“Circumcision purifies and refines. It forces us to make a sacrifice. Removing the foreskin diminishes the pleasure and enjoyment of intercourse.1 We sacrifice such pleasure and proclaim that, on our scale, Divine instruction is a greater priority than self-gratification.2
Males could have been created without the foreskin, yet G‑d wanted us to remove it ourselves. This was to demonstrate that as we complete the physical appearance of our bodies, so can we perfect the contours of our personalities and the shapes of our souls.3″
Midrash Tanchumah, Tazriah 5 and Sefer Hachinuch, Mitzvas Milah (The anonymous author, who identifies himself only as “a Levite from Barcelona,” was a student of the Rashba, Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet, in the thirteenth century). Our sages further taught that circumcision is an offering to G‑d that, like a sacrifice, atones for inherent human weaknesses (Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, ch. 29).
Classical Jewish thought has long maintained this position. However, contemporary scientific studies on this matter have failed to produce conclusive evidence either way.
Maimonides in his Guide for the Perplexed, v. III, ch. 29. See also R. Bachye on Genesis 17:13.
Sacrificing your own kids…. but not to Moloch, don’t be silly!
“This work involves both milah, cutting the thick foreskin, and priyah, ripping open the thin membrane, which on a spiritual plane alludes to the subduing of our material desires.25 Afterwards, one must perform metzitzah (sucking out the blood), thus removing the excitement generated by material things from one’s body as a whole.”
Doesn’t sound Satanic at all…. they totally don’t need that spiritual energy…. but ‘priests’ need to do it, not surgeons or anyone with medical training and pain relief.
I covered previously studies of the medical damage involved, ripping out nerve bundles.
As a consequence, a husband cannot emotionally bond with his wife (Jewish men are oddly notorious for cheating) nor the wife with the husband (see satisfaction studies).
“How we relate to G‑d affects how we relate to other people. That is Hosea’s message – and vice versa: how we relate to other people affects the way we think of G‑d. Israel’s political chaos in the eighth century bce was intimately connected to its religious waywardness. A society built on corruption and exploitation is one where might prevails over right. That is not Judaism but idolatry, Baal-worship.
Now we understand why the sign of the covenant is circumcision, a commandment given in Tazria. For faith to be more than the worship of power, it must affect the most intimate relationship between men and women. In a society founded on covenant, male-female relationships are built on something other and gentler than male dominance, masculine power, sexual desire and the drive to own, control and possess. Baal must become ish. The alpha male must become the caring husband. Sex must be sanctified and tempered by mutual respect. The sexual drive must be circumcised and circumscribed so that it no longer seeks to possess and is instead content to love.”
Anti-men rhetoric, you again…. Is that ish like Ishtar?
Whereas Christians see husbands AS alpha males…. as does biology, because the alpha male is part of a monogamous breeding pair with an alpha female. There’s no such thing as a single alpha male.
“The foreskin of the male reproductive organ effects his experience of marital relations in two ways: it increases his gross sensual pleasure and decreases his sensitivity to his wife by insulating him from her to a certain extent. By removing the foreskin, the experience of marital relations becomes for the man less of a narcissistic indulgence and more of a true spiritual coupling between him and his wife. Once the spiritual dimension of marital relations is allowed into the picture, it enhances the physical dimension as well. The sages of the Talmud therefore state that ideally, at least, it is the Jewish couple that experiences the truest enjoyment in marital relations.”
Satisfaction studies have disabused them of this notion.
“As originally created, the physiology of woman was such that she did not have a menstrual cycle, and the process of conceiving and giving birth did not involve any bleeding. Nor did she bleed when she first engaged in marital relations. These (as well as other) facets of life were introduced into reality as the result of the primordial sin.”
Myth, that isn’t how hymens work. Some women aren’t even born with one. You might as well appeal to humours in healthcare. Not even wrong. Why is it always a man talking about female anatomy and periods? Sit down, shut up.
It isn’t even the hymen capable of that bleeding, it’s the friction of the vagina (and its heavy blood supply) that is capable of bleeding profusely (in virgins or non-), which must be worse/more likely when the man has no idea how to make her wet in the first place (inexperienced or incompetent lovers) and has no foreskin to reduce friction naturally.
Satan really is deceiving them.
“When a man has been circumcised of his gross sensual approach to marital relations, he retains more control over his sexual passion, and is thus less likely to succumb to them. His circumcision thus helps him not engage in forbidden marital relations, including relations with his wife during her period.”
If blood is the issue, he couldn’t screw his wife during normal spotting or pregnancy spotting, nor if she were ‘bleeding’ miniscule amounts (no blood supply) from the hymen as a virgin.
Frigidity isn’t possible with women, but the impotence (ED or whatever other term) does occur in mutilated men, as you’d also expect with mutilated women.
They hate their sons, duh.
“Circumcision is a tangible reminder to all men that they are the masters of their bodies, that they are in control of their sexual urges.”
Gaslighting from a mother who hates you but likes her own prepuce where it is. It’s funny their demon is a sexy woman (Lilith) not a part of Christian lore. They are not master of their body, their mother is. Maybe Freud wanted his mother to get his foreskin back.
“Cutting back the foreskin represents tapering the self-centered nature of lust. It’s not only about me, but about another person’s dignity and desires. It’s not all about the pleasure that I want, but about the pleasure that G‑d wants me to have.”
This is written by a woman. Clearly.
“Perhaps this reasoning behind circumcision can account for the Talmud’s statement that women are born naturally circumcised. Generally speaking, a woman’s nature is not to dominate someone whom she desires. Studies show that female sexual predators make up such a small percentage that there is little known about them as a group.1 Although women may have many imperfections, it seems that they are naturally less in danger of violating the dignity of others through their lustful impulses.”
Then why are most rapists circumcised, when it’s measured?
“Both men and women are entrusted to serve G‑d with dignity and consciousness. At the core of this service is the challenge to infuse meaning into the most mundane aspects of our life. To imprint the covenant on our physical body. And perhaps it is in this arena that women are naturally gifted. This gift of “natural circumcision”—the perspective of fluidity between the holy and the mundane—empowers (and obligates) women to become leaders. In the era preceding the global redemption, when the schism between what is worldly and what is G‑dly will vanish, feminine leadership is vital.”
Women also have a prepuce. It evolved in both sexes for biological purposes, including pleasure.
Does she own shares in a lube company?
She basically admits that partially castrating men keeps them in line as husbands (less adultery, in theory*) and makes them less masculine (well, yeah). That isn’t FOR them….
*Since they can’t bond with the wife, they seek other people.
Also, the American divorce rate is tied to circumcised men. As they get older and “need” Viagra (like Israel, how odd!) they start to doubt the wife’s attractiveness, as does she, causing separation.
A guy says about “rupturing the hymen” as women’s circumcision in the comments…. no. Not how it works. In the rare cases a woman has no gaps in hers, it must be surgically perforated to allow menstrual blood out. It goes from an antibacterial barrier for the safety of a baby to ….a more flexible antibacterial barrier. It only disappears from easy sight once a woman has given birth for the first time. Even in virgins (say a nun), it does break down over time, it isn’t just exercise, time itself thins it because, again, no blood supply.
That’s why surgeons can cut it with a scalpel to release old menstrual blood and the girl won’t bleed to death.
It’s kinda like those extra fingers that naturally drop off.
Women aren’t even born with the same thickness of membrane, it ages uniquely between women, so this discussion is really stupid. Women aren’t all the same, medically!