Type what you’re looking for and press Enter.
“Isaac’s Circumcision” from fol. 81b of the Regensburg Pentateuch, Germany, ca. 1300
View

On the forms and the true purpose of Castration

September 2nd, 2019
8 Comments

Physical castration

The earliest records for intentional physical castration are from the Sumerian city of Lagash in the 21st century BC. 1 In those ancient times physical castration often involved the complete removal of the genitals. Less extreme forms of physical castration in the case of men involved cutting away just the scrotum while leaving the penis attached. Today physical castration is still being performed in some societies around the world, although it mostly involves partial castration. For example, there are still countries and cultures where the penises of boys are being circumcised or split open in ritualistic sub-incision. In the case of women, their clitorises are being cut away and labia are sewn together. Chemical castration also became a possibility, where the genitals are deactivated using pharmaceutical drugs.

On the surface, the reason for why all these forms of physical castration exist appears to be to prevent the castrated individuals from satisfying their sexual desires. 2 It’s basically an extreme way of enforcing sexual suppression and repression. But as we’ll see later, there’s a deeper underlying and occult purpose for castration.

The current general trend worldwide appears to be that any form of physical castration is increasingly considered to be barbaric; however, other non-physical forms of castration are becoming the norm. This is similar to what happened with the more extreme forms of slavery. While the more extreme forms of slavery have officially and supposedly been “abolished” decades ago in most parts of the world, in reality what happened is that we just made the transition from the obvious in-your-face type of physical slavery to a less obvious form of mental slavery, where most people think that they’re free when in fact they really aren’t; they’ve just been brainwashed for most of their life to accept the new form of slavery considering it to be a “normal” way of life (for more details on this, check out my post “Statism: A System for your Enslavement”).

The same kind of transition is currently underway when it comes to physical castration. While the more extreme forms of physical castration are being phased out and are now considered to be barbaric and against basic human rights, they’re simply being replaced by different forms of castration that are less obvious to the victims, but in the final analysis, have the same kind of intended effects on the victims as physical castration.

Mental or psychic castration

Physical castration is one way of preventing an individual from satisfying their sexual desires — an extreme and potentially permanent way at that. However, if you want to prevent an individual from using their genitals to satisfy their sexual desires, then you don’t necessarily have to physically remove, mutilate or disable their genitals. You can prevent them from using their genitals in other ways, for example, by mentally preventing them from doing so. This can be done by instilling fear into them or feelings of shame or guilt. You make them believe that they are only allowed to satisfy their sexual desires when certain conditions are met. As long as those conditions aren’t met, they aren’t allowed to use their genitals to satisfy their sexual desires, and are thus effectively castrated.

Again, as mentioned earlier above, the relation between physical and mental castration is comparable to the relation between physical and mental slavery. Just like in the case of mental slavery, where people are brainwashed to accept subjugation and toiling for the ruling class, so too, in the case of mental castration, are people brainwashed to stay away from their genitals and ignore their sexual desires — all while thinking it’s “normal”.

There are many ways in which this can be accomplished, but fundamentally any belief promoting sexual suppression or repression leads to mental castration. It’s easier to explain this by discussing a few examples.

Children growing up with (often religious) parents who teach them not to touch or play with their genitals because it is “dirty”, “evil” and “sinful,” are being mentally programmed to be afraid of their sexuality. Even while their genitals aren’t cut off, mutilated or disabled in any way, they’re still unlikely to be using them in an erotic way because of the fear of getting caught and being punished. They may also feel that they’re doing something wrong and are being immoral, which will cause feelings of shame and guilt. This keeps them sexually suppressed to a certain degree which can be more or less extreme depending on how much fear, shame and/or guilt is instilled into them.

Young women who are taught that they should remain virgins for as long as possible to be worthy of a man, and not be considered “cheap,” a “whore” or a “slut,” are also brainwashed to stay away from their genitals and prevented from satisfying their sexual desires. In many societies around the world, both men and women are being programmed from early childhood to believe that they are not allowed to use their genitals for sexual gratification, unless they follow what society or “culture” deems to be the correct procedure for doing so. And following the correct procedure often means having to satisfy certain requirements and following the rules — written (“laws”) and unwritten (“cultural traditions”) — laid out in society. This can include having to be above a certain minimum age, achieving a certain amount of wealth or social status, playing elaborate dating and courting games, and in extreme cases staying a virgin and having to get married before you’re allowed to satisfy your sexual desires. People who believe that they should only have exclusive relationships, such as marriage, where monogamy is often expected or required by society, also severely limit their options for satisfying their sexual desires and thus are castrated to a certain degree.

As long as the above examples of sexual suppression and repression brainwash prevent an individual from freely satisfying their sexual desires, they are effectively mentally castrated.

Social castration

An individual not having been physically castrated, and their mind also being free from cultural brainwash leading to mental castration, can still be affected by social castration. In this case, they’re being prevented from satisfying their sexual desires due to circumstances in their social environment.

For example, your genitals may be healthy and intact, and your mind may be free from sexual suppression brainwash, but it will still be difficult for you to satisfy your sexual desires if you can’t easily find someone in your environment with whom you can do so. While you might be unrepressed, most people in your environment might still be very much sexually repressed. This means that it will still remain very difficult for you to satisfy your sexual desires in a natural and healthy way, which in turn means that, effectively, you’re castrated to a certain degree.

Of course, social castration is less extreme compared to physical and mental castration; the problem then mainly exists outside in the individual’s environment. But it has the same kind of effects on the individual as the other forms of castration, albeit probably to a lesser degree.

Purpose of castration

We’ve seen that there are a variety of ways in which an individual can be prevented from using their genitals for sexual gratification, or in other words, that there are a variety of ways in which an individual can be castrated. And depending on the methods used, there can be varying degrees of castration.

Whenever an individual is being limited or prevented from freely satisfying their sexual desires in a natural and healthy way we can speak of castration. The degree to which an individual is castrated is inversely related to how easily they’re able to satisfy their sexual desires.

It’s easy to derive that the purpose of castration is to prevent an individual from using their genitals for sexual gratification. But why? Why would someone want to prevent an individual from satisfying their sexual desires? The answer to that question is simply to turn them into (better or more ideal) slaves. And we can find clues pointing to this all the way back to ancient times.

For example, castrated men — eunuchs — were “particularly used to staff bureaucracies and palace households”; in other words, castrated men were particularly used for positions in government, and there was a reason for that as we find on Wikipedia:

Eunuchs would usually be servants or slaves who had been castrated in order to make them reliable servants of a royal court where physical access to the ruler could wield great influence.5 Seemingly lowly domestic functions — such as making the ruler’s bed, bathing him, cutting his hair, carrying him in his litter, or even relaying messages — could in theory give a eunuch “the ruler’s ear” and impart de facto power on the formally humble but trusted servant. Similar instances are reflected in the humble origins and etymology of many high offices.

So castrated men were considered to be more reliable slaves. It’s also very important to understand that, because of their reliability, these castrated slaves were very expensive and in high demand:

“The Caliphate in Baghdad at the beginning of the 10th Century had 7,000 black eunuchs and 4,000 white eunuchs in his palace.”132 The Arab slave trade typically dealt in the sale of castrated male slaves. Black boys at the age of eight to twelve had their scrotum and penis completely amputated. Reportedly, about two of three boys died, but those who survived drew high prices.133

The question that undoubtedly comes to mind is, why was a castrated slave considered to be more reliable? Why would a slave trader risk losing two out of three slaves just to create one more reliable castrated slave? The answer to this question lies in the understanding of the true purpose of sexual suppression and repression.

The ultimate purpose of castration is mental manipulation or mind control for the purpose of creating ideal slaves. It’s no wonder that the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which did a lot of trauma-based mind control experiments, was so interested in circumcision a few decades ago. 3 Castration leads to severe mental trauma; 4 it breaks an individual’s free will and ability to reason, has a severely negative impact on their intellect, and causes them to become docile and submissive. Both Dr. Sigmund Freud, a brilliant neurologist and psychoanalyst, as well as one of his best pupils, Dr. Wilhelm Reich, eventually came to this conclusion during their research:

In my sex-counseling centers, it became clear to me that the suppression of child and adolescent sexuality had the function of making it easier for parents to insist on blind obedience from their children. In the earliest beginnings of economic patriarchy, the sexuality of children and adolescents was combatted by means of direct castration or genital mutilation in one form or another. Later, psychic castration through the inculcation of sexual anxiety and guilt feeling became the customary means. Sexual suppression has the function of making man amenable to authority, just as the castration of stallions and bulls has the function of producing willing draft animals. No one had thought about the devastating consequences of psychic castration, and no one can predict how human society will cope with them. Freud later confirmed the relation between sexual suppression and the attitude of submissiveness, after I had brought the issue to a head in my publications. Wilhelm Reich

This is why, in most societies around the world today, every individual is exposed to sexual suppression starting from early childhood when they haven’t even gotten a chance to build any defenses against it. They’re being mentally castrated, without having even the slightest chance of realizing what’s being done to them, and by the time they grow older their will has been completely broken in most cases, having been transformed into ideal slaves ready to obey and serve the ruling class. Physical castration had the same purpose; like Robert Anton Wilson explained:

Geldings [castrated male horses], any farmer will tell you, are easier to control than stallions. The first governments, which were frankly slave-states, inculcated sexual repression for precisely this reason. […] A governor, we can safely say, has less problems in enforcing obedience if his subjects are mystical, religious and frightened of sex.

Perhaps now it may also be easier to understand why the Judeo-Christian god, in Genesis 17:11-12, through Abraham, required his slaves to undergo circumcision as part of his covenant with them:

You must circumcise the flesh of your foreskin to serve as a sign of the covenant between me and you. Throughout your generations, every male among you is to be circumcised at eight days old ​— ​every male born in your household or purchased from any foreigner and not your offspring.

The “sign of the covenant” had the purpose of preventing the child from experiencing erotic pleasure from touching their genitals; the extremely traumatic experience caused by circumcision would discourage them to do so, 2 thus keeping them sexually suppressed almost as soon as they’re born, resulting in more reliable and submissive adult slaves for god. 5 And this was definitely not a first; we’ve seen before that this god was constantly coming up with new ways to keep his slaves sexually suppressed in order to keep them obedient.

Imagine what kind of effect mental castration has on a child reaching the age of “puberty,” when their genitals reach a certain level of maturity, and they’re being confronted with their bodies’ increased demands for sexual gratification. It’s no wonder that in most sexually repressed societies around the world children begin to exhibit difficult and rebellious behavior during “puberty.” Their difficult behavior is no doubt a consequence of the internal pressure and conflict caused by suppressing their constantly nagging sexual desires. It’s during this period of their life that they’re being submitted to the ultimate test: subduing and breaking their own will in the form of their strong sexual desires in favor of obeying the demands of their social environment.

Considering that children usually reach “puberty” between the ages of 11 and 13, they have to struggle for almost 6 years until they reach the “age of consent” when they’re allowed by most societies to (legally) have intercourse (assuming other rules in society don’t prevent them from easily doing so). If you can get a person to disobey their own strong sexual desires in favor of your demands for that long, you’ve essentially succeeded in beating them into submission. It’s also a form of self-betrayal and results in the person losing a great deal of self-respect; and people who lack self-respect can easily be abused. So by the time these children reach adulthood they’re ready to join the rest of the slave workforce of the State and be abused for most of their life.

This happens at great cost to the children as they suffer a great degree of often irreparable mental trauma in the process, which they will have to deal with for the rest of their life. For example, due to the mental damage caused starting from early childhood, these children may go on to develop perverse sexual desires, 6 in extreme cases resulting in the kind of people that we currently have in the LGBT movement:

Due to sexual suppression, children aren’t allowed to — and in most cases can’t — develop their sexuality in a free, natural and self-regulated manner and as a negative consequence of that develop very perverted sexual preferences and warped ideas about (their) sexuality. This is the root cause of people developing paraphilia, such as sexual attraction to the same sex (homosexuality), a primary sexual preference for children (pedophilia) or for animals (zoophilia), and people developing warped ideas about (their own) sexuality (gender dysphoria; transgenders).

All kinds of personality disorders also come into play, and especially women go on to develop the very irrational, unpredictable, unstable and emotional behavior that they’ve become known for. Remember, castration does a lot of damage to “the portions of the victim’s brain associated with reasoning, perception and emotions.” 4 Not surprisingly, the elite are now hard at work to normalize all of these adverse effects of castration, even to the point of convincing the victims that they should be proud of being mentally ill.

Depending on the specific circumstances and environment, some children might be able to relieve themselves of some of the internal pressure caused by unfulfilled sexual desires by masturbating or secretly having intercourse, and this no doubt results in their becoming less than ideal slaves for the State. This is why, for example, masturbation is often also off limits (especially in religion) as it interferes with the process of creating docile slaves and this is why it was combatted through physical castration. 2 But unfortunately it’s quite impossible for anybody to escape being castrated in one form or another, to a lesser or greater degree, in our current societies around the world.

Footnotes

  1. Maekawa, Kazuya (1980). Animal and human castration in Sumer, Part II: Human castration in the Ur III period. Zinbun [Journal of the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies, Kyoto University], pp. 1–56. ↩︎
  2. In the book “Sex at Dawn” (2012) by Christopher Ryan Ph.D. and Cacilda Jethá M.D. we find some examples of partial castration, such as circumcision and clitorectomies, and the reasons why they were recommended. In the case of men we find the following:

    If you’re unfamiliar with the writings of Kellogg and others like him, their gloating disdain for basic human eroticism is chilling and unmistakable. In his best-selling Plain Facts for Old and Young (written on his sexless honeymoon in 1888), Kellogg offered parents guidance for dealing with their sons’ natural erotic self-exploration in a section entitled “Treatment for Self-Abuse and its Effects.” “A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys,” he wrote, “is circumcision.” He stipulated that, “The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment…. [emphasis added]”

    If circumcising a struggling, terrified boy without anesthesia wasn’t quite what a parent had in mind, Kellogg recommended “the application of one or more silver sutures in such a way as to prevent erection. The prepuce, or foreskin, is drawn forward over the glans, and the needle to which the wire is attached is passed through from one side to the other. After drawing the wire through, the ends are twisted together and cut off close. It is now impossible for an erection to occur….” Parents were assured that sewing their son’s penis into its foreskin “acts as a most powerful means of overcoming the disposition to resort to the practice [of masturbation].”

    Circumcision remains prevalent in the United States, though varying greatly by region, ranging from about 40 percent of newborns circumcised in western states to about twice that in the Northeast. This widespread procedure, rarely a medical necessity, has its roots in the anti-masturbation campaigns of Kellogg and his like-minded contemporaries. As Money explains, “Neonatal circumcision crept into American delivery rooms in the 1870s and 1880s, not for religious reasons and not for reasons of health or hygiene, as is commonly supposed, but because of the claim that, later in life, it would prevent irritation that would cause the boy to become a masturbator.”

    …

    His smug satisfaction in tormenting children is striking and disturbing, but Kellogg’s “no child left alone” policy is anything but unusual or limited to ancient history. The anti-masturbation measures quoted above were published in 1888, but more than eighty years were to pass before the American Medical Association declared, in 1972, “Masturbation is a normal part of adolescent sexual development and requires no medical management.” But still, the war continues. As recently as 1994, pediatrician Joycelyn Elders was forced from her post as Surgeon General of the United States for simply asserting that masturbation “is part of human sexuality.” The suffering caused by centuries of war on masturbation is beyond calculation. But this we know: all the suffering, every bit of it, was for nothing. Absolutely nothing.

    And in the case of women we read:

    Lest you think Kellogg was interested only in the sadistic torture of boys, in the same book he soberly advises the application of carbolic acid to the clitorises of little girls to teach them not to touch themselves. Kellogg and his like-minded contemporaries demonstrate that sexual repression is a “malady that considers itself the remedy,” to paraphrase Karl Kraus’s dismissal of psychoanalysis.

    …

    A century later, in 1858, a British gynecologist named Isaac Baker Brown (president of the Medical Society of London at the time) proposed that most women’s diseases were attributable to overexcitement of the nervous system, with the pubic nerve, which runs to the clitoris, being particularly culpable. […] Unfortunately, Baker Brown’s writing had already had a significant impact on medical practice across the Atlantic. Clitorectomies continued to be performed in the United States well into the twentieth century as a cure for hysteria, nymphomania, and female masturbation. As late as 1936, Holt’s Diseases of Infancy and Childhood, a respected medical-school text, recommended surgical removal or cauterization of the clitoris as a cure for masturbation in girls. […] This apparent need to punish female sexual desire as something evil, dangerous, and pathological is not limited to medieval times or remote Mayan villages. Recent estimates by the World Health Organization suggest that approximately 137 million girls undergo some form of genital mutilation every year.

    And as Dr. Wilhelm Reich writes in his book “Children of the Future” (1950):

    We have since struggled to abolish a third type of massacre of infants and children, namely, the tying of their hands to prevent them from touching their genitals and sucking their thumbs. This maltreatment lasted for centuries and created many generations of neurotic people. Its sole purpose was to satisfy the adults’ need not to be reminded of the sucking and masturbation desires they had experienced in their own childhood. It took a Freud and two generations of analytically trained pedagogues to launch the fight against this torture. We are still a long way from being able to claim that the infant or small child is permitted to give free rein to its pleasure function.

    For more check out my post “Warning: Do NOT circumsize your children”.

    ↩︎

  3. It’s very interesting to note that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the early 1960s “funded” experiments on circumcised children in the USA to research what kind of effect it had on hem. Here’s from The Washington Post,  “CIA Circumcision Study Secretly Circumscribed” (October 20, 1977):

    […] the CIA in the early 1960s “funded” experiments on circumcised children “to determine if the operation left any emotional after-effects . . . The aim was to determine if circumcision at a significant stage of a child’s development produced anxieties such as fear of castration . . .”

    …

    So I called the CIA, acting very reportorial and somber, and I told my business to a woman who answered the phone and she volunteered that the agency had gotten lots of letters from people who also wanted to know what the CIA had learned about circumcision. […] Then I got a public information officer on the phone. […] He explained that the existence of the program had been deduced from financial records but the study and its conclusion, if any, were no longer available. It had been destroyed in 1973.

    Since we now know that circumcision causes severe brain- and mental damage to children and is used to enable trauma-based mind control, it’s not surprising that the CIA would want to know about the effects of circumcision on children. The CIA was heavily into mind control research and one of their well known mind control programs was called MK ULTRA (1953~1973). Read the book “Trance: Formation of America” for a detailed explanation of how that worked and what its purpose was. ↩︎

  4. Research shows that circumcision causes permanent brain damage, particularly in the areas of the brain associated with reasoning, perception and emotions. Here’s from “Circumcision Permanently Alters the Brain” by Paul D. Tinari, Ph.D.:

    As a graduate student working in the Dept. of Epidemiology, I was approached by a group of nurses who were attempting to organize a protest against male infant circumcision in Kingston General Hospital. They said that their observations indicated that babies undergoing the procedure were subjected to significant and inhumane levels of pain that subsequently adversely affected their behaviors. They said that they needed some scientific support for their position. It was my idea to use fMRI and/or PET scanning to directly observe the effects of circumcision on the infant brain.

    …

    The baby was kept in the machine for several minutes to generate baseline data of the normal metabolic activity in the brain. This was used to compare to the data gathered during and after the surgery. Analysis of the MRI data indicated that the surgery subjected the infant to significant trauma. The greatest changes occurred in the limbic system concentrating in the amygdala and in the frontal and temporal lobes.

    A neurologist who saw the results postulated that the data indicated that circumcision affected most intensely the portions of the victim’s brain associated with reasoning, perception and emotions. Follow up tests on the infant one day, one week and one month after the surgery indicated that the child’s brain never returned to its baseline configuration. In other words, the evidence generated by this research indicated that the brain of the circumcised infant was permanently changed by the surgery.

    From Psychology Today, “Myths about Circumcision You Likely Believe” (September 11th 2011):

    The body is a historical repository and remembers everything (Rothschild 2000; van der Kolk, 2014). The pain of circumcision causes a rewiring of the baby’s brain so that he is more sensitive to pain later (Taddio 1997, Anand 2000). Circumcision also can cause post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD, Ramos & Boyle, 2001), depression, anger, low self-esteem and problems with intimacy (Boyle 2002, Hammond 1999, Goldman 1999; see Boyle et al., 2002 for a review of trauma effects).

    If circumcision can cause the above mentioned mental damage to an individual, then what kind of mental damage can we expect to find in victims of more extreme forms of physical castration? Isn’t it also reasonable to assume that the “less extreme” forms of castration also result in similar types of mental damage, albeit perhaps to a lesser degree? ↩︎

  5. Jewish professor Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce from France has an interesting theory about the relationship between circumcision (on the 8th day according to religious practice) and free will. You can listen to it in the below video interview starting at around 10 minutes in.

    Below is a transcript of the relevant part:

    On what do we blame, or can we blame, objectively, the Jewish mindset? Well, you know in the commentary of the Torah, it is written that circumcision is something that goes beyond human understanding — that you shouldn’t try to understand. I read it myself in the commentary of the Torah, so I say this knowingly. Well, that’s not the case anymore. Now we know. And we know, well I know and some people know, Albert Camus knew and Dr. Gautier who figured it out of course knew better than me, some philosophers like Gustave Thibon etc. know. But the masses ignore it, and the Jews are totally unaware because it’s an ordeal they live through. You know, to torment and to kill others, it’s also hell for them, it’s a disease. You know Nietzsche said “it was the sick who invented malice.” Consequently these are people you need to cure, and to cure the Jews it’s very simple: radical suppression of the 8th day circumcision.

    And we’re going to enter the heart of the issue. Well there is, for the Jews, an operation you get done on the 8th day after birth, it’s called circumcision. Now on the 8th day after birth, begins — as Dr. Jean Gautier has shown — the first puberty. This puberty lasts 21 days. It’s going to last 21 days starting on the 8th day. And it’s on the 8th day that circumcision is practiced. As a result, the first puberty, which is a major event, is going to be disturbed. This operation affects the Jewish psyche and endocrine system. What happens is when you perform this operation, you set free some hormones contained in the internal genital organ, which is THE human gland. The gland that basically runs everything deliberately. Deliberately not automatically, so it’s the organ of free will. It will consequently become underdeveloped starting that day. It will be underdeveloped and at the same time it will liberate other organs, which will run without the breaks on. Because the role of the internal genital gland is precisely to orchestrate a balance in the whole hormonal system. It won’t be able to do it. Thus the pituitary and the thyroid, even the adrenal glands to a lesser extent, will become unhinged. They will therefore be out of control — 7, 8, or 10 times more active than in most humans. And what’s going to happen? The internal genital gland, which is underdeveloped in the mentally ill, will be underdeveloped in the Jews. Which means they’ll only have enough interstitial capacity to direct their speculations which will be dictated by their pituitary and their thyroid. Hence a sort of real illness: they can’t stop. What’s switched off is the potential to control their speculation. And you come to these monstrosities that are financial capitalism, Marxism and Freudianism. So then the hormones will fixate either upon the reproductive genital gland, which will make the Jews sex fiends, womanizers.

    So the Jews would have a satanic mission with the obligation to not understand the tragedy of circumcision through denial if need be. To reach the end of their satanic path they are hence compelled to pursue this horrible analytical path until the end, and to impose it on humanity as a whole, and unfortunately they’re buying into it without any resistance. That’s how you can understand the Jewish question on a metaphysical level — basically, they are innocents, miserable, who suffer the consequences of an unfortunate operation, giving them an absolutely fixed mentality which makes them great financiers. I mean the ones who run the world, they are also Jewish. The Jews who run the world, they have the mindset because of the circumcision, and they cannot escape it. So this circumcision is, therefore the key.

    ↩︎

  6. As the fucking brilliant Dr. Wilhelm Reich writes in his book “Children of the Future” (1950):

    Young people have more than merely a right to be “enlightened”; they are fully entitled to their emotional health and their sexual joy in life. This right has been taken away from them. Countless young people have lost all awareness of their sexuality, although this has opened the way to serious psychic disturbances during puberty.

    If the young person is unable for external or internal reasons to take the step to sexual intercourse and to a mature sexual life, his development is blocked and it is easy for him to start to slip backwards, i.e., to have recourse to childish fantasies that lead him away from the naturally given goal that now exists. We observe that various drives then increase in intensity. For example, the inclination toward persons of the same sex increases; the social barriers preventing sexual intercourse and the separation of the sexes are the major reasons for excessive indulgence in mutual masturbation among young people of the same sex. The lascivious desire to look at naked bodies or to expose one’s own sex organs and the temptation to have sexual relations with children also often occur for the first time at this stage. Because of pent-up sexual energy, which finds no satisfactory release, sadistic and masochistic tendencies, which are usually attenuated and kept in the background by the development of normal sexual activity, now become fully effective. It is certainly not our intention to frighten anybody by pointing out such things. We merely wish to state that the foundation for such disturbances can be laid by preventing young people from having normal sexual relations at a time when they urgently need them. We cannot ignore the facts and must fight with all means available against the sexual rules of society that cause such damage in young people. We must use all our force to make them understand that their struggle with masturbation, their feelings of guilt, their sexual deviations, are not their fault nor are they inherited; instead, they are for the most part the consequences of a society’s rules governing sexual behavior which force the development and the natural course of sexuality into one mold into which it is impossible for all young people to fit.

    What is more, there are many men who have the physical and emotional characteristics appropriate to the sex organs with which they are equipped, yet they desire younger, effeminate men toward whom they behave like a man to a wife; and there are completely feminine women who behave toward harder, more masculine-looking women like a wife to a husband. These kinds of homosexuals did not become inclined that way because of physical developments but as a result of defective emotional development in early childhood, when they suffered severe disappointment at the hands of a member of the opposite sex. For example, a male child can easily become openly homosexual if the love he has for his mother is too often and too bitterly disappointed because she is a strict, harsh person. Similarly, a girl can easily be induced to become homosexual at a very early age if she is severely disappointed by her father. Such children readily withdraw their sexual desires from the opposite sex and turn instead to those of their own sex. As a rule, these early disappointments are repressed. Upon growing up, the person who has suffered such disappointments is no longer aware of them and can only recall them when he or she relives this early period of development while undergoing psychiatric treatment.

    The most powerful rebuttal that we can make against the claim made by so many homosexuals that they represent a special kind of sexuality and are not an aberration, is to point out that in the course of a special kind of psychiatric treatment any homosexual can stop feeling the way he or she does, whereas a normally developed person never becomes a homosexual through this same treatment. If the homosexual behavior has not gone on too long and has not totally destroyed relations with the opposite sex, if also the person in question is not happy with the homosexual state and wishes to be rid of it, then homosexuality can be cured fundamentally by treatment, which reverses the aberrant sexual development that occurred in childhood. What we have said so far is scientifically based fact, and it can be further reinforced by pointing to the example of primitive peoples who lead a satisfying, undisturbed sexual life, who do not hinder the sexual development of their children, and among whom homosexuality is consequently unknown, except in the spiritualized form of friendship. According to the findings of Malinowski, an English ethnologist, homosexuality starts to appear among primitive peoples at the same rate that missionaries import Christian morality into these people’s natural sexual lives and separate the sexes from each other. This is also confirmed by the fact, which we observe over and over again, that wherever normal sexual relations between men and women or girls and boys are prohibited or hampered (e.g., in boarding schools, in the army or navy, etc.), homosexuality develops in proportion to the degree of sexual suppression. Thus, ignoring the cases which are physically based, we may provisionally conclude that homosexuality is a purely social phenomenon, i.e., a question of sexual education and development. The best means of preventing it is to bring up and educate the two sexes side by side and to permit sexual intercourse to commence at the right time.

    ↩︎

Meta

This entry was published on Monday, September 2nd, 2019 at 3:14 pm by Karel Donk and is filed under Law Politics Religion Science Takes on Life . You can use the permanent link to bookmark and/or share it.

Pingbacks

  1. Lindsay Shepherd’s Twitter Ban: The Pride Agenda in Action — Karel Donk (04/09/2019)
  2. LGBT pride month: There is no pride in mental illness — Karel Donk (04/09/2019)
  3. Warning: Do NOT circumsize your children — Karel Donk (16/09/2019)
  4. A record number of Americans aren’t having sex — Karel Donk (17/10/2019)
  5. Sex & Circumcision: An American Love Story By Eric Clopper — Karel Donk (19/12/2019)
  6. Access to Porn does not mean Sexual Freedom — Karel Donk (24/09/2020)
  7. Sexual Suppression And Repression II: The Human Battery — Karel Donk (03/11/2020)

Comments

There are 8 responses. Follow any responses to this post through its comments RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Eye of Providence

Subscribe to blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Note that this subscription is different from my newsletter.