CIRCUMCISION IS AN ACT OF GENOCIDE.

[NOTE: THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS GRAPHIC CONTENT THAT SOME MAY FIND DISTURBING.]

~ AN UNCONSCIONABLE  ACT OF VIOLENCE ~

The genital mutilation of baby boys for religious and/or erroneous medical reasons is nothing less than an extreme act of violence towards a defenceless being who was born perfect. It is psychological, spiritual and emotional abuse against a divine being that is born whole:

 “An infant boy is born with a healthy foreskin. Consequently, there are no medical indications for circumcision in the newborn period. Infant circumcision is a painful, stressful, and traumatic procedure that leaves the infant exhausted and debilitated to the extent that some are unable to suckle at the breast.” Source: www.DoctorsOpposingCircumcision.org

 

As such, it is a palpable act of genocide as defined under International Law,

 

“Article II:  In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

 (a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.  LINK

Definition:

 “The word circumcision means “to cut around”. In male infants, circumcision is an operation which involves tearing the foreskin away from the glans (head) of the penis, cutting along the top of the foreskin, then clamping the foreskin and cutting it off. The skin of the penis is a complex movable ‘sheath’ with no clear indication of where it should be cut during a circumcision. This means that the amount of foreskin removed from one circumcision to the next can be very different, and no two circumcisions are the same.”

As a victim of this barbaric and morally repugnant act, it is reasonable to suppose the Rogue Male is understandably pissed off at this state of affairs. Fact is, ne’er a day goes by without it entering his mind. Especially now the winter months are here and no-one feels the cold quite as keenly as the circumcised male. People will think I’m joking and they would be wrong. This essay is not going to go into the mechanics of the process but it will examine some of the long term consequences which, although personal to the writer,  remain true for each male who has been subjected to this form of genital mutilation.

The photograph above is the last known image of the young Rogue Male with an intact foreskin. The bairn is with his two grandfathers, both of whom are from lineages that are rooted in the North of these lands known as Britain, which rules out a religious explanation of the butchery. Sometime after this, under the deceptive advice of an NHS ‘health visitor’, the infant boy was subjected to an act of brutal surgery, carried out without anaesthetic, which removed some 50% of the infant penis.  The psychological, emotional and physical consequences of such wholly unnecessary barbarism are still at work today, almost half a century later.

An interesting aspect to this is the response of most women. Compassion and empathy from the female are in short supply when it comes to male circumcision but imagine the outcry if ‘hygenic’ genital mutilation was being carried out on baby girls who, soon after birth, were subjected to a clitoridectomy?  Upon being shown the image below, RM’s sister, rather than displaying horror at the image of 5 baby boys, mutilated and in agony, stated, “Oh, it’s probably just some religious reason.”

The exact circumstances of how RM came to be circumcised remains as unclear and silent as his mother when asked about it. However, we can state that it was not done for religious reasons. Rather, it was carried out under the false pretext of the quack medicine that continues to inflict every aspect of the state’s so-called ‘health care’. The fact is it was his mother’s choice who, knowing fuck all about the purpose of the foreskin, went along with the suggestion of the health visitor that the baby boy’s foreskin was ‘too tight’ and therefore it was necessary to slice it off. The old fallacy that it was somehow more hygienic and that the male would be less prone to sexual disease was trotted out to me throughout my childhood, especially when I asked my dad why his penis was intact. See, there is no excuse and no medical reason for such an act of violence. It is the equivalent of a parent consenting to an unnecessary operation removing a baby’s finger or a toe. A child is born whole, he is a divine creation and, if one chooses to believe in the teachings of all religions, no one is between him and the Creator/God.  He is born perfect and no parent has the right to decide whether or not his body parts should be removed.

The psychological trauma of the experience (always carried out with no anaesthetic, remember) is well-documented:

 “Memory starts before birth and newborn infants have fully functioning pain pathways. One would expect, therefore, to find psychological effects associated with the painful genital cutting operation.

“Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a normal response to an abnormal event. Neonatal genital cutting is an event in which a newborn infant experiences extreme levels of pain, terror, and helplessness, so it fulfills the criteria as a psychogenic for PTSD. Levy (1945) reported that children experience behavior problems, such as night terrors and a fear of nurses and doctors, after surgery, including circumcision. Cansever (1965) tested boys before and after circumcison and reported that the ego seeks safety in total withdrawal. Levy found their symptoms to be similar to combat neurosis, now known as PTSD. Taddio et al. (1997) studied the behavior of babies at first vaccination.

“They found that circumcised boys have a much stronger reaction to pain of vaccination than do girls and intact non-circumcised boys, which the authors suggested is an “infant analogue” of PTSD. Other authors also have reported PTSD in circumcised males. Rhinehart (1999) reported four cases of PTSD secondary to neonatal circumcision in middle-aged men that he encountered in his psychiatric practice. Ramos & Boyle (2001) reported PTSD in 70 percent of Philippino boys who experienced ritual circumcision and 51 percent of Philippino boys who experienced medical circumcision.” (LINK)

One of the most deleterious effects is upon the bond between the child and his mother. At such a young age, the baby is wholly dependent upon the love and nurturing of his parents, but especially the mother with whom he is forming a bond.

“Because children should be protected from permanent bodily alteration inflicted on them without their consent in the name of culture, religion, profit, or parental preference. Under accepted bioethical principles, parents can consent to surgery on behalf of a child only if it is necessary to protect the child’s life or health. “Routine” circumcision fails this test because it painfully and permanently removes a normal and healthy part of a boy’s penis, does not protect the child’s life or health, and in fact creates new risks. Removing the foreskin is no more justified than removing a finger or any other healthy body part.” LINK

When he is taken into the brightly-lit operating theatre, to be bombarded by glaring lights, faced with cult-like figures in masks and gowns, with stainless steel knives glinting above and around him, he is rendered entirely helpless, torn from the protection of his mother, the butchery leaves him deeply traumatised and, more often than not, this severs the tie between him and his mother. The trust has gone and deep in his psyche, there lurks a mistrust of women that will stay with him throughout his life, whether or not he chooses to admit it. It will also leave him with a high level distrust of anyone in a white surgical coat, hospitals, doctors, dentists, nurses and, it has to be said, anyone in authority.

And so it was for the RM ~ an adult life of numerous short term relationships,  none lasting more than three years has been characterised by  him never being able to offer the levels of commitment and trust required for him to be a husband or  father. I state that not out of frustration but rather as a matter of fact. It deeply traumatised me and whilst I have in the past made light of it, the fact remains I have only (within the last two years) really begun to look into it and to unravel the long term consequences of the brutality and its effects on my psyche.

Are there any positives to be taken from it? Mmm.  A higher, almost supra-human, tolerance of physical pain? For sure ~ as a child my mother (again, misplacing her trust in the medical profession) took me to a dentist by the name of A.K Varma, who used to practice his butchery in the town of Huddersfield. He was, I now realise, a sadist, who would drill holes into my teeth in order to fit unnecessary composite fillings, which contain mercury. He did not use an anaesthetic and I can remember a contest of wills would develop with me gripping the arms of the chair, staring into his black eyes above the mask, challenging him to test me. As I write this, it occurs to me that the circumcision made me able to tolerate and endure physical pain when it would have been more natural for me to rebel, tell the fuckers to stop and take flight.  In this way, the RM came to realise that he was here to suffer, that cruelty and pain are the name of the game on planet earth and you’d better get used to it. I don’t believe that is a healthy state of mind to have and whilst it never turned me into a psychopathic bully, there have been moments when I have verged on it.  Throughout my childhood, I was subjected to nightmares in which I was being pursued by a dark entity which would, as I now realise, be a form of re-experiencing the trauma.

If one looks into the well-documented operations of mind controllers upon children, one comes to understand how trauma splinters the mind into thousands of pieces and thereby makes it easier for the victims to be controlled. It also teaches him an insidious form of learned helplessness and a deep distrust of all those who would seek to have any form of authority over him. That is a most healthy state of mind to develop but it has come at a price. The fact that most males in the land mass known as America have undergone this brutality is also worthy of note too:

 “Social Effects”

“Laumann (1997) reported that 77 percent of the adult males in the National Health and Social Life Survey (1992) were circumcised. The effects of this wounding by circumcision have been discussed above. Goldman (1997) argues extensively that the result of having so many emotionally and sexually injured males in a society would produce undesirable social effects.

Goldman (1997) suggests that men who were neonatally circumcised would be more likely to suffer from low self-esteem, to avoid intimacy in male-female relationships, and a higher incidence of divorce. Moreover, he says neonatal circumcision may cause a higher incidence of unnecessary surgery, and of adult violence, including suicide, rape, and murder.

Baker (1996) argues that men harbor rage toward their mothers for their circumcision. She also identifies a connection between sexual violence, rape, and neonatal circumcision. DeMause (1996) connects perinatal circumcision trauma with increases in teenage suicide and social violence.” LINK

Conclusion:

Circumcision is, quite simply, an attack on the sacred masculine spirit and thus is a brutal attempt to emasculate the male. This is one of myriad assaults on him~ vaccinations containing deadly poisons, oestrogen & fluoride in the water, soya lecithins in food, vegan diets, feminism,  chemtrails in the air and a media that deliberately promotes disharmony and aggression between the sexes, all the while distracting them from the real harmonic balance of the sacred masculine with its female counterpart.

The social engineering at play is self-evidently one of ‘divide and rule’  and, like the butchery of the last two world wars which slaughtered millions of men in their prime, its ultimate effect is to blunt the power of Man’s Sacred Masculine Energy to effect change in these dimensions through his actions. We are at war and the enemy is seeking to cull the Male from taking action against those who would suppress him~ Mark Passio goes into this in some detail here, in his seminal work, “New Age Bullshit and the Suppression of the Sacred Masculine”.

Circumcision is the equivalent of clipping off an Angel’s wings and, like so much of the erroneous bullshit that gets thrust upon the child, it serves to teach him he is worthless and always at the mercy of adults ~ especially his parents. The reader may well be amused at that suggestion right now, but once it seeps into the conscious, the metaphor will serve to reveal the truth of the matter.

Some of us will have to fight without helmets and not by choice. So be it. It may seem we are vulnerable but our would-be oppressors (many of whom have been circumcised themselves) would do well to take note: the Rogue Male has nothing to lose and, in spite of it all, the phallus will rise. The Sacred Masculine cannot be kept down.

 

Bibliography and Credits:

1. http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/DOC/statement0.html
2. http://www.intactamerica.org/resources/decision
3. http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html
4. Mark Passio: “New Age Bullshit and the Suppression of the Sacred Masculine” (Podcast)