THE HANDSTAND

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 Medical Breviary

Gilad Atzmon in the following paragraph has brought to my attention the strange and wonderful aspect that irrational behaviour with which he, as a musician and writer, and the human race in general, pride themselves; (also for character traits of Jazz musicians I suggest reading the historian Eric Hobsbawn's essays, for which Atzmon must also have a sincere regard). This irrationality and many associated behaviour anomalies may be, it is now suggested, even in this particular case for example, actually a demonstration of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder:

Gilad Atzmon writes:
The Jewish people happen to follow an ancient barbarian tradition of chopping off their male infant’s foreskin at the tender age of eight days. Even the Bundist Jewish Anti-Zionists who regard themselves at the avant-garde of world working class engage in the barbarian ritual. Someone should correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I can understand it, circumcision prohibits the Jewish infant from being an equal man. He is no doubt different, he becomes a part of a clan, either chosen or inferior (this is a matter of taste and belief). Most importantly, he is different. This cannibalistic act would have beyond doubts implications on the evolution of the rationality of the Jewish boy. Cleverly, the Jews call that circumcision "Brit Mila": a 'Covenant with the Word'. When the Jewish kinder is just eight days old, he enters a lifetime bond with the language of his ancestors. His rationality is tilted forever. Some would run into wild supremacist lifestyle such as Zionism, others would adopt a non-realistic form of atheist rational universalism. Yet being universalist and secular and modernised does not stop them from circumcising their newborn male babies. You ask yourself why? I do as well. I think that to be irrational is authentic at times. And as it seems, Jews like everyone else, like to be authentic and irrational, the question is why they refuse to admit it. Don't they want to be like everyone else?

Well, he breaks off there without any reference to the fact that circumcision throughout the entire Middle East, and also the African operation on young female children, are both operations which in any human consideration of the actual medical facts would find abhorrent - but these operations are infact also the living proof of the religious instititionalisation of a hygeinic measure. Infection in the folds of skin on the penis can be difficult to cure and circumcision is a normal medical solution and/or prevention for the problem, which doctors even advise here in Ireland. And for consideration of the female problem - where tribal life ensures that the night hours of sleep will be passed in the desert on the ground, the operation on females is a defence against ant infestation. The fact that religious or mystical "rationality" instituted the blanket of "custom" is an essential factor that must be taken into account in the Middle East generally.

As to the post-traumatic stress disorder - it is quite obviously a danger where such operations are undertaken by other than medical practitioners without anaesthetic. Also it it quite obvious that with modern knowledge of hygeine there is no necessity for either of these operations to take place.

Gilad Atzmon states that "I think that to be irrational is authentic at times"(sic), and thus uses the possibility of circumcision trauma as an excuse for certain Jewish ideas and adult behaviour."The fact that religious use of these hygiene methods has now been acknowledged as a form of torture for infants would, it seems, ensure that these operations are either abandoned (as Law tries to effect in the female case of female circmcision) or maintained, (male circumcision), only in cases of medical necessity - an operation that would be performed with anaesthetic by a surgeon ; anaesthetic which is not used by the rabbinical Orthodox Jew, who also uses a traditional tool (or stone knife..).

As to the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder , there are a multiplicity of opinions as to wether the human mind orders or re-orders stress in the memory. At the present time Roger Pitman, a psychiatrist at Harvard University, has already shown that giving certain drugs to victims of trauma brought into hospital seems to help the victims to be less likely to develop the condition.(
The Guardian,Feb3rd.2006)

PTSD = bad memories, uncontrollable emotional reactions, adrenaline floods that create emotion that may overwhelm the victim for years in the future. A very important point for us all to observe, as undoubtedly nearly everyone must have unpleasant memories - is that the re-activation of trauma memories may mean that an individual's memory can be manipulated by others. Trauma can be brought to the mind again by talking to a supposed friend or ofcourse to counsellors, social, medical or religious.

Dr. Pitman and his associate Dr.Nader say that bringing memory to the front of the mind by counsellors can enable the patient have those memories modified thereafter by giving them "propanolol"( a beta-blocker) medication to reduce the re-storation of those memories deep within the historical networks of the mind. Dr. Pitman says that then "the memory gets re-stored in a weaker version than it was originally."

A final paragraph in The Guardian article. Feb.3rd 2006,on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder states: But deleting memories is not the aim of this particular project because for many PTSD sufferes, the bad memories are part of their identity. "What we want to do is turn it down a bit so it's not so overwhelming - and bring them into a range where they are responsive to the traditional ways of treatment - therapy and psychiatric treatment." said Dr. Nader.
Jocelyn Braddell.