The Fundamentalist Mystique
While Boudicca continues to recover, the task has been put to me to carry on in her blogging stead. This means blogging about sex.
Sullivan has intervened on my behalf, serving up some delicious goodies. The post is on - and I'm serious - Iraqi Islamists and their demands that goats submit to a form of hijab. You see, immodestly attired goats will tempt men. Money quote:
Iraqi Islamists are threatening shepherds with violence if they don't clothe their goats with diapers to avoid tempting lonely shepherds. Another facet of the "new Middle East"...Sullivan cannot escape the conclusion:
The goat diapers are funny. But they are a function of a sexual pathology, maintained by religious norms, and all for sustaining the immunity of heterosexual males from the consequences of their sex drives - and the subjugation of women into near-slavery throughout many enclaves in the Muslim world.Fear of the sexual power of women is chief in the fundamentalist, and therefore terrorist, mind. The key distinction between a conservative (using myself as an example) and reactionaries such as these, I think, is the following: the conservative may object to the encroachment of sexuality into the public sphere, but the reactionary would suppress to natural and individual differences in sexuality, afraid any temptations will reveal his own sinful deviance. How revealing is it, then, that the objects of such violence are gays and now goats?
posted by Joshua @ 4:32 PM
4 Comments:
It seems to me that if a man has self-control, they need not fear any sexual temptatiom.
Well, of course! But the Islamo-fascists are hardly self-controlled individuals.
This post reminds me of a book I read a few years ago entitled Scheherazade Goes West by a Moroccan author, Fatema Mernissi. In it, basically, she deconstructs the basis of sexism in Eastern and Western societies. In Western society, sexism against women is based on the idea that men are better than women – smarter, more powerful, and better at protecting the ‘weaker sex.’ In Eastern society, the subjugation is based on fear of women – basically, that if men let the women do whatever they want, the men will become weak and helpless in the face of the sexual power and the mystique that is women. While Eastern society is more severe in its subjugation, it is rooted in a deep respect, perhaps awe, for women, and a deep uncertainty about their own self-restraint. Not that I’m saying I’d rather live in Saudi Arabia, but it does make for interesting reading…
In the post that Tacitean was referring to by Andrew Sullivan, he mentions that men, straight men in particular, are rarely held accountable for anything they do that’s sexually-related. He says “In many Islamic cultures, Women are deemed responsible for their own rape or molestation if they haven't dressed modestly enough. Gay soldiers are to blame if straight men cannot help themselves and start buggering them in the shower. It's never up to the straight guys to restrain themselves from getting a blow-job; it's always up to the gay men not to offer temptation.” Linking back to Tacitean’s other post about monogamy, perhaps we can start to encourage monogamy further if we stop letting men get away with murder, sexually speaking, and start holding them responsible for their own actions. Now, I’m not saying a majority of men act with no self-restraint when it comes to sex, but I’d say teenage boys are forgiven for slutty or thoughtless behavior much more often than teenage girls are, and until that perception changes in the media and within society, there’s no reason for them to stop. One example I can think of is that a 16-year-old girl who sleep with a much older man is considered misguided, taken advantage of, and full of ‘issues.’ A 16-year-old boy who’s sleeping with a much older women gets slaps on the back and is considered the pupil in a great arrangement. And actually, a 16-year-old boy in a relationship with a much older man is considered a victim of molestation... I don't think any of these arrangements are that healthy, but that two are condemned while one isn't says a lot about the strange society we live in. Anyway, sorry for the rambling, maybe next time I’ll try to answer one post at a time.
In reading over that, I realized that last bit didn't quite make sense. Basically, it's tough to encourage monogamous, healthy relationships amongst youth when we as a society do not have a clear set of guidelines for what is ok for men and women to do, sexually speaking. I would set these guidelines as basic as 'be responsible, be safe, be smart, and consider the feelings of others before acting.' In a country where we have three or four different standards for similar situations it's difficult for kids to know what is and isn't acceptable behavior. And let's not go into that argument of which gender should be more responsible for morals again - any teenage girl in this era is going to argue that if guys can get away with something, they should be able to as well.
Post a Comment
<< Home