Thursday, 9 February 2017

The proposal to ban male circumcision that I do *not* support

Today, I took the opportunity of formally dissociating myself from the nonsense of gentiles associated with anti-Semitism campaigning for the banning of male circumcision because they are pretending that they care about the foreskins of Jewish and Muslim boys.

I actually find this degree of hypocrisy nauseating. The people who most promote this are militant atheists, people who also want to ban kosher and halal slaughter, feminists who wish to officiously deprive boys of the benefit of this rite of passage and people who voted Brexit ie the group of people most likely to be anti-Semites and Islamophobes. They tend however not to be proletarian because the average prole is more likely to choke on the viscosity of this particular hypocrisy. It is the educated middle class anti-Semite and Islamophobe who holds this view, the kind who is too intellectually insecure and cowardly to express his hatred of Jews through questioning the law against Holocaust Denial, officially still legal in this country.There is also something particularly repulsively effeminate about pretending you care about the foreskins of Jewish and Muslims boys if you are an anti-Semitic and Islamophobic male.  

Below are the comments I made:

Only Jews and Muslims would be exercised about the proposal to ban circumcision and the gentiles who support this wouldn't care about the subject beyond its anti-Semitic and Islamophobic connotations.

Proposing to ban male circumcision is simply an expression of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

The perception by Jews is that proposing to ban male circumcision is ipso facto anti-Semitic.

It is like these activists believe they have found yourself a loophole to annoy Jews and Muslims without being accused of being anti-Semitic and Islamophobic, and this is it.

Presumably the best case scenario anti-circumcision activists desire is to be in a position to encourage Jewish/Muslim sons to sue their Jewish/Muslim parents for their lack of foreskin to discourage Judaism/Islam and their numbers.

The fact is that you would like Jewish/Muslim sons to sue their parents for depriving them of their foreskin, otherwise, why even talk about it?

Either you are an anti-Semite who for tactical reasons denies this, or you genuinely don't know that you would come across as an anti-Semite or Islamophobic, which is naive of you.

Male circumcision does not interfere with a man's ability to enjoy sex or his performance.

Gentiles are known to have their sons circumcised. The English upper classes were known to have this procedure performed on their sons.

The banning of male circumcision would mean infringing the First Amendment.

While I am an anti-feminist, have mixed in nationalist circles and been accused of anti-Semitism myself, I wish to formally distance myself from this kind of futile anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Challenging the validity of Holocaust Denial laws in the Free West is infinitely more productive than anti-Semites and Islamophobes hypocritically pretending they care about the foreskins of Jewish and Muslim boys.

If you had said "I have had sex with a great and equal number of circumcised men and uncircumcised men and am really the best person to ask about their respective performance in the sack," we would all be agog to know on what basis you say having sex with uncircumcised men is better than having sex with circumcised men.

Banning circumcision would be an infringement of the religious freedom of Jews and Muslims to practice circumcision because you are banning this tradition and practice common to Judaism and Islam.

Perhaps the best women to ask are prostitutes, but I bet they will have nothing meaningful to say about the respective performance of sex with circumcised men and sex with uncircumcised men.

The circumcised penis is more pleasing to my eye. It obviously does not harm Jewish and Muslim men. This unbecoming campaign is simply a manifestation of white gentile anxiety and neurosis about being exploited by Jews and invaded by Muslims.


Mat said...

Can you please tell me as a male that has had long term problems after circumsision.
What is wrong with the idea of waiting untill the boys in question is 18 years old and can then make his own mind up about whether or not to undergo circumsision?
I can not see how this extra pereod of waiting would impact on any religeon and in actual fact if a boy over the age of 18 were to decide to be circomsised on religeouse grounds it would actualy strengthen the religeon as the boy would have chosen to adhere to his faith rather than have had that choice forced upon him.

Surely in a civilised sociatey every human being has the right to decide weather they want parts of their own body permenantly removed or not?

Claire Khaw said...

What problems do you have exactly and are you an observant Jew or a militant atheist?