At the back of the hill

Warning: If you stay here long enough you will gain weight! Grazing here strongly suggests that you are either omnivorous, or a glutton. And you might like cheese-doodles.
BTW: I'm presently searching for another person who likes cheese-doodles.
Please form a caseophilic line to the right. Thank you.

Monday, June 06, 2011


A number of commenters have already weighed in on San Francisco's ballot proposition to outlaw circumcision till the recipient of that procedure is of age, and to penalize anyone who performs it.

Likewise, the anti-circumcision comic strip, featuring super hero Foreskin Man versus racist stereoptype Monster Mohel, has caught its share of deserved flak.

For an excellent review of why Foreskin Man is both completely loopy as well as anti-Semitic, please read Rabbi Eliyahu Fink's blogpost here:

"Moving the conversation away from circumcision, the comic book taps into centuries of anti-Semitic propaganda using caricatures that haven’t been used since the Holocaust. Further, the comic book portrays the “good” side as blond, Aryan-looking and white. It looks like a KKK or Aryan Brotherhood comic book. The pictures are obscene and message to me is clear.

This is not about circumcision. This is not even about religion. This is about anti-Semitism.

Those who know me can attest, I am the last person to assert anti-Semitism. I am an optimist and don’t believe that the non-Jewish public hates Jews. But this comic book is anti-Semitic.
End quote.

Before the proposition qualified for the ballot I myself vented a little bit on the issue:

Mis-guided do-gooders and anti-Semites. Plus a form of penis-envy.

But there's something else that needs to be stressed.

The backers of this proposition are deeply disturbed individuals. They have an unhealthy obsession with penises.

A number of them are seeking to restore their own foreskins, wailing that the removal of that precious wisp of tissue has robbed them of sexual satisfaction, nay, made it impossible to enjoy sex to the fullest extent possible!

They are adamant that but for their lack, they wouldn't have sexual issues.
It was their parents that caused them this grief. That they are dysfunctional is purely the fault of the adults who authorized the removal of the prepuce, scarring them for life, making them incomplete, destroying their future sexual self-image, encouraged potential sexual partners to loathe and avoid them, etcetera.

Boys, get over it.

You'd be lousy at sex anyhow. Your absent foreskin is not the reason.
Your penises just aren't very good.
Yes, your sexual inadequacy probably was caused by your parents - they didn't recognize soon enough what a bunch of total freaks you are, and denied you the therapy which you clearly desperately need.
Perhaps they loved you too much.
No one wants to admit that their precious little potato, that sprung from their own loins and lovemaking, is a deeply twisted little crud.
But it was because they still had hopes that you'd turn out halfway functional that they put off signing you up for psychiatric help.
How were they to know that you had an unhealthy obsession with your penis?

Just let it go. You'll never be adequate. There's just far too much scrambled about your sexuality for you to ever get better.
Your penis is ugly because you think it's ugly. That you cannot stand the sight of it, well, sorry, but that's your own problem.
We aren't interested. Not in your penis, not in you.
If you want to have friends who aren't as disturbed as you, you should stop waving your wangle around.

It's not just your penis.

It's you.

You're the problem.

NOTE: In the interest of full disclosure, the author of this blog is a circumcised man.
My penis and I have no issues, and are perfectly happy with each other.
In fact, I don't think we've EVER disagreed.
Well, not about anything major.

NOTE: Readers may contact me directly:
All correspondence will be kept in confidence.



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older