"Recently Mr. Dervin gave a teach-in for the Feminist
Majority Leadership Alliance at San Francisco State
University entitled, "Why Male Circumcision is a
Feminist Issue," essentially focusing this teach-in on
the numerous ways in which male circumcision affects
women including, but not limited to:breaking of the
mother-infant bond; overriding the new mother's basic
instinct to protect her child from harm; disrupting
breast-feeding; lessening overall sexual enjoyment of
women; increasing the "female sexual dysfunctions" of
vaginal dryness and pain during intercourse; as well
as likely increasing rates of rape and domestic
violence."

This argument is pure fallacy( :) ).

Whether or not male circumcision is right or not
remains an issue, however:

1) Male circumcision is NOT a feminist issue.
According to people of this character EVERTHING is a
feminist issue. Circumcision is not the cause of
domestic violence and rape. I am sick of people
turning thier personal psychological problems into
social programs, because unfortunately in places like
the US, this has become accepted.

2) Circumcision has a long history, predating the
Victorian era. Although this article is yet another
fine example of commentary designed to villify the
evil white male, circumcision as a practice is not at
all limited to European culture. It is estimated
that the majority of ancient Egyptians were
circumcised, and this is likely the place where it was
picked up by the western Judaeo-Christian-Islam
tradition( it is also believed that Egyptians did not
circumcise at birth, but rather at puberty ).
Circumcision has been practiced since the beginnings
of civilization.

3) The idea that sexual behaviour must be somehow
'liberated' has become practically inextricable from
so called modern progressive political and
philosophical movements( and these ideas can be traced
to Freud and associates ). I see sentiments like the
ones above as a good example of such thinking. What I
find interesting AND CONTRADICTORY is:

a) They see problems like AIDS and STD( the AIDS
rate continues to rise, it is estimated that 1 in 5
people between 20-30 have HERPES) as a HEALTH problem
rather than a social problem. I believe that this
mental construction is likely to be supported by the
wonderful american medical community for reasons that
are obvious. AIDS is a MAJOR calamity! In some
african countries the rate exceeds 10%!

b) Often this brand of post-modern rhetoric
associates itself with the socialist left. They
expound the idea that socialism and the 'sexual
liberation' go hand in hand. However, it is modern
American sexuality that is responsible for the dreaded
'consumerist culture'. Most of the crap that
americans purchase is to enhance thier sexual
desireabilty as McLuhan pointed out 40 years ago(
McLuhan was a Roman Catholic BTW :) ). To embrace the
so-called sexual revolution is to embrace high
capitalism. If you want to study this effect take a
look at Maxim or Stuff magazine.

In addition, there is yet another aspect to this
so called 'liberalism' culture that I find
interesting. Many of these social circles embrace a
typical modern form of spirituality that looks to
cultures like China and India for a source of
spiritual fulfillment, while again turning the
Judaeo-Christian-Islam tradition into some kind of
hated evil in need of being rooted out. The fact is,
in places like India and China, their sense of
sexuality and gender relationships has been
historically much more defined, if not restrained,
than ours( premarital sex was almost non-existent
before the 20th century in India ). Of course this
aspect of these cultures is ignored, as various
superficial aspects of religious doctrine and custom
are emphasized, often to justify some kind of agenda.
This kind of activity is, at best, an insult to these
people. This association of the 'eastern
enlightenment' with socialism can be traced to the
anti-war movements of the sixties. If one were to
look further into where these ideas came from, these
'activists' just might change thier tune.

take care, josh




— doron golan <doron@computerfinearts.com> wrote:
> (from charlei NYC)
> this guy greg dervin is my friend from NYU. the mp3
> at this link is a lecture by him on the issue of
> male circumcision. download it:
>
> http://www.indybay.org/uploads/sgi.mp3
>
> male circumcision is wrong, a leftover from
> victorian sexual control due to fear of sex and
> masturbation in particular. it changes sexual
> feeling for both circumcised men and the women
> having sex with
> circumcised men. it causes intense trauma for
> infants. you should
> read more about this at the link below. forced
> mutilation of powerless unaware infants is not ok.
>
> also, the rational about "cleanliness" is bullshit
> that came later to excuse the practise of genital
> mutilation.
> america is far behind the rest of the world at
> eliminating infant
> circumcision. 57% of males are cut after being born
> in this country today.
> please go to web site for more info:
> http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/11/1545248.php
> + the internet is not your life.
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
http://rhizome.org/info/29.php


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

— Charlie NYC <charlienyc@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> i understand what you are saying, josh. but, no one
> said victorians
> created circumcision.

Something I find humorous is that a lot of feminist
thinking presents the Victorian age as the founder of
this highly oppressive legacy, but paradoxically, the
Victorian age characterizes itself as having *female
leadership*.

> we said it became popular
> non-religiously and
> with christians to stop masturbation and then touted
> as a health
> issue to justify it for future generations after the
> "masturbation is
> the root of all evil" thing went out of style.
>
> yes, the feminist thing is a stretch, a common
> strategy used by
> leftists to unite other groups under their power
> field. it is true
> though that a mother naturally does not want to cut
> her newborn and
> hear his screams. it is also true that the baby has
> no choice in the
> matter and in that is it technically "forced genital
> mutilation".
> whether or not it affects a woman's enjoyment of sex
> is up in the air
> as far as i am concerned. i would need a LARGE well
> spread survey.

Well the ends do not justify the means. If you
believe in this argument( 'circumcision is wrong' )
then it should hold its own so to speak without
needing various rhetorical contortions. This just
adds to the misinformation, creates more problems,
people die, babies cry, etc.


>
> the idea that it can cause social problems like rape
> and violence is
> probably bullshit used by anti-circumcision people
> to scare their
> opponents. i highly doubt this. instead i think our
> war-mentality in
> america is a separate problem. we have NO IDEA what
> happens in the
> psychology of a newborn though i will guess that the
> extreme pain as
> a very early sensation in the genitals HAS to have
> some effect and i
> will also guess it is a trauma of some sort. a baby,
> taken from his
> mother's arms to have one of the most sensitive
> areas of his body cut
> by a stranger, come on. you think this is a good
> idea?

Well I would honestly say no. Such an operation
should probably not be manditory. As was mentioned
this does have a religious precedence. Also
circumcision is practiced in cultures that have not
been infected with the 'judeo-christian
snake-in-the-grass' such as Australian Aboriginies.

>
> your comments on eastern enlightenment and india's
> no-sex-before-marriage culture was connected how?
> sexual politics?

You could put it this way: often times to justify a
position certain parties try to create an alternate
reality that they present as a better option to the
one we currently have. Mythologizing about
hypothetical asian cultures does not help anybody.
What it does is takes fragments of cultures that are
misunderstood and presents them as the whole, a
sociological frankenstein monster. This kind of
argument is VERY common today and is rooted in our
conceptions of race and cultural identity and so
forth.

>
> this is what i think. i think we had some major
> problems with sex
> because of illegitimate children and STDs running
> rampant through us
> at MANY points in our past so we evolved culturally
> to solve this
> problem by creating strict culture about monogamy
> and marriage to
> close the sexual network and protect us. now, we
> have 1) antibiotics,
> 2) condoms, and 3) abortion.

Do we( as in ALL of us ) consider these things as
options? At least one of these things, antibiotics,
is beginning to be seen by science as
counter-productive. Do we want to become dependent on
technologies rather than moral codes?

As you know the abortion issue is still largely
unresolved. Abortion has a long history of
persecution. Midwives were often associated with
witchcraft, etc. The problematic issue of abortion is
not a new one, and its not likely to go away anytime
soon.

> therefore, we do not
> need AS MUCH these
> fears of sex and extreme focus on monogamy as we
> once did. yes, our
> sexual fears helped us survive once by slowing
> horrible plagues like
> syphilis and by creating greater stability in child
> raising by
> strengthening he family structure and fatherhood.
> that is why these
> fears are here. we are the successful offspring of
> survivors of STD
> plagues; both physically and culturally we adapted.
> and, usually, the
> family structure has, over-all, increased our chance
> of surviving by
> the father protects the wife protects the child
> system. this is also
> physical and cultural as almost everything is. now,
> we have a choice.

> do we want to still be uncomfortable with our bodies
> and sex?

What does that mean? I really cannot interpret this
statement.

> i think
> for raising children, the father should be known and
> be a part of it.

You have drawn a picture of 'traditional culture'
and shown how we have obviated it due to current
technological development. How do you see these
'traditional cultures' as not involving the father in
child rearing? If anything absentee fathers are a
manifestation of recent cultural changes rather than
these reported vestiges of the past.

> but before we are ready to have children, why all
> this monogamy crap?
> whatever, that is my opinion.

Psychology has shown that the sexual act has a
profound effect on the psyche. So called 'mental
illnesses' seem to be utterly ubiquitous today( which
is yet another multi-billion dollar industry ). What
is the solution? Jerk off?( btw- in most 'asian'
cultures this is considered even to this day to be a
function of insanity ). The link between sexual
behaviour and a mental outlook has been shown
countless times by modern psychology.

>
> but this is off topic. the main thing about the male
> circumcision
> issue for me is the lack of choice on the part of
> the child.

Ok, but if you want an argument to be taken
seriously, you do not throw in everthing and anything
from your system of beliefs( as discussed above ).

> i am
> vegan and it is the same issue for me: a stronger
> force physically
> controlling the life of another. yes, we RAISE our
> children but we
> should OWN them.
>
> oh, and why not post this debate online:
> http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/11/1545248.php


be my guest…

-josh

>
> ~Charlie
>
> >———-
> > > From: josh zeidner <jjzeidner@yahoo.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 08:07:41 -0800 (PST)
> >> To: doron golan <doron@computerfinearts.com>
> >> Cc: list@rhizome.org
> >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Male Circumcision is
> Wrong
> >>
> >> "Recently Mr. Dervin gave a teach-in for the
> Feminist
> >> Majority Leadership Alliance at San Francisco
> State
> >> University entitled, "Why Male Circumcision is a
> >> Feminist Issue," essentially focusing this
> teach-in on
> >> the numerous ways in which male circumcision
> affects
> >> women including, but not limited to:breaking of
> the
> >> mother-infant bond; overriding the new mother's
> basic
> > > instinct to protect her child from harm;
> disrupting
> >> breast-feeding; lessening overall sexual
> enjoyment of
> >> women; increasing the "female sexual
> dysfunctions" of
> >> vaginal dryness and pain during intercourse; as
> well
> >> as likely increasing rates of rape and domestic
> >> violence."
> >>
> >> This argument is pure fallacy( :) ).
> >>
> >> Whether or not male circumcision is right or not
> >> remains an issue, however:
> >>
> >> 1) Male circumcision is NOT a feminist issue.
> >> According to people of this character EVERTHING
> is a
> >> feminist issue. Circumcision is not the cause
> of
> >> domestic violence and rape. I am sick of people
> >> turning thier personal psychological problems
> into
> >> social programs, because unfortunately in places
> like
> >> the US, this has become accepted.
> >>
> >> 2) Circumcision has a long history, predating
> the
> >> Victorian era. Although this article is yet
> another
> >> fine example of commentary designed to villify
> the
> >> evil white male, circumcision as a practice is
> not at
> >> all limited to European culture. It is
> estimated
> >> that the majority of ancient Egyptians were
> >> circumcised, and this is likely the place where
> it was
> > > picked up by the western Judaeo-Christian-Islam
> >> tradition( it is also believed that Egyptians
> did not
> >> circumcise at birth, but rather at puberty ).
> >> Circumcision has been practiced since the
> beginnings
> >> of civilization.
> >>
> >> 3) The idea that sexual behaviour must be
> somehow
> >> 'liberated' has become practically inextricable
> from
> >> so called modern progressive political and
> >> philosophical movements( and these ideas can be
> traced
> >> to Freud and associates ). I see sentiments
> like the
> >> ones above as a good example of such thinking.
> What I
> >> find interesting AND CONTRADICTORY is:
> >>
> >> a) They see problems like AIDS and STD( the AIDS
> >> rate continues to rise, it is estimated that 1
> in 5
> >> people between 20-30 have HERPES) as a HEALTH
> problem
> >> rather than a social problem. I believe that
> this
> >> mental construction is likely to be supported by
> the
> >> wonderful american medical community for reasons
> that
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

read on…


> >
> > > do we want to still be uncomfortable with our
> bodies
> >> and sex?
> >
> > What does that mean? I really cannot interpret
> this
> >statement.
>
> the whole thing? well, i see evolution as occurring
> on every level of
> existence. cultures evolve with our genes in a total
> flow. survival
> into this moment from the last moment determines
> what patterns remain
> in existence, all patterns are being "tested"
> constantly. fatherhood
> and family has evolved into us because, as a pattern
> (whether
> physical, genetic, or cultural, learned or both) it
> survived by us
> surviving with it (ie: those who had it did better
> than those who
> didnt a some point in our past - chimps and bonobos
> do not have it,
> gorillas have harems). this is still worded a little
> unclear, i am
> sorry. i hope you understand though.

I think that a lot of this kind of semantic
structure is rooted in certain concepts about
psychology. Mainly, it is the belief that it is
somehow possible to totally grasp the working of our
own psychology, and somehow fix it or transcend it.
Our own devices of observation are but a small portion
of our entire psyche, and therefore are woefully
unequipped to grasp the complexity of the whole. Here
we begin to dwell in the dismal depths of metaphysics.
For the purposes of brevity, i will end this line of
thinking here to address some of the other points you
made below.

>
> well, we have less control over our behavior
> patterns that are rooted
> in our genes at this point, but culturally, we have
> choices.

Again, how is it possible for behavior to control
itself? This is really an issue addressed by abstract
cybernetics, which if you have ever read authors like
Weiner, begin to take on an almost religious tone.

The idea that we can understand the genetic code is
an even bigger pipe dream. The complexity of the
human genome( or even a fly genome ), is beyond our
means of comprehension. Of course one may suggest
that we can create computers to do this thinking for
us, or 'externalize our nervous systems' as Mr.
McLuhan put it some time ago. But then are we really
'controlling' our own blueprint, or have we put
machines before our own humanity? These are all
issues that the 'digital artists' are wrestling with(
at least the real ones :) ). If you like science
fiction read 'Dune', Herbert deals with this issues
quite well. If you want to learn about cybernetics
read Stanislaw Lem( there is a movie starring George
Clooney based on one of his books ).

> do i
> join this culture, believe this idea, follow this
> leader, decide to
> partake in this action? we can continue to feel
> "uncomfortable with
> our bodies and sex", as i said above, or we can
> change. i dont like
> discomfort or repression or most fears we have. i
> dont want them.
> where it endangers us, we need fears. STDs are a
> danger, so is (to a
> woman) having a baby without a father. with our
> minds and our
> awareness about how sex can lead to STDs and
> children, we can make
> choices, like wearing condoms. with our minds we
> have also invented
> cures to some diseases and the technology of
> abortion though i am NOT
> advocating abortion as birth control (it is just a
> last defense
> against unplanned children).

So then abortion is an option only as a last resort(
and in my view the only reasonable use for it ). So
then it really does not factor into this argument.

>
> all i am saying is we do not NEED AS MUCH ANYMORE
> the fears of sex
> that are in our culture. our culture needs to catch
> up IF WE WANT TO
> BE MORE COMFORTABLE with sex and our bodies.

I suppose it would be nice if WE WERE COMFORTABLE
with our bodies and these ideas of casual sex, but to
think that we can somehow engineer a solution to our
psychological mechanism of guilt( which is there for
our own survival ), is a form of arrogance destined
for a societal catastrophe.

> >
> > You have drawn a picture of 'traditional
> culture'
> >and shown how we have obviated it due to current
> >technological development. How do you see these
> >'traditional cultures' as not involving the father
> in
> >child rearing? If anything absentee fathers are a
> >manifestation of recent cultural changes rather
> than
> >these reported vestiges of the past.
>
> i dont think so. there have ALWAYS been dead beat
> dads.

yes, but there have been much more of them in the
past 40 years.

> it is part of
> the interplay of our sexual behavior. that is why a
> women
> INSTINCTUALLY doesnt feel comfortable having sex
> with a man she
> doesnt know well or who is not committed to her.

well there are also reasons why men INSTINCTUALLY
have trouble commiting to women who have been
'COMFORTABLE WITH THIER BODIES'.

> it
> is also why love
> is desired by women in a monogamous situation, to
> KEEP THE MAN AROUND
> and caring for her and the child.

lifelong committment is a lifelong committment.

>
> > > but before we are ready to have children, why
> all
> >> this monogamy crap?
> >> whatever, that is my opinion.
> >
> > Psychology has shown that the sexual act has a
> >profound effect on the psyche. So called 'mental
> >illnesses' seem to be utterly ubiquitous today(
> which
> >is yet another multi-billion dollar industry ).
> What
> >is the solution? Jerk off?( btw- in most 'asian'
> >cultures this is considered even to this day to be
> a
> >function of insanity ). The link between sexual
> >behaviour and a mental outlook has been shown
> >countless times by modern psychology.
>
> interesting topic. i think masturbation addiction is
> bad for our
> psychology. when it is used as a drug, it is
> addictive and
> destructive of libido and makes sexual pleasure from
> a sexual act
> with another person less enjoyable. if it is looked
> at in the context
> of a drug addiction, a lot can be seen about it.
> excessive
> masturbation is a problem that we do not want to
> accept in modern
> liberal culture.

When does it become a drug? When is it healthy?
Although I do not have a scientific reason, personally
I believe that a lot of these complaints about sexual
dysfunction are due to these new concepts about sex.
Women complain about 'vaginal dryness' or 'painful
intercourse'. Why do you think that is? Your body is
subconsciously rejecting your own behavior, trying to
protect itself.

Almost every major social collapse in history is
preceded by views on sex similar to modern
Euro-America ( ex. Rome, French Monarchy, etc ). The
question does come down to what we really want. Do we
want to be slave to our own device? What is the best
expression of humanity? We all believe that we are
enslaved, this idea is everwhere amongst the
bleeding-heart liberals world-wide. I have abandoned
the idea that there is a body of people enslaving us(
evil white man ). We consistently make the choice to
be enslaved.

"We must free ourselves from Egypt every day."


>
> it is nice talking with you.

likewise…

——————————————————
The old woman said; "You've heard of animals chewing
off a leg to escape a trap? There's an animal kind of
trick. A human would remain in the trap, endure the
pain, feigning death that he might kill the trapper
and remove a threat to his kind."
——————————————————

-josh

btw- I hope that Doron Golan was not some
pseudo-jewish persona you made up :).

"The opposite of love is not hate, it's
indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness,
it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not
heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is
not death, it's indifference." Elie Wiesel






__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com