Quiz: Which religious cult slices up its babies’ genitals and then sucks on them?

There’s this strange cult where they cut off a piece of a little girl’s genitals, and then the witch doctor who does it sucks the little girl’s vagina. Isn’t that disgusting? Barbaric? Stone age?

Oh, wait, its not little girls, its little boys. The “cult” is a sect of judaism.

As part of the ultra-orthodox Jewish circumcision ritual—known as metzitzah b’peh—the rabbi or mohel removes blood from the wound with his mouth. (source)

Yeah, and occasionally, when the mohel has herpes, he gives it to the baby. (source). Sometimes then, the baby dies. (source)

Nice fuckin ritual you got there, guys.

7 Responses to Quiz: Which religious cult slices up its babies’ genitals and then sucks on them?

  1. Charles Platt says:

    My extremely smart, literate, liberal, Jewish wife promised me that if she gave birth to a boy, he would not be circumcised. As it happened, she gave birth to a girl.

    Later we divorced and she remarried a Jewish man. This time she gave birth to a boy. Despite her prior agreement with me that the procedure was a barbaric superstitious relic, the boy was circumcised.

    The persistence of superstition is, to me, one of the strangest and most disturbing attributes of the human race.

    I note that an argument over circumcision lasted for literally years on Usenet, back in the day, and was of course inconclusive, in that I never read a single post in which the writer said, “Hm, I’ve changed my mind.” So I don’t expect too much from this topic here.

    • I find it shocking that we have an international movement against little girls being circumcised in some dark recesses of the Sudan and Somalia. But, every day, this barbaric act is committed against little boys in supposed “first world” countries, and there aren’t riots in the streets about it.

      I changed my mind on the procedure. I used to think I’d have my son circumcised, as it is “the tradition.” But, when I heard that my son was on his way, I vowed that nobody cuts off a piece of his dick without his permission. I sure as shit wouldn’t let it happen and THEN let the guy who did it suck my son’s dick.

      • senpai71 says:

        Marco,

        I’m a strongly anti-circumcision parent, and I’ve done my bit trying to stop otherwise sensible (often secular) parents from circumcising their sons, often to no avail. When I went to a pre-natal ‘new parents’ class in liberal San Francisco, I was the ONLY father who said I wouldn’t circumcises my son, which shocked me. Circumcision is just barbaric and wrong.

        However…

        You do yourself a serious disservice if you compare male and female circumcision inn the same sentence. As bad a male circumcision is, it is NOTHING compared to female circumcision. At least with male circumcision, the man does get pleasure (perhaps dulled somewhat – there is little ‘hard’ (tee hee!) evidence to show that circumcised men feel less pleasure than uncircumcised men, although lots of apocryphal stories and “well obviously it must be true” arguments). Whereas when a little girl is circumcised, her clitoris is REMOVED. She will likely NEVER feel sexual pleasure as an adult and indeed, may only feel pain during sex.

        In my book, they’re both wrong. But I fear you undermine your standing if you compare them as you did – the barbaric act committed against a boy is very different from the barbaric act committed against a girl.

        Just sayin’

        • Perhaps my source isn’t the best, but Wikipedia’s entry on female genital mutilation says otherwise (sort of). Some forms of female circumcision are what you describe — the removal of the clitoris (so point to you on that). But, other forms involve removing just the hood, just the labia, or other forms of mutilation.

          But your point is irrefutable — removing the foreskin is not the same as removing the clitoris.

          But, I stand by my position that taking a blade to a baby’s genitals for no other reason than some belief that a fairy tale tells you to is the same, no matter what gender the baby.

          • senpai71 says:

            Oh, you’ll get no disagreement from me on that one.

            Funny story – several years ago, my wife was at the park with a bunch of other mothers (at least one of whom knew that, since I’m English by birth, chances are that I’m not circumcised). These ladies started discussing loudly about how it would be so gross to have sex with a man who was uncircumcised. My wife stood up and loudly proclaimed “Well I think uncut dick is the best”. And then she just sat there and glared at them…

          • Frederick Michael Carl Frederickson says:

            I think many people do it out of fear of their child looking different. It’s my understanding that when I was born there was still a belief within the medical profession that circumcision had hygienic benefits. When this was discovered to be completely unfounded most people continued to have it done out of a desire to conform. I’ll admit that the primary reason my son is uncircumcised is because it is no longer deemed medically necessary and therefore not covered by insurance. Had it been covered I might still have opted not to have it done, but I can’t say for certain. Perhaps it will slowly become normal NOT to have it done. Then all the jewish boys can be the weirdoes.

          • Frederick,

            With declining circumcision rates, I think that the generation being born now might think that the mutilated children are the “funny looking ones.”

            Frankly, anyone who mutilates their child’s genitals just to “conform” deserves to be forcibly sterilized.

%d bloggers like this: