EC 557

A Happenstance Witness and The Holy Ghost:

ADDENDUMS

By © Ludis Cuckold

⁸ Why Circumcision?

When I first heard of circumcision, it was associated with Jewish males, which is what prompted me to think of the scarring of penises as a way for Jewish men to identify themselves when at Roman public baths. When I began to read books of anthropology, I learned of its use among archaic tribes as an initiation of young boys into manhood.

Truth be said, none of the reasons for circumcision convinced me of its legitimacy. Only after I recently wrote a blog (The Sorrows of Young Werther) that argued that Latvijan women used to knit woolen mittens (the Liv women knit woolen socks) for their dowry, because these were used as a primitive birth-control device to ‘pull off’ a man before he got to demanding vaginal intercourse, did I begin to wonder whether my argument was quite right.

One thing that bothered me about my reasoning was that wool against naked skin is not a pleasant feeling, especially not when the skin may happen to be that of genetalia. I comforted myself by arguing that Latvijan damilies were not known to practice circumcision, and therefore the wool of a mitten never came in contact with anyone’s glans penis. Indeed, a mitten—depending on one’s social status—could come with an invertable linen or silk lining. Also, a mitten may be knit with both ends open and, thus, be like a muff, which, moreover, is a slang name for the vulva.

Be that as it may, a natural ‘muff’ is a man’s own foreskin, which protects the glans from abrasions.  When the foreskin is removed and the glans is exposed and comes in harms way, it must forego sexual methods that may expose it to abrasions, and seek sexual contacts in ways it finds less threatening. With the foreskin removed, masturbation becomes unpleasant (I have heard from Jewish friends that they have used raw liver, butter, Vaseline, and soap to make pleasuring one’s self more pleasant.) However, the most interesting fact is that the removal of the foreskin encourages the glans to seek warmth of the vagina, rather than engage the clitoris with an external approach or be caressed by a palm.

Circumcision, thus, is a device that encourages the sexul act to be limited to vaginal sex, which increases the likelihood of pregnancy, increases the population of the tribe, and creates a civilization that thinks nothing over a holocaust of abortions. Since intercourse by 'missionary position' during pregnancy is not advisable, the circumcised male is forced to seek 'unfaithful' means of sexual satisfaction (possibly by engaging a prostitute), which—one would imagine—increases his sense of guilt over being born a sexual being.

EC 555

A Happenstance Witness and The Holy Ghost:

ADDENDUMS

By © Ludis Cuckold

⁶ Fantasy As History*

*The link fairly accurately reflects my own perspective. Still, the author of the link, links the problem of history on “a superior power”, with which perspective it is hard to disagree; except as to the nature of this power. While the link links history to Hegel, I link it to a coup d'etat against Original Christianity (see EC541), a late manifestation of which coup was the Westphalian Peace Treaty. I would place less blame on post Enlightenment secret societies, as on self-poisoning by post hypnotic suggestion of which the words that awaken have been forgotten, and whence the self-poisoning.

History was not always perceived in terms of a linear sequence that moved from a -1 to a hypothetical zero to an infinite point in the future. Before the advent of the concept of time as espoused by our ‘scientific*’ age, history was composed by and sung by poets, and limited itself to the time of a king and his dynasty.

*The pretention of science to objectivity is a fantasy of the Ego.

Because the rule of a king (and possibly queen) was seen as a self-sacrificial event (God as a projection of human imagination dies in the process of creating the world), he could do no wrong, even if his rule could end tragically (Oedipus). When a king died, his-her entire retinue died with him. We can see this in the reproductions of the painted Chinese terra cotta courts of Emperor Qin Shi Huang (note that the name ‘Huang’—just as the Spanish name of Huan—rings to Yuang or John or herder), which were discovered in recent times. In other words, in past times history was not necessarily viewed as an endless chain of ‘progressive’ events, but as a segment of a given lifetime to which the next period was not necessarily related. We may remember the phrase: “In my father’s house are many mansions.”* (John 14:2)

*When a period of history is seen as a mansion instead of a road without end, it makes sense that historians are poets, who celebrate their time and praise their kings. In our time, academic historians pretend to be apolitical and even ignorant of politics, but for these same reason invent false histories. To wit: a linear history is violent because it is unnatural.

The epics of Homer, the Illyad and Odysey, said to have been composed in the 8 century BC (I would project the epic much closer to our time, perhaps the 3^rd century AD) describes a historical event that apparently was of great significance to the time and region. However, an Italian writer believes that these epic events do not take place in the region of the Bosphorus, the Black or Mediterranean seas, but in the Baltic.

What makes history so confusing is the aggressive ‘fake’ that no one notices—at least not for a time. While the fake is a virtue in basketball, when applied to history, it may result in a major catastrophe. We are living such a catastrophe today in the East vs West conflict that is being pressed (with plenty of fakes) by the United States of America, but was started a long time ago by its Viking predecesors.

The fake history was introduced by the West with a play of words that involved ‘naming’ something for what it is not. This happened when the West began to call the Vikings Mongols. The Viking invasion of the Black Sea region—via the numerous rivers that flowed into the Black and Caspian seas from the north and northwest—was renamed the Mongol invasion of Genghis Khan (John the King) from the barren steppes of the Far East and worse.

To this day the Mongol invasion is explained as search by the Mongolian people for more hospitable living space. This explanation ignores the likelihood that the invaders were Vikings, whose predecessors had been herders of wild animals from the Black Sea region who had practiced animal husbandry by driving a species of elk deer north during the summer months, and returning home (and sometimes—as the Finns and Yenniseyans prove—not returning) with the herds came winter time. Following the Storrega earthquake in the North Sea that created a tsunamis that flooded much of northwestern and northern Europe, the herders became trapped in the north, and could not find their way home. When they did return several centuries later, they had largely forgotten their origins, and, pressed by circumstances, had turned from gentle herders of an autocephalic society into hunters and thieves ruled by a violent king of thieves.