Quantcast


Advertisement

Bloggish

Email | Print | Text - Text +

June 29, 2011 | 12:24 pm

Foreskin Man, meet Vulva Girl

Posted by Jonah Lowenfeld

Photo

Vulva Girl partners with Foreskin Man in a new issue of the controversial "intactivist" comic book. (Image courtesy www.foreskinman.com)

A new issue of “Foreskin Man,” the anti-circumcision comic book whose treatment of a Jewish ritual circumciser was widely critiqued as anti-Semitic, hit the web on June 29. It introduces Vulva Girl, a female counterpart to the comic book’s blonde, buff, eponymous hero.

Like the first two issues, Foreskin Man No. 3 was written and edited by Matthew Hess, the president of MGMBill.org, a San Diego-based group. Hess wrote the San Francisco ballot proposition which seeks to ban circumcision of boys under 18 in any situation other than a medical emergency. He also drafted a similar proposition that was advanced and later rescinded in Santa Monica.

Foreskin Man No.2 featured an evil Jewish ritual circumciser as its villain—Monster Mohel—and provoked strong condemnations from Jewish organizations, who saw its imagery as anti-Semitic. The Anti-Defamation League called the comic’s depiction of Jewish ritual circumcision, a central rite of Jewish practice that can be traced back to the first book of the Hebrew Bible, “disrespectful and deeply offensive.”

In the latest installment, Foreskin Man heads off to Kenya to battle Githinji, a “ruthless circumciser” of boys, and his wife, Ghinjo, who “has mutilated thousands of girls.” Foreskin Man is saved by Vulva Girl, another flying superhero dedicated to stopping the cutting of genitalia. The two team up to defeat the African circumcising couple.

Equating the surgeries performed on boys and girls is the comic book’s goal, Hess said in a statement released today announcing the publication of Foreskin Man No. 3.

“I think everyone has met at least one person who believes that circumcising girls should be a crime, but circumcising boys is okay,” Hess said in the statement. “The idea behind Foreskin Man #3 is to expose that double standard and help persuade readers that male and female circumcision are really two sides of the same coin.”

Female genital cutting has been illegal in the United States since 1996.

Even among intactivists, as the opponents of circumcision are called, Foreskin Man No. 2 ruffled a number of feathers. Many intactivists—particularly Jewish ones—attempted to distance themselves from the comic’s perceived anti-Semitic imagery.

Hess isn’t backing down, though. “They hate us because we’re blond,” read the trailer for Foreskin Man No. 3, which was released on June 25.“But there’s one thing they can’t stop,” the trailer’s text concluded, before announcing the imminent return of Foreskin Man.

“His new comic does nothing to address the bigotry that’s rife in his previous efforts,” Nancy Appel, associate director of the Anti-Defamation League’s central Pacific region, said of Hess’s latest.

“In addition,” Appel continued, “it’s of course factually inaccurate to compare male circumcision to female genital mutilation, and Hess’s equation of the two is deeply offensive to all Jews, Muslims and other parents who choose to circumcise their male children.”

Hess’s initiative qualified for inclusion on the San Francisco ballot last month, but opponents of the ballot initiative—lawyers and legislators, not caped crusaders—are fighting to prevent it from being put to a vote this November.

On June 15, a group of plaintiffs filed a lawsuit claiming that the ballot proposition seeking to ban circumcision in San Francisco goes against California State Law. And on June 24, Rep. Brad Sherman filed a bill in the House of Representatives that would prevent any state or local government from enacting or enforcing any law prohibiting or regulating circumcision of a minor whose parent or guardian has consented to the procedure. Sherman’s bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Keith Ellison, Henry Waxman, Jerrold Nadler, Howard Berman, Eliot Engel, Sander Levin, Andre Carson, Steve Israel, and Gary Ackerman.

Check out the press release here and the comic itself at foreskinman.com.

33 Comments — Leave your comment

Share this post: del.icio.us Favicondel.icio.us Digg FaviconDigg Facebook FaviconFacebook Google FaviconGoogle Reddit FaviconReddit StumbleUpon FaviconStumbleUpon Technorati FaviconTechnorati YahooMyWeb FaviconYahooMyWeb

COMMENTS

We welcome your feedback. Comments may not exceed 700 characters.

Privacy Policy

Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.

Terms of Service

JewishJournal.com has rules for its commenting community.Get all the details.

Jewish Groups Opposing Circumcision
http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/
http://www.jewishcircumcision.org/
http://www.britmila.org.il/
http://www.kahal.org/

Comment by A Jew Against Circumcision on 6/29/11 at 2:21 pm

I’m stunned anyone has the chutzpah to say they are part of a bullied minority, and to go through legal hoops as if in the US we don’t put up with bullying and come to the aid of the defenseless. 

The only party whose rights are not being respected is the helpless baby.  NOT ONE national medical association on earth (not even Isreal’s) endorses routine circumcision.

Comment by Ron Low on 6/29/11 at 7:44 pm

In response to the ADL: What is truly “disrespectful and deeply offensive” is the ADL’s smear campaign in defense of the outdated genital cutting ritual.

The ADL is feigning outrage over Foreskin Man and misleading many vulnerable new and expectant parents in the process.

It’s time to question circumcision.

~Barefoot Intactivist
A Jewish Man Against All Genital Cutting

Comment by Barefoot Intactivist on 6/29/11 at 8:29 pm

BS"D

Matthew Hess, Ron Low, Barefoot Intactivist, and others who seek to criminalize brit milah have good company:

“It is true, we are barbarians. It is an honored title to us. I free humanity from the shackles of the soul, from the degrading suffering caused by the false vision called conscience and ethics. The Jews have inflicted two wounds on mankind: circumcision on its body and a conscience on its soul. These are Jewish inventions. The war for domination of the world is waged only between the two of us, between these two camps alone, the Germans and the Jews. Everything else is but deception.”

Adolf Hitler, the most prominent intactivist of the 20th century.

Comment by Stephen Mendelsohn on 6/29/11 at 10:13 pm

^^ Adolf Hitler ^^

Also loved dogs and was a vegetarian.  I didn’t notice you posting at the animal and diet forums. 

What on earth has that go to do with an infant’s basic human right to be free of non-therapeutic amputations before her can give his own consent. 

Maybe you’ve heard of another nazi, Joseph Mengele, who had no problem forcing amputations on the innocent.  OH MY G-D!  Stephen Mendelsohn’s a nazi!

Comment by Ron Low on 6/30/11 at 10:33 am

Dear intactivists,
Please spend some time fighiting war, poverty,disease.  Give some tzedakah and tutor a child to read.  I get your point.  We hear you.  We don’t agree with you.  You will have to accept that we do not agree with you. We are not going to agree with you no matter what insults you throw at us. Maybe you can put your energy elsewhere.  Keep your nose away from my foreskin.

Comment by sami on 6/30/11 at 1:54 pm

Mendelsohn has it wrong. Far from being an intactivist, I think Adolf Hitler was a hater of Jews, but a lover of circumcision, because circumcision was a clear mark of identification that was a ticket to Auschwitz.

Comment by Roland on 6/30/11 at 3:28 pm

The hero for blond haired “Mr. Hess” should be Super Nanny: Super Nanny knows what is proper for children since she replaces parents and determines the following regarding the children:  what they eat; watch in videos and on television; books (comics) they read; vaccinations they get and when to tell on parents who violate Super Nanny’s rules.

Comment by Aaron on 6/30/11 at 3:40 pm

Hitler is smiling; Mr. Hess is moving forward with his work to eliminate Jews.  He is not killing them, he just want to erase their identity.  I remember in law school where we discussed whether trees had rights.  Now were are arguing whether children should be the propery of the state so that the state can ursurp the rights of parents.  The idiotic arguments people use to change the basic relationships of millennium. You have to have a college degree to argue this nonsense.

Comment by Aaron on 6/30/11 at 3:50 pm

@Aaron, who are you to tell me that I can’t beat my child? Who are you to tell me I can’t send my child off to work?

Don’t hide behind the law. Why can’t I treat my child like property? You have no problem branding yours like cattle.

Comment by Eat Spam on 6/30/11 at 3:51 pm

Hitler’s maternal grandparents were Jewish and you know how pushy they can be about having their grandsons circumcised. Hitler was only getting even.

Comment by Frederick Rhodes on 6/30/11 at 4:46 pm

@ Eat Spam:  I am tellin you that the State of California determines what it is to “beat” your child, and I suggest that you better not guess wrong or you will be put in jail.  It is Mr. Hess who wants to treat children as property of the state so that he can tell parents what they can do with their children, if that includes branding them (as Hitler did the Jews) that is what happens when the Nanny is in control.

Comment by Aaron on 6/30/11 at 7:27 pm

“it’s of course factually inaccurate to compare male circumcision to female genital mutilation,” Not at all, they are very comparable - done for the same extraoridinary range of reasons (see http://www.circumstitions.com/FGC-stitions.html) and in overlapping degrees of severity (http://www.mndaily.com/2010/09/20/cut-divides).

“and Hess’s equation of the two is deeply offensive to all Jews, Muslims and other parents who choose to circumcise their male children.” Yet in Indonesia and Malaysia millions of Muslims choose to “circumcise” their female children.

Comment by Hugh7 on 6/30/11 at 8:10 pm

It would be amusing if it were not so sad to see the intellectual contortions people put themselves through to distance male from female genital cutting, while making the most ridiculous comparisons (hair cutting, tooth straightening, homeschooling, language, bedtimes, and now what videos they watch) to justify male genital cutting.

Comment by Hugh7 on 6/30/11 at 8:17 pm

In Foreskin Man #3 the eponymous hero saves an African boy at his mother’s request from tribal circumcision (which has killed seven boys in one province of South Africa alone this month, 62 last year) while Vulva Girl saves a girl from FGC. Why should the ADL be against that?

Comment by Hugh7 on 6/30/11 at 8:24 pm

Iran is testing missiles to deliver not too distant future nuclear bombs. Meanwhile in
San Francisco they are voting to curtail the ritual bris. So manifestly appropriate!

Some folks just have too much time on their hands. Not to worry, such a law is unconstitutional on its face, but certainly brings out those hanging on to reality by the skin of their teeth. Auntie Mame

Comment by Mr. Againster on 7/01/11 at 5:03 am

I am not sure what is going on in South Africa that there would be deaths from circumcisions.  If it is a problem, Mr. Hess should go to South Africa a start a campaign agaisnt those particular circumsisions.  That is if he is interested in saving lives.

Comment by Aaron on 7/01/11 at 8:27 am

The only person I see arguing about children being “property of the state” is you, Aaron. A rational person would argue that people are not considered “property” anymore. A child is not “property” of its parents. Please stop defending this barbaric procedure with your “idiotic arguments.”

Comment by Aaron is an idiot on 7/01/11 at 11:47 am

Foreskin Man Unmasked by Messianic Jewish Sheep Shearer


http://ayidindixieland.blogspot.com/2011/06/foreskin-man-unmasked-by-messianic.html

Comment by A Yid in Dixieland on 7/01/11 at 4:02 pm

The desire to control other people’s children can be justified only by treating these children as property that the controller has control of.  The fact that you cover up this desire for control by stating that an infant’s civil rights is being violated (a child that has no right under the law to make any decisions since ipso facto he is a minor) demontrates that only a twit believes that he is protecting a child’s rights as opposed to treating that child as property, which in itself is constitutional in this country.

Comment by Aaron on 7/01/11 at 5:23 pm

Those struggling to excuse forced genital cutting of children are desperately relying on smokescreens (Hitler) to deflect attention from the human rights issue, bodily autonomy of all children. Among intactivists Jews are some of the most passionate, informed and intelligent arguing to end this heinous practice.

In a YouTube interview, Jewish American scholar Leonard Glick says, “I am completely convinced that cutting the genitals of children, boys or girls, is fundamentally evil.”

Comment by James Loewen on 7/02/11 at 7:45 am

Secular “Jews” say all kinds of strange things, e.g., Marx and Lenin.  Look at the chaos they created in the world.  “Jews” (who do not follow their religion) are at the fore front of a lot a screwy ideas and participate in a number of non-Jewish religions.  Leonard Glick is one doctor with an opinion unsupported by Torah. In other words, he is essentially a non-believer who ignores the spiritual reasons for circumscision.  Finally, to equate “cutting of female genitals” with circumscision within the context of Judaism is an oxymoron stated by a moron.  Jews do not participate in any ritual cutting of female genitals. The mention the two practices in the same breath is propaganda.

Comment by Aaron on 7/04/11 at 12:46 am

^^ To mention the two practices {male and female genital cutting} in the same breath is propaganda. ^^

It’s actually quite relevant to the dicussion. 

Both are done by force or coercion to minors.  Both cause hundreds of deaths annually and send thousands to the hospital.  Both are often defended and perpetrated by victims. 

The main difference is that female cutting - even a pin-poke to draw one ceremonial drop of blood - is illegal in the US with no religious exemption.  Male cutting sadly is still permitted, at the whim of someone who will not have to live with the outcome. 

Not one national medical association (not even Israel’s) endorses routine circumcision.

Comment by Ron Low on 7/04/11 at 9:05 am

The Golem of Pragues’s Foreskin Now on display at the Smithsonian.  Take that Foreskin Man!
Semitic, Snipped, and Proud!
http://ayidindixieland.blogspo...

Comment by A Yid in Dixieland on 7/05/11 at 5:38 pm

I’d like to make it clear that my distate for infant circumcision have nothing to do with Judaism, so those who would brand me, and those like me, a nazi, don’t bother.

When I first saw Mr Hess’ Monster Mohel character in Foreskin Man #3 I thought he had gone too far, that it was counterproductive. When I stopped to think about it, I realized that the Mohel was no more offensive than some satirical depictions of Christian priests I’ve seen. I still thought it a stupid move on Mr Hess’ part because of the offence it would cause.

Comment by Jason on 7/06/11 at 1:30 pm

When I read Foreskin Man #3, introducing Foreskin Man’s distaff counterpart, Vulva Girl, I realized that Mr Hess know exactly what he was doing. Viewed objectively, VG’s agenda is the same as FM’s, yet she would be applauded if she were real, whereas FM would be villified as anti-Semetic, to say nothing of his Aryan appearance. I can only wonder if African tribespeople would be as offended by VG as some Jewish people seem to be by FM.
(In my previous post I meant #2, my mistake)

Comment by Jason on 7/06/11 at 1:34 pm

Circumcision is violent disfiguring child rape. Period.

Your religious rights do not extend to the unnecessary surgical alteration of your children’s genitals. We recognize that for girls, without religious exception. It’s long overdue we recognize this for boys, without religious exception.

Face the music. Your religious tradition is barbaric and cruel, a blatant sexual assault against a child, and therefore indefensible. Please join the rest of us in the 21st century and abandon the torture of children.

Comment by Brad on 7/06/11 at 6:24 pm

i love the christians telling us our religious traditions are barbaric and cruel.
maybe you should look into your own history before evincing such hypocricy.
i won’t even mention the fact that you worship a torture victim, drink his blood, eat his flesh, and wear the torture device around your necks.
all i have to mention is the thousands of years of murder, torture, rape, and conquest that has been done by churches in the name of jesus.

maybe you should clean your own house first.

Comment by john on 7/07/11 at 9:09 am

circumcision is nothing like female genital mutilation. comparing the 2 is a total straw man argument.

the goal of fgm is to limit or eliminate sexual pleasure in women. it routinely causes scarring, infections and other problems.

circumcision does not limit sexual pleasure (as reported by men who were circumcised later in life), and it very very rarely has any complications.

comparing the 2 is just ignorance.

Comment by steve on 7/07/11 at 9:09 am

John said: ^^ i love the christians telling us our religious traditions are barbaric and cruel…you should clean your own house first. ^^

Or maybe you could see it in your heart to not punish your child for the transgressions of Christians? 

I’m fighting for the basic human right of all children, including those in non-reilgious families like mine, to be free from non-therapeutic forced genital cutting.  As Eli Wiesel said at my college commencement: “We are all children of earth — If anyone’s freedom is taken away, our own freedom is not secure.” (I think he was quoting Roosevelt).

Comment by Ron Low on 7/07/11 at 9:39 am

Genital cutting forced upon a child is a barbaric act, whether forced upon a male or a female child. Genital cutting is a barbaric act, whether its done minimally with a slight
“nick” to the female prepuce (foreskin) as the American Pediatric Society was suggesting for girls in the USA just last year, or if it involves full foreskin amputation as is done routinely to boys every day in the USA.

Comment by James Loewen on 7/08/11 at 8:18 am

John: “you worship a torture victim, drink his blood, eat his flesh” 1) Not everyone who isn’t Jewish is Christian. 2) The difference is that Christians only pretend to drink his blood or eat his flesh (or think they do).

“And on June 24, Rep. Brad Sherman filed a bill in the House of Representatives that would prevent any state or local government from enacting or enforcing any law prohibiting or regulating circumcision of a minor whose parent or guardian has consented to the procedure.”

So this bill will make it legal for a blind man with Parkinsons to circumcise a protesting 17-year-old with a boxcutter, just so long as one parent has consented and it’s a clean boxcutter….

Comment by Hugh7 on 7/10/11 at 5:41 pm

FHM India did a very interesting comic book story on the foreskin man: Check it out http://fhmindia.com/index.php/77-featured/127-foreskin-man

Comment by Rahul on 7/11/11 at 10:59 pm

Post a Comment

Name:  
Email:  

Type the word you see below:

Comment:


About this Blog

Blog Home
About the Blogger(s)
Contact

RSS


Blog Archive






Newspaper

Serving a community of 600,000, The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles is the largest Jewish weekly outside New York City. Our award-winning paper reaches over 150,000 educated, involved and affluent readers each week. Subscribe here.

© Copyright 2012 Tribe Media Corp.
All rights reserved. JewishJournal.com is hosted by Nexcess.net. Homepage design by Koret Communications.
Widgets by Mijits. Site construction by Hop Studios.

counter fake hit page