Welcome to the Darkest Parts of the Carnal Brain

Welcome to Aphelion dearest traveler,

My motto is "to Lust is to Live" and I have so constructed my life, engaging in activities that I'm passionate about. This blog is no different; I've amassed a respectable library on all things erotic or could inform me on such a subject, thus these essays are in the genre of research.

Some pieces will be instructional, opinionated, informative, and others are exercises in what I call a "Whore Exposure"; which amounts to complaining about something I had to deal with in regards to prudish behavior or a sexual hypocrite.

Without further adieu, I present the darkest parts of my carnal brain- with a tint of Scarlet of course.

Wear your Scarlet A proudly fellow travelers of Himeros path.
-Aden A.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

You Lied About my Foreskin

One of the oldest religious rituals practiced in our species is circumcision; this is cross cultural, with variations of how much is cut and at what age being dependent on the culture one is discussing. Some cultures, like ours, only remove the ridged band, which is removing the “excess skin” to where the frenulum and the point of the Glans penis meets the shaft; others slice the love member down the middle so each end hangs like the petals of a flower .The argument for circumcision contains various “reasoning”, but oft times are variations of three major premises. One being that circumcision helps in reducing HIV, STDs, and STIs. Another being for hygiene and the third is penile cancer. Remember, these are the major three; not an exhaustive compendium of listless medical idiocies, but a trilogy of terribly ridiculous quackery.


Besides the fact that any god that asks his people to mutilate themselves for him doesn’t garner worship, I want to discuss how child abuse is child abuse no matter the religious affiliation. Hypothetical example: if I worship Athena and take a knife to my daughter’s arm to create a symbol out of a scar, I could be taken to prison for child abuse or the act could be seen as a precursor to ritual sacrifice. Jews, Christians, Muslims, and a horde of other religionists cut off the ridged band, prepuce (of either sex), or parts of the clitoris; if not the whole thing, for absolutely no medical reason. I feel ultimately that if such acts are performed for a solely religious reason, then the decision should be made at the age of legal adulthood. If this is a secular society, then religious surgery should be treated as body modification and forbidden till one is legally able to make one’s own decisions.


Individuals who justify the compulsory circumcision of their children I call Cutters. Since one cannot ideally use religious reasons in a secular situation, Cutters have sought out medical reasons to cut the kids, such as to prevent HIV in men. According to various studies performed, getting circumcised helped in reducing HIV… so long as condoms were used. The idea is that the membranes in the foreskin make it easier for bacteria or disease to enter and that smegma, or penis cheese, would create a healthier environment for HIV, STDs, and STIs to enter into the body. The research barely reveals a correlation between circumcision and lower HIV rates.


Researchers have warned that they do not know why groups who are circumcised seem to have lower HIV and STD/STI rates than those who are uncut. There are other theories on the limited evidence of correlation, such as low alcohol consumption leading to lower rates of promiscuity, higher condom use, and access to modern health care/hygiene techniques. We can also apply this reasoning to female circumcision in the form of removing the clitoral hood or tip of the clitoris. The excuse in some groups is that dimming sexual pleasure will tamper with the woman’s libido so she is more protected from disease and dishonor. Research on circumcised female prostitutes has shown a lower rate of HIV infection than prostitutes who are not. But, like the research on men, the evidence barely demonstrates a correlation. All in all, a surgery that’s goal is a preemptive strike against an infection or disease of any sort is on par with removing the prostrate or breasts so cancer doesn’t develop. Think of it as cutting out the tonsils or the appendix of a child to battle a future complication in adulthood.

I’ve heard people protest to my assertion that circumcision isn’t necessary on the grounds of hygiene. Reasons included are as follows: prevents urinary tract infections, balanoposthitis, balanitis, phimosis, and a buildup of smegma. Balanoposthitis, balanitis, and phimosis are infections of the penis caused by bacteria; smegma is penis cheese that can accumulate without proper washing. The infections I’ve listed are easily cured with a topical cream or an antifungal medicine. By the Cutter’s logic, I should remove my butt cheeks to prevent a buildup of poop so that I don’t catch any kind of anal infection caused by lack of wiping. Also, my ears should be removed so that ear wax build up doesn’t cause deafness or ear infections. Perhaps I should remove my toes to prevent toe fungus or plantar warts, maybe keep my head shaved so that I don’t catch lice? Hygiene is a poor excuse to remove a part of someone’s genitalia, especially when proper washing prevents these conditions and there is medicine to cure it. Also, in the rare case of an infection needing circumcision, there is a dorsal slit. A dorsal slit is basically a half circumcision, a single incision along the upper length of the foreskin from the tip to the corona, exposing the glans without removing any tissue. This surgery is seen as an absolute last resort for aesthetic reasons.


Circumcision was originally a body modification to show one’s religious affiliation, others had neck or lip extensions. We now back up this religious surgery with flimsy medical reasons in order to keep the tradition alive. I find it somewhat comical when Christians, specifically Catholics, are circumcised because it was once forbidden by the Church; only Jews are circumcised and the thought was once that a good Christian cannot have anything in common with a denier of Christ. Ultimately, the problem I have with circumcision is that I don’t feel as much as I would in a sexual scenario. Whether or not the removal of the foreskin takes 60% of the nerve endings with it, the surgery removes the cover of the glans penis, leading to desensitivity of the head, and removing unnecessary genital parts from either gender to circumvent an instinct, satisfy a custom, or out of sheer hygienic laziness is detestable. There is a body modification culture where far worse is done to a penis or vagina for aesthetic reasons and the same people who profess the necessity of circumcision are the same people who damn this culture. I’m not a big fan of body modification either way, but I do defend the idea of individual’s authority over their own body. That is my ultimate feeling on the matter, there is no reason for circumcision besides aesthetic s or religious reasons; both should be left as option for either gender at the age of legal adulthood.

1 comment:

  1. Some random thoughts that sprang to mind here...

    Some people think that it's "nicer" (for lack of a better word) to circumcise a baby because they "won't remember the pain."

    From a female perceptive, visually, it makes no difference to me. I have rarely come across men who were circumcised as adults.

    In regards to your statements about how people of "other" religions would be persecuted if they branded their children in accordance with a "pagan god" ... very insightful, and VERY true. Also, much the same thing!

    ReplyDelete