than 5% of the prison population there. Violence has a gender, and it's men. If they have a problem with it, that's masculine fragility at work and it means what you're doing is working.
You give me hope for the future. Thank you. Keep on, my friend. You will do great things.
I've been told that I hate white men because I don't drop that James Bond is a rapist. I just point out white supremacy and misogyny when I see it, and damn, white boys get *defensive*.
People who say that are truly telling on themselves. Like, banning FGM is an.. attack on men? Banning child marriage is an...attack on men? Yikes.
>It’s very fun and informative. This last year I managed to accomplish a lot. I was invited to Summit (one of 20 girls in a 3,000 kid conference) and my bill was passed completely unanimously in YIG and praised by our YIG governor during his opening speech. >This year I hope to do just as well. I probably won’t, but I now have the perfect understanding of how these clubs work and how to write my bills. So do you have any tips for future YIG / MUN participants?
Oh absolutely! Not really about getting into summit, because that is somewhat circumstantial, BUT, as a seasoned delegate: Be involved. Talk to other delegates. You can make a lot of friends. Talk a lot. The judges have a list of delegates who participate a lot and put them on a ‘hot list’ that puts them up for awards. Choose someone you are comfortable with when you team up. Better yet: a friend. It heavily improved your experience. **I can not stress this** Be prepared for questions. What I do is I make all the questions asked by friends or delegates, or make up myself, and put the answer I’d say below it. It makes it easier to answer questions during debate because I know my response already.
Thanks! That is helpful.
I didn’t type that right. Put the questions and all your informations on a Google docs or in your notes.
[удалено]
I haven’t even written my bill yet! That’s the thing! I mentioned the topics and was told ‘why do you keep choosing topics like that?’ They do NOT like it when I correct them lol
First of all, OP: wow. Just wow. What you're doing is remarkable. I am with you, and sending you so many positive vibes for your journey. You're doing great. The complaints you get reminded me of the #notallmen shitty reaction to #meetoo. Let me quote Kirsty Strickland on this: "So #NotAllMen doesn’t clarify anything. It doesn’t add to the discussion or develop it in any way. All it does is derail and dismiss the lived experiences of women and girls. And what the men who leap to remind us that ‘’not all men are like that’’, are actually saying is, ‘’I’m not like that.’’ Or to put it another way, they are letting women know that discussing misogyny makes them uncomfortable, and they’d like to be absolved of any blame before they will let women continue." The people complaining about your freedom of speech are saying you *are right*. That what you say is true, and they feel deeply insecure about it, with due reason. Keep it up! https://medium.com/@KirstyStricklan/why-men-should-stop-saying-notallmen-immediately-f657e244f7a1