Circumcision (Page 6 of 8)

Oh I completely agree, you can't pin something on just one thing or circumstance. But, if your coming from a family that would support circumcision, your probably bound to have other "issues" as well.

*Edit* snipped from http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/foley.htm

Then too, homosexuality also seems to be related to circumcision. First to report this was Melitta Schmideberg (Psychoanalytic Review, 1948), who treated two patients, homosexuals, who had been circumcised. In one of them, "The resentment and fear of his mother associated with circumcision was an important factor in the development of his homosexuality." More recently, a study was made of admissions to a large Naval hospital. Of all admissions, 32% had been circumcised. Of all admission with the diagnosis of "overt homosexuality," 100% had been circumcised. Before he died, Dr. Alfred Kinsey intended to investigate the relationship between circumcision and homosexuality.

Well, I'll come clean on this issue. Actually my natural sexual orientation is homosexual, and I see these little barbs and jabs about homosexuals all over spirituality websites. I saw the same thing happening here, and just wondered how deep does it go?

I think the issue of homosexuality and circumcision are completely connected issues, because circumcision makes infants to associate pain with sex, and heterosexual indoctrination makes people with homosexual feelings associate sex, and their sense of being, with shame. It's the same thing as teaching that masturbation is wrong or sex is only meant for procreation. These harmful teachings and practices result in people storing negative emotions in their sexual chakra's, with all the harm that this causes.

Everyone in my whole extended family was brought up to believe that sex before marriage is wrong, not everyone stuck with that, and my cousin had cervical cancer when she was 19. Although she had sex, she never even had an orgasm because she wouldn't touch herself enough to find out how she liked it, because she felt it was dirty and felt guilty about it. Even with all the carcinogenic chemicals in the America diet and environment, I don't believe it's possible to get cancer at age 19 without a huge energy disturbance by storing negative emotions down there.

Society has  a lot of dysfunctional aspects , like rape, violent porn, cancer around the sexual organs, body shame, homosexual teen suicides and hostility towards other sexual expressions and body forms. There's knock on effects from all of these, like hostility towards women, because boys are brought up to believe sex is dirty. Then when they get older, they form this love/hate relationship, where they feel attracted towards women, but then hate them for making them feel dirty. But at the same time, like feeling “dirty"  because it excites them.

So I'm glad that the topic of circumcision was brought up, because I'm sure that society will benefit as a whole when infants aren't forced through this trauma, and people are able to grow-up without learning to associate pain with sexual feelings. But ending this barbaric practice won't have any beneficial effect, if society is still structured to teach sexual guilt and shame. And that's why I felt this is an appropriate thread to address the homosexual prejudice comments.

Thank you for sharing, Avalokita. I would classify myself as bi-sexual, I always had a fascination towards the uncut guys. A very close friend of mine who is uncut happened to tell me in a very synchronistic way that he felt bi-sexual. We experimented, he decided it wasn't his cup of tea(got back with his ex), and I came out feeling like I completed an Earth mission, and helped a friend a long the way (Perhaps THAT was the mission)

Besides the use of sexual agendas to further control people, it's probably one of the base insticts to manipulate, and the easiest wouldn't you say?

anti-social
Ahuhauhahuahuhau
I am a hermit!

Right now I am on a celibate phase, because human close relationship
was always a vector of attack on me(ex wife was the worst), so I decided
to cut that until could see things more clear, being alone was never a problem
to me and also I feel a bit of universal love to the God creations.
Some people may think I an a crazy monk, the shit heads around may
even think I an gay
Looks like my hermit time is ending, now I know things better and can
leave the cave,  in the near future I will start to socialize a bit again, but at slowww pace.
I will not search but will not keep the door locked, will let the life flow...

Being a hermit gives zero change to find company, forget about finding
the “perfect" as it do not exist, better desire something to complement
your life in some aspect, not all aspect will be fullfiled...
The day you want to leave the cave, dance or theatrical lessons is a good start
try some artistic stuff and you may even find a diamond lost in the sand...

hehe... Pictus, I've been doing the same thing with the hermit lifestyle and celibacy.

Visavis, it really does seem like someone (your HS is probaby the one) is trying to tell you something.  I almost wish I'd had such a safety sensor, as it would have saved me years of heartaches and disappointments!

Before picking this apart, I have to stress again that I'm all for promoting the end to circumcision.  It's barbaric and I would never do it to my own kids if I had them, and I'd like to see all parents saying no to this. 

But.  This study is skewed, and I'll show you why, so that you can be on the lookout in the future when you read other studies.  Sometimes, studies will manipulate information to get you, the reader, swept up in what's being said you'll just automatically accept it all at face value.  Here's the problem with this study:

- 32% of admissions were circumcised.....out of how many total?   Five?  Ten?  Fifty?  A hundred?  So 32% of what?

- 100% of the diagnosed overt homosexuals were circumcised.  But what was the actual number of homosexuals?  And more importantly - again - what was the grand total number of admissions?

When I'm given stuff like this to "prove" something, I'll sometimes go as far as to grab a scrap piece of paper and pen and jot down the facts and numbers I'm being given, so I can see it on paper in front of me, to see if it adds up and makes sense.....and see if something is missing.   In this case, key information is being left out....seemingly on purpose. 

They say that 100% of the diagnosed homosexuals were circumcised, but you see how different it would look if you found out that:

- There were 350 guys total admitted to the hospital;
- Out of those 350 guys, 299 were circumcised;
- Out of those 299 circumcised guys, only 8 were overtly gay.
- And out of those 51 NON-circumcised guys, there were also three overtly gay men.

Suddenly, there's not much of a case for the link between homosexuality and circumcision when only 8 circumcised guys out of 289 were overtly gay, and there are even some UN-circumcised gay men in the bunch..........something the "study" fails to mention either way.

I just made up figures here to illustrate a point, and I hope you understand how just citing percentages, with a lack of actual total figures, means absolutely nothing.   Not only for this particular case study, but for ANY case study that you might come across in life.   Always take the time to really read and scrutinize.   Grab a pen and paper if you have to, write it down and look at how the numbers adds up - or don't add up - on paper.   Many people are hoping you won't take the time to do that, and try to slip stuff in, or toss out all these numbers so it sounds believable and impressive.....until you look closer.  It's a classic manipulative tactic.   Again, I'm all for the anti-circumcision thing, but I don't dig manipulated statistics and things being twisted and distorted to "prove" that a square peg fits into a round hole.

And also to stress that it's not that my mind is totally made up that there's no link between circumcision and homosexuality.  There very well might be, I'm open to anything.  Just provide a better case study...one with figures that make sense.  That's all.

PS Edit:   And as it was brought to my attention:  IF there was such a major link between circumcision and homosexuality, then:

- Most Jewish men should be gay, or either wrestling with homosexual tendencies on a mass level, since most, if not all, Jews are circumcised;

- There should be a very low instance of homosexuality in the rest of the predominantly non-circumcised world.  Which is not the case, as we all know.

So, just some food for thought.

Good point about the acuracy of statistics Lyra, you really do have to have all the details yourself when analysing the study, instead of just believing the conclusion.

But to clarify the study said, "A large Naval hospital", I'd imagine a large Naval hospital would have quite a large number of admissions. If the study said, a rural hospital in Kansas, I'd be much more wary of the conclusion, but you're right, there's no way of knowing for sure without all the data.

Bearing this in mind, in the example you gave, the data is:

350 admitted
299 circumcised
= 85% circumcised

8 out of 299 circumcised men are gay
= 2.7% of circumcised men are gay

3 out of 51 uncircumcised men are gay
= 5.9% of uncircumcised men are gay

11 out of 350 are gay
= 3.1% of all admissions are gay.

This points to the conclusion that there are both circumcised and uncircumcised gay men, but uncircumcised men are more likely to be gay then the average, and circumcised men are also less likely to be gay then then the average.

However in the study in the large naval hospital, because 32% of all admissions were circumcised, it means that the majority of all admissions weren't circumcised, but 100% of all the "overty" gay admissions were. This is a major difference than your example. Also noted, is that Dr. Alfred Kinsey is a well known figure for devoting a large chunk of his life to researching human sexuality. The fact that he was intriqued enough by the figures to think it's worth further study speaks volumes.

But even more concerning than the lack of the real figures is the fact that this is a naval hospital. With Dr Kinsey alive, this means that this was a time where people were expelled from the military for being "obvertly gay". So this means that people were not honest about their sexuality, they either didn't tell the hospital for fear of being kicked out, or else they lied and said they were gay when they weren't in order to get a dishonorable discharge and get out of the military before they were killed. So for this reason, I wouldn't set too much in store by this report, even if I knew the true figures involved.