Feminine and Masculine Sexual Mutilation, the Greatest Crime Against Humanity

"Every man who has chosen lie as means must inexorably choose violence for rule." Alexander Soljenitsyne

uncutting.tumblr.com

(PARIS, France) - "The sex of the (child) appears well as a stake of possession, a symbol of submission." after Simone Veil ¹

Doctors were the first to denounce the monstrous havocs of excision. But the latter is only the tip of the iceberg of sexual mutilation. For if the damage of circumcision is the most often less serious, its planetary consequences are thousand times more serious. Practiced upon minors, these tortures are the height of methods of education through violence that are the apprenticeship of violence, barbarity and racism.

Miriam Pollack showed that circumcision is a matter of sexism². Sexism being degree zero of racism, it is not astonishing that the latter too should be implied in the barbarous and obscene mutilation imposed to children through torture, ignoble since it deprives them of the specific organ of autosexuality.

The racism of sexual mutilation shows its face at two levels:

First, reasoning through amalgam is at the heart of racist thought. Then, some cultures, in a minority, pretend to strengthen the difference of sexes by the destruction of the organ of infantile sexuality (the foreskin, and sometimes the clitoris), decreed ambiguous. In a gross majority (80% of humanity), the other cultures admit the existence of those organs as integral parts of the difference of sexes. Indeed, their mutilation lies on a series of amalgams.

If the great motivation of sexual mutilation is to dominate the youth through the terror of a human sacrifice recalling the death penalty, the second is to make supermen (women), assumed to be morally superior, elected by God or the ancestors, which already constitutes discrimination founded upon physical differentiation, and thus, artificial racism³. Lying upon an absurd guilt and will of punishment, this claim of moral, and even spiritual, superiority (the mutilation suggests abstention and despise of autosexuality decreed a sin), is largely hypocrite. The amalgam between sexual mutilation and moral superiority lies upon a puritan extremism.

In an as nonsensical way, the amalgam between gender and sex imagines that the suppression of the – hastily considered as secondary – sexual organs evoking the opposite sex would grant a superiority through a plus of femininity or masculinity.

Emphasized by the May 7 2012 decision of the high court of Köln, the amalgam between voluntarily mutilation in adult age and surgically imposed particular sign on minors during their childhood, and even their infancy sometimes, confuses an ignored handicap⁴ and a voluntary distinctive sign. We remind, included to the German judges, that elementary bioethics forbids physicians performing a mutilation without very serious and present medical motive.

At last, a fourth amalgam, between particular sign and sign of ethnical identity, comes within a sectarian choice that insults the human gender. Distinguishing the ethnic group from humanity through surgical alteration is a racist collective madness⁵, often religious, that psychiatry would qualify a transgenerational and collective syndrome of Münchhausen by proxy. The fanatics of Greek antiquity or Russia (sect of Skoptzis) did not stop at the castration of the foreskin; they would cut the whole penis off!

Sigmund Freud's two great findings are infantile sexuality and the unconscious. Those who assault the specific organs of that very sexuality very obviously do it under the sway of an unconscious guilt, which seems confirmed by the fact that the awaited results: strengthening the gender and reducing sexual appetite, are not reached. It must be thought that another goal is aimed at.

Second, that racism bursts out in the fact that the myths and rumours of masculine excision are an odious manipulation aiming at making young women believe that the "non-circumcised" are profligate, without hygiene, bad lovers and, in cultures that practise the mutilation after the age of speech, coward ("A non-circumcised is not a man." – African saying). All that in order to make sure of the possession of women through endogamy, and cohesion and perpetuation of the community, as disclosed in a historical hoax by the Jewish free-thinker philosopher Maimonides. So, circumcision is an artificial racism. Masked behind culture, tradition, religion and folklore, that pretend it an identity, this racism is more insidious than ordinary racism. It is not astonishing that it should give rise to counter racisms. Spinoza, Freud and Rozenberg⁷ mentioned this danger. The thing is yet clearer with feminine excision for which, in our countries, parents would affirm: "If we don't do it, they will not find a husband."; inside the ethnic group maybe! But the same could also be said of circumcision: "If we do not circumcise him, he won't find a wife.", meaning "within the community". Excision and circumcision are racist operations.

Barbarity and counter-barbarity are the direct consequence of this racism that catalyzes violence. Out of the thirteen genocides of modern times: Congolese, Hereros, Armenians, Jews, Tziganes, Biafrans, Bengalis, Hutus, Tutsis, Kurds, Bosnians, inhabitants of Darfur, Rohinghyas, twelve implied circumcised on one side at least and three on both sides. The circumcised perpetrated six of them. But for one exception (Sri Lanka), all wars between 1996 and 2002 involved at least one circumcising country and they were more than three times more numerous in circumcising countries. The death penalty is twice more frequent in them. They are the only ones to practise excision. In Norway, between 2006 and 2010, two per cent of circumcised committed a hundred per cent of the rapes. Circumcised Congo holds the world record of rape: 400,000 over a period of a year. Sexual mutilation separates the child from the mother at an age where this is the last thing to do, the result is catastrophic; it is the breeding ground of (reciprocal) paranoia, fanaticism, group and even state terrorism, and sexism.

If repression of autosexuality is a planetary disease, sexual excisions are its most monstrous tool. A quasi-castration for women, a genuine threat of castration for men, they are a threat of death for the individual and a threat of extermination for the group. "The greatest crime against humanity is the torture and mutilation of children." (cf. Alice Miller) but, due to the age of the victims, it is the sole which nobody complains about. It also the only one that is not punishable since it is perpetrated without intention of harming. At all events, medicine may not be used as a pretext for barbarity; in the absence of "very serious medical motive" (article 41 of the French Code of medical ethics), mutilating, a fortiori minors, and whatever the motive, religious or cosmetic, is contrary to bioethics. The right to the body must be mentioned in article 1 of the Universal declaration of human rights:

"All human beings are born free and equal in rights, in first place the right to the body, in its three dimensions of integrity, dignity and autonomy."

¹ Veil S. Preface to the supplement to the Bulletin de l'Académie nationale de médecine 2004, 188 (6).

² Pollack M. Circumcision, identity, gender and power.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miriam-pollack/circumcision-identity-gen_b_1132896.html

³ Navoiseau-Bertaux M. H. Between barbarity and exclusion, circumcision, a nec plus ultra of racism: sexual mutilation, an unconscious, hyper-dangerous ultra-racism, masked behind culture, tradition, religion and folklore. Site academia.edu.

⁴ Navoiseau-Bertaux M. H. The foreskin: a lip with a sexual function, and thus an organ; its ablation is a mutilation. Site circabolition.

⁵ Navoiseau-Bertaux M. H. Circumcision, a dangerous collective madness: from an individual psychosis to collective psychosis psychiatry, psychoanalysis and circumcision. Site academia.edu.

⁷ Rozenberg J. Biologie de la race et psychopathologie. Archives de philosophie 64, 2001.

⁸ Declaration of the first Symposium of NOCIRC. 1985. http://montagunocircpetition.org/

⁹ Miller A. Introduction to reflections about sexual mutilation, in Banished knowledge - Facing childhood injuries. New York: Doubleday; 1990. p. 131.

Michel Hervé Navoiseau-Bertaux (Sigismond) is the author of "Sexual mutilation: excision, circumcision, the victims' point of view", for free at circabolition.multiply.com; he is an Independent psychoanalysis researcher (Chercheur indépendant en psychanalyse) based in Paris, France, who works with Salem-News.com to help raise awareness of the massive societal problems connected to the blindly accepted, mutilating practice of circumcision. He says, "Non violence is as fundamental as violence, love and hatred, justice and injustice. But power is at the tip of the tongue and the sweet violence of speech, if one takes hold of it, can silence weapons."

(La non violence est aussi fondamentale que la violence, l'amour et la haine, le juste et l'injuste. Mais le pouvoir est au bout de la langue et la douce violence de la parole, si l'on s'en empare, peut faire taire les armes.)