In which comic books in the USA become clearly anti-Semitic:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

As some may know, there's a whole furor in San Francisco over penises. This may seem unsurprising given that it is San Francisco, except that in this case the furor is over circumcision. A man named Hess has been advocating banning circumcision of men, which is opposed by both Jews and Muslims in the city. As well it should be, for such a ban is a time-honored practice of slapping Jews in the face, and a disturbing precedent set by any US city (and of course it also affects Muslims).

Things have gotten beyond the point of parody, however, with this comic:

http://gawker.com/5808669/support-anti+circumcision-bill-with-fun-anti+semitic-foreskin-man-comic

And this is the appearance of the supervillain, Monster Mohel (no, I am not making this up):



Now, I would like once again to note that this image ^ is from the idea of a man named Hess. You can't make this shit up.

In my opinion circumcision bans, particularly like the one that's currently in place in San Fran, are deliberate attacks on religious rituals, and this particular type of ban has an unpleasant history around it. Any doubt that Jew-hatred is behind it has been pretty much cleared up by this comic and characters like this. In terms of Western nations, Jew-hatred in the USA has been relatively limited compared to places elsewhere, but it is my fervent belief that this particular comic goes beyond race!fail to outright racism, and it is also my fervent belief that this comic and the ban itself are morally indefensible.

Your thoughts?

Comments

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Between this and Representative Weiner's wiener the Onion will soon be out of a job.

That or become a legitimate news source.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I think it became a legitimate news source back when they made Atlas Shrugged into a three-part movie.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Don't worry, there'll be always food for the Onion. Especially after Palin decides to run. That'll be Lulz-Bonanza!

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

We bar a lot of religious rituals. If you're having peyote off a reservation, you will be arrested. Same for pot if you're a Rastafarian. Are those morally indefensible *because* they interfere with religious rituals?

I'll agree that the comic is obviously anti-Semitic. This does not mean the ban is. To quote Eugene Volokh (http://volokh.com/2011/05/26/are-the-proposed-circumcision-bans-motivated-by-hostility-to-jews-or-muslims/), "As best I can tell, opponents of male circumcision believe that it’s a serious interference with the rights of boys, and the men they’ll become, and a serious harm to those boys and men. If that’s so, then there’s every reason for them to think that it’s just as much an interference with rights, and just as much of a harm, when the conduct is done for religious reasons. And therefore it makes perfect sense that, with no hostility to the religion as such, the backers would refuse to include a religious exemption. The refusal to give people a religious exemption from a ban on behavior that you think is harmful and rights-violating hardly shows a hostility to religion — it shows a hostility to the behavior, whether the behavior is religious or otherwise." (Emphasis mine)

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Arguably, yes. Given that plenty of people *do* want cannabis legalized.

I disagree that the ban is not anti-Semitic, given that the guy behind the comic is the one who advocated for the ban in the first place.

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

"...opponents of male circumcision believe that it’s a serious interference with the rights of boys, and the men they’ll become, and a serious harm to those boys and men..."

If they backed that up with credible evidence, I'd be more willing to believe their sincerity. Frankly, having been one of those poor little circumcised infants (though not for religious reasons), unnumbered are the ways in which my lack of a foreskin has not interfered with the man I've become, and I can't think of a single way it has, to say nothing of the alleged "harm."

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

This.

Maybe the ban had anti-semitic beginnings. Obviously, I think that is wrong. However, I do think a circumcision ban is a good thing, since it's a choice a man should be allowed to make when he's old enough to decide for himself.

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

You forgot to mention that Monster Mohel's opponant, Foreskin Man is bright blond and blue-eyed like something out of a Nazi recruitment poster.

*sigh*

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

You're right. It's just....bizarre.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

As a gay man, when I first encountered the circumcision debate (via IRC), I really found the anti-circumcision folks just very odd: the intensity of anger about this issue was just off the charts for me. I didn't get it then, I don't get it now. But yeah, that cartoon is some nasty stuff.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

The guy behind this is one of the major pushers of the ban. And I might note that with a name like Hess, this comic doesn't exactly help his case (and in any case the whole anti-circumcision thing for men is ridiculous).

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Granted, it's not a pet issue for me, but I'm kind of horrified that we still allow it as an option in non-religious circumstances.

[chickendelight.livejournal.com]

I'm all for the ban.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Why? Leaving aside that it's pretty blatantly against Judaism (and to a lesser degree Islam) there's no health concerns with male circumcision that make banning it worthwhile. Phobia of that in Western culture has more to do with the long legacy of Jew-hatred in this specific case predating Christianity (though rapidly picked up by the Church).

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

I saw this and immediately thought, if you are cribbing from Julius Streicher, you are losing the argument. How anyone could green light this for publication in a supposedly "liberal," "tolerant," "evolved" haven like SF and not see the obvious and direct parallels to Der Stürmer is beyond me.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Two possibilities: either the people who greenlit this actually agree with the message in it, or San Francisco is not as liberal, tolerant, and evolved as it's credited to be.

An observation

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

The next place they are taking this is to (the people's republic of) Santa Monica. These are 2 of the 3 most liberal bastians in Calif (why did they skip Berkley?).
Since this forum is mostly inhabited by liberals of all stripes, my query is this: Is anti circumcision to be the next great liberal cause?

Re: An observation

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

There's always been overtones to liberalism of anti-religion. This appears to be the latest spasm of it. I think, too, though, that California is not necessarily as liberal as everyone says it is. It's the state of Berkley to be sure, but Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger are also Californians.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

According to one of the commentators on the website you linked to, the supreme court has ruled that Jews are white, therefore you can't be racist against them *trufax*

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

That kind of stupidity leaves me speechless. O.o

I favor voluntary circumcision.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Religious freedom can be taken to the extreme of allowing people to abuse their children for supposedly religious reasons. If circumcision were truly a religious ritual, it would be entered into voluntarily. My position on baptism is similar, but it is not a form of mutilation, so I do not see it as as extreme as circumcision. Baptism without free will is a hollow ritual. There is a connection, of course, because infant baptism was a replacement for circumcision.

The practice of circumcision is a vestige of slavery. Just as the slave master has control over the body of the slave, the parent has control over the body of the child. When Abraham was enslaved by an alien deity, he was force to sacrifice his wholeness and the wholeness of his children for generations to come. From a political perspective, circumcision is evidence of continued Egyptian hegemony in Jewish culture. I associate it more with Pharaoh than with a higher power.

There are Jews who recognize the barbarity of the ritual and oppose the practice.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

There are other, more plausible reasons than slavery for assigning control over the body of a child to a parent. It could be argued, for example, that children at a young age do not have the life experience, maturity or knowledge to make informed decisions about things that affect their bodies.

[hey-its-michael.livejournal.com]

If one believes that banning circumcision is anti-religion, then one must think that circumcising an infant does not violate that infant's human rights.

There are many of us who do consider circumcision a practice that DOES violate the rights of a baby (who cannot consent to having his genitalia modified). Therefore, religion does not excuse this practice.

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

this.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Welcome to San Francisco, where they're known for being oh-so TOLERANT. Know what else they're afraid of they've banned?

- Happy Meal toys
- Plastic bags (just at large chain stores, but they're considering expanding to all stores)
- Bottled water, sodas, and juice drinks with no real fruit juice (cannot be sold on city property)
- Segways (not allowed on sidewalks or bike paths)
- Baby ducks, chickens, and rabbits cannot be sold in San Fran.
- City employees (except police officers investigating a crime) aren't allowed to travel to Arizona.
- Firearms in advertisements (like movie posters)
- No sitting on the street between 7AM and 11PM

WTF‽

[telemann.livejournal.com]

And health care for all its citizens. A GDP that would rival several countries, and a vibrant and beautiful city, despite the libertarian shrieks of horror. I'd rather live in SF than say, BUFFALO! :P

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Its on the ballot, they didn't pass it. All sorts of crazy things get on ballots. All you need to do is get enough people to sign the paper.

Until it passes, it's not a thing.

Well the guy is a wacko, but this is the earth, we have a blue light special on wacko clearance sales.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but I don't think I like your new icon.

(my non-sequiter for the month ;) )

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Oh circumcision wank.

It's reverse fundamentalism. Purely reactionary. People get so worked up because they're feigning outrage.

I'm gonna get my two year old pierced ears.

Oh the horror.

Appropos of almost nothing

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Hey, it was a slow day on the forum :D

Only if your two year old is a boy.

For some strange reason, my white grand-daughters have and the brown ones don't.

[deborahkla.livejournal.com]

Aesthetic reasons? How could anyone find that scar and the two-toned shaft look aesthetic? Besides, it doesn't feel as good without a foreskin.

That said, I don't agree with the ban at all, especially seeing the people behind it and this horrible comic.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I think circumcision is an old tradition that we have yet to do away with, but it's not harmful enough for me to consider any sort of ban or whatever. As long as people realize that being circumsized is not a 'natural' state which many people believe.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Almost everything about this post and the subsequent discussion depresses me utterly.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Sorry. :-(.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

test