The subject of sex has been a focus for Jewish writers since Biblical times. The Babylonian Talmud, which is the legal code that forms the basis of Jewish regulations, contains many references to sexual mores and commentaries. Many of these regulations are perverse. For example, Yebhamoth 55b permits sexual intercourse with a dead relative, whether the relative was single or married. Kethuboth 11b advocates sex with three year old girls. Sanhedrin 54b-55a permits sodomy with three year old girls and boys under nine. 78a of the same book allows sodomy with a dying person, but only so long as the act is committed in the presence of a rabbi!
Lengthy debates take place within the holy books about whether or not consummation of a marriage on the Sabbath would constitute work. The law-makers conclude that such intercourse is not work and is permissible because “any act of damage does not constitute labor in regard to the Sabbath"!
Even Jesus is included in these bizarre sexual ramblings. Sanhedrin 105a-b tells that “Jesus fornicated with his jackass". And Gittin 57a holds that “Jesus is in hell and is being punished by being boiled in hot semen. Christians are boiled in shit.”
One of the most complete accounts of Jewish sexual mores is contained in Erotica Judaica by Allen Edwardes (NY, 1967). This fascinating, yet little known book, presents a sexual history of the Jews. Edwards, and others, have addressed the vexing issue of Jewish ritual circumcision. The French Jew Leon Poliakov writing in The History of Anti-Semitism suggests that the psychological trauma of circumcision contributes to the unique Jewish personality traits. Poliakov has not done his homework properly, for in the United States nearly 90% of Gentile males are circumcised, and Americans have not yet adopted “Jewish” personality characteristics as a result.
Sigmund Freud was closer to the mark when he wrote in Moses and Monotheism:
“Circumcision is the symbolic substitute of castration, a punishment which the primeval father dealt his sons long ago out of the fullness of his power; and whosoever accepted this symbol showed by so doing that he was ready to submit to the father’s will, although it was at the cost of a painful sacrifice.”
However, Freud seems to overlook the fact that a new-born infant is not in any position to have any choice in the matter of his mutilation by a mohel or by a pediatrician. Bruno Bettelheim comes much closer when he writes:
“Circumcision … can only symbolize castration in a society where severe punishment, particularly in regard to sexual behavior, is part of the individual’s frame of reference. And only where the punitive figure of an adult looms large will the child easily make the mental transition from circumcision to castration anxiety. Jewish society is one such, and so are the other societies that have been influenced deeply by Judaism.” — Symbolic Wounds
But Freud did hit the nail on the head with his remarks later in the same tome:
“… this feeling of guiltiness which the Prophets incessantly kept alive and which soon became an integral part of the religious system itself. It became not easy to adhere to the illusion, cherished above all else, that they were God’s chosen people … The need for satisfying this feeling of guilt … made them render their religious precepts ever and ever more strict, more exacting, but also more petty.”
Edwardes later reveals some startling aspects of ritual circumcision which Freud just happened to avoid mentioning:
“Jews are even saddled with the sin of masturbatiomania, owing to Gentile observance of the mohel, or circumciser, routinely clasping the babe’s penis with thumb and forefinger and gently stimulating an erection to facilitate the delicate operation; and are heavily burdened with the terrible guilt of being fellatio maniacs: a scandal aroused by Gentile observation of the circumcisional routine of metzizah, or stypic suction of the wound by the circumciser’s wine-daubed lips — a highly controversial procedure suggestive of Jewish perversion as well as explanatory of alleged Jewish addiction to fellation. Freudian theories of sexual traumatism were thus afloat in an earlier age!”
Despite much aversion to and prohibition of circumcision, early Christians were so gullible to Judaic lore that they even worshipped “holy foreskins” at churches throughout Europe. At least 12 examples of “Jesus' foreskin” were revered as holy relics at different churches. One Parisian church had the “Virgin Mary’s vaginal lips” enshrined. All of these relics were brought back to Europe by the Crusaders.
Medieval times were also significant for the preponderance of Jewish converts to Christianity who were actively involved in the persecution of Jews. In 1240, Louis IX of France set up a committee to investigate Jewish hatred of Christians. Head of the committee was Nicholas Donin, a convert. In the mid 15th century in Spain, a homosexual renegade Jew, Fray Alonso de Espina, published many accusations against the Jews, his best-known being Fortress of Faith Against the Jews. But Espina was by far eclipsed by his contemporary, Fray Tomas de Torquemada, the first Inquisitor General (1483) and papal Grand Inquisitor (1487). As Edwardes tells us:
“Both his father and his uncle, Cardinal Juan de Torquemada, were of immediate Jewish descent. Uncle Juan became a full fledged converso or “New Christian", rising to great eminence in Church and State, while Tomas' sire remained a crypto-Jew or Marrano (literally, 'Pig'). Although he reared Tomas as a strict Christian, he had dared to have him circumcised in infancy, so that if Tomas ever wished to revert to Judaism, he was already a Jew in the flesh.
“This goes far to explain much of Tomas de Torquemada’s excessive severity, for he was the most relentless expeller and persecutor of Jews since ancient times — a monomaniac 'who, shedding floods of honest tears, caused his victims to be burned alive.'
“His successor, Fray Diego de Deza, was also a Christianized Jew — as was Alonso Manrique, Cardinal-Archbishop of Seville and Inquisitor General from 1523 to 1538. These two may not have been circumcised, but they were anti-Judaic infatuates all the same!
“This leads us to a remarkable discovery, which seems to account for much of the mad excess of Spanish Judaeophobia. Seventeenth century Dutch theologian Philip van Limborch, on the authority of his friend and famed Amsterdam Jewish physician Isaac Orobio de Castro, wrote that 'The monasteries and convents (of Spain and Portugal) are all full of Jews; while many even of the canons, inquisitors, and bishops themselves are of Jewish descent.'”
Even the pope was a Jew. Antipope Anacletus II (1130-38) was descended from Jewish converts; a phenomenon which led St. Bernard de Clairvaux to exclaim: “A Jewish sprout has occupied the Chair of Peter!” Anacletus (Cardinal Pietro Pierleoni) was excommunicated, and thereafter a “papal stool” was provided, so that the pope could dangle his penis through a hole to have it inspected for circumcision by a toccatogli i testicola or “testicle-toucher". Pope Alexander VI was subjected to a particularly rigorous examination, on account of his recent name-change. His prepuce was found to be intact, and he continued to reign as the “vicar of Christ” (despite the fact that he continued to sire a multitude of children by a host of mistresses).
Many Jews fled from the Spanish Inquisition and settled in North Africa, where religious tolerance prevailed. Here, many of the younger refugees became prostitutes. The men became known as marìcones ("fags") and would often paint the word kosher over their doors to show that they only accepted “kosher meat", i.e. only the circumcised. The female Jewish prostitutes became known as shlikkah, a word passed down to today as “shiksehs” which charmingly now refers to any Gentile woman.
Some writers have noted a neurotic sexual undertone within modern Zionism. Wesley Hazleton’s book The Israeli Women first deals with Biblical Oedipal/political currents:
“As a mystical idea, the return to Zion afforded the bond of a future but never-to-be-achieved-in-our-lifetime Redemption. It was imagined, as Isaiah indicates, in terms of the return of son to mother in sexual union.”
She characterizes Ezekiel’s prophesies as follows:
“The sons were to mount Zion in the role of rescuer and sexual claimant, the young groom returning to claim his bride; the son his mother. The result of the intercourse between son and mother would be the rebirth of the son himself, who would give new life to his mother by saving her from the iniquities of suffering under foreign rule, and restore her innocence and light as mother and life-giver.”
Then, she shows how modern Zionists reflect this urge. She quotes a kibbutz leader Muir Yaari, who openly referred to the sexual nature of the kibbutzniks' zeal. The land they tilled, he said, was their bride, and they themselves “the bridegroom who abandons himself in his bride’s bosom … thus we abandon ourselves to the motherly womb of the sanctifying earth".
The modern Hebrew language, she tells us, is full of Oedipal terminology. Even archeology is “digging into the motherland; back to the womb.” Gever, the Hebrew word for “man” also means rooster or cock. The word for “weapon” is zayin, which also means penis. Thus the phrase for Israel’s Armed Forces can also be translated as “roosters equipped with penises".
Ms. Hazleton touches on one of the most sensitive chords in modern Jewish theology: attitudes toward menstruation:
“Codified in perverse detail by Joseph Caro in the Shulchan Aruch, the laws of niddah forbid sexual intercourse not only during menstruation but for at least seven days after, to ensure that the woman is perfectly 'clean'. Defiance of this law supposedly can lead to premature death for both partners. The detailed means of avoiding this danger make horribly fascinating reading: 'To touch her (a menstruating woman) in a caressing manner is punishable with lashes. He is not permitted to come into contact with her, be it even a long thing, nor should he receive aught from her; he is likewise forbidden to throw anything from his hand into her hand.'
“The two cannot sleep together. He must not sit where she sat. But since he has to eat and drink and his wife has to provide for these needs, she is permitted to prepare food and drink for him as long as she does not do so in his presence. She must then set the food on the table when he is out of the room, if he is in the room and sees her doing so, he cannot touch the food.
“More details follow in abundance, delving into the exact color and quantity of any 'moisture oozing out of her body'. A woman with a vaginal discharge due to a fungal infection is apparently pure while just the suspicion that she has started menstruating even if there is no blood, is enough to make her impure.
“This impurity lasts a minimum of 12 days. During the 7 days after menstruation, the woman must examine herself carefully each day … This menstrual fetishism culminates in the final proof of purity, the mikveh, a ritual bath in which the woman immerses herself at the end of the 12 days, muttering blessings the while, to emerge clean to the male touch.
“Lest there still remain any doubt to the general uncleanliness of the female sex, it extends even to newborn children: a woman is ritually unclean for 3 weeks after a male child is born, and for double that time after the birth of a female child.”
These insulting practices are fully supported by the Israeli government, who pass out to every bride-to-be a booklet entitled Happy Marriage which endorses such habits by quoting “experts” on the dangers of “bloody elements". As Hazleton points out somewhat tongue-in-cheek, the pursuit of such habits “may explain why ultra Orthodox men are among Israeli prostitutes' most regular clientele". Other observers have noted that some Orthodox men bend the rules somewhat, by covering their wife with a sheet, and copulating with her through a small hole cut in the center.
Sexuality, often of a salacious nature, features throughout “Holocaust” literature and is often tied into scatological descriptions. However, this whole area deserves a chapter to itself, and hence we pass over this aspect of Jewish psychology for now.
Let us draw together some of the various findings we have uncovered. We have found that Jewish religious literature dwells on perverse sex. We discover that in the modern age, Jews are still practicing weird sex cults, such as circumcision and the rejection of a menstruating wife. We have found that rabbis will masturbate, then mutilate and then fellate a baby’s penis. We know that Jews often grow up in matriarchal homes, yet the adult Jew insults his wife through rejection during menstruation, and through according her very few rights under civil or under religious law in the world’s only Jewish theocracy, Israel.
Our conclusion must be as follows: Jews suffer from an inadequacy and hatred of themselves which is stimulated by maternal punitiveness, and manifests itself as filial guilt. Fathers exercise their guilt and shame at being Jewish by performing a token castration of their male children; circumcision. But at the same time they try to make amends to the infant by kissing/fellating his mutilated penis. Resentment against Jewish mothers is transposed onto Jewish wives by rejecting them during their most feminine period. The Jewish wives react by themselves becoming punitive against the males in the family. So the vicious cycle continues. In other chapters we will notice the guilt phenomenon manifesting itself in other areas of Jewish life.