May 25, 2004
Islam and the Threat of Female Desire
Daniel Pipes on the Islamic view of women and the threat posed by their sexuality:
The West and the Muslim world entertain vastly different assumptions about female sexuality.
In the West, it was until recently assumed that males and females experience eros differently, with men actively undertaking the hunt, seduction, and penetration, and women passively enduring the experience. Only lately did the idea gain currency that women too have sexual desires.
Indeed, Muslims generally believe female desire to be so much greater than the male equivalent that the woman is viewed as the hunter and the man as her passive victim. If believers feel little distress about sex acts as such, they are obsessed with the dangers posed by women.
So strong are her needs thought to be, she ends up representing the forces of unreason and disorder. Women's rampant desires and irresistible attractiveness gives them a power over men that even rivals God's. She must be contained, for her unbridled sexuality poses a direct danger to the social order. (Symbolic of this, the Arabic word fitna means both civil disorder and beautiful woman .)
The entire Muslim social structure can be understood as containing female sexuality. It goes to great lengths to separate the sexes and reduce contact between them. This explains such customs as the covering of women's faces and the separation of women's residential quarters (the harem).
May 25, 2004 at 09:06 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Islam and the Threat of Female Desire:
"Only lately did the idea gain currency that women too have sexual desires."
It's an evil lie. Probably propagated by women to get the husbands to buy them jewelry.
Ok, its back to the cave for me.
Posted by: spd rdr at May 25, 2004 9:43:47 AM
You'd better run... :)
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 9:50:16 AM
Which is one reason why female circumcision is practiced. I don't normally get into these types of discussions, but well, I am a very happily married woman...catch my drift here...and I am so glad that I am able to fully experience the marital relationship. I am aghast that such a misconception would be so prevalent as to destroy any type of understand, cohesion and true partnership.
Fear and ignorance are enemies of God. I attended the infamous MEOC briefing, and the woman giving the brief mentioned female circumcision. Arab women are still suffering the surgery, and this female PhD was asked if she was circumcised. She said no, and the ladies she was talking to wanted to see what she looked like (talk about personal space being invaded here!). She politely demurred, but made the point that the women are suppressed to where they can't even have a reciprocal experience. That is sad.
Sorry to be so blunt, but women shouldn't have to be punished for being women. And I doubt very much my hormones are raging to the point where I want another man. Good grief, I have my hands full with the one I've got!
spr rdr, I hear there is a nice hole in Iraq, only one occupant and currently empty...heh heh heh. :-)!
Posted by: La Femme Crickita at May 25, 2004 10:16:43 AM
Nothing to be sorry about Cricket. I think it's one thing to discuss things like this in a prurient manner, but that's not what you're doing.
And this is a subject many people shy away from (for obvious reasons), but it is important. I can't imagine what perversion of religion makes these whack-jobs think they are justified in improving on God's creation - do they imagine He didn't know what he was doing when he made women the way they are? What colossal arrogance.
Does it ever occur to these morons that allowing a woman to fully enjoy being married might be an inducement to fidelity?
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 10:34:46 AM
Not to be graphic or anything, but as a case in point, it has often occurred to me that if I ever chose to stray from my marriage, I might well be trading something of great value for something far less satisfying.
These men are making the mistake of thinking that women think the same way they do - that they place a premium on variety. And in any event, in a good relationship with an imaginative partner, variety is rarely an issue.
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 10:41:11 AM
I think there should be a better term than female circumcision. I don't think that accurately describes what actually is done. There are very few nerve endings in what is removed in a male circumcision, not so with female. Without getting to graphic, if it were really equivalent, male circumcision would have to remove the first inch or so.
Now that I have been good, understanding and sufficiently disgusted, a piggish remark, these Islamic deep thinkers obviously never met my ex-wife.
Posted by: Pile On® at May 25, 2004 11:41:04 AM
That's a good point (about equating the two practices, not about your ex-wife.. Although I've known quite a few women who seem to think their end of the bargain entails lying back and stoically thinking of England...).
It annoys me when people try to compare them. And FWIW, I put a lot of thought into the issue when I had my sons - the hospital was quite annoyed with me when I stopped them from automatically performing the procedure on my youngest. In the end I gave in, due to reading research that indicated there were medical reasons for doing so and the risk of having to have it done later in life (which I would think would be pretty darned traumatic). But it was by no means an automatic decision, and certainly wasn't dictated by any thought of "controlling" my son's natural inclinations.
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 12:01:10 PM
What is it with these whack job--horn dogs anyway? (They think) If they're "well behaved" they'll get 72 virgins in the "afterlife" and then these same ijuts project their own horn dogginess on the women who have to pay the price for THEIR apparent obsession with sex???.
I betcha mohammed didn't promise the women 72 male virgins in the after life.
Like you pointed out, Cass---Do these arrogant fools really believe all women are "Manufacturer defective"? [ based on their overall treatment of them--the answer would be yes]
[it's]"Allah-bout" the sex be praised. (~;
Posted by: CKCat reporting (by phone) from the Convent [ever seen a Cat blush? (;] at May 25, 2004 3:01:15 PM
What use would 72 male virgins be to a real woman, anywho?
I've heard it said that "Practice makes perfect" and from what I've seen, I'm inclined to believe it :)
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 3:21:13 PM
Thanks. I agree with the wisdom that being happily married is a disincentive to stray.
Unfortunately you have trash bags like Madonna, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera projecting exactly what it is they want to repress.
While I don't think Madonna has been 'technically' unfaithful, neither do I call the kiss she gave Britney Spears a peck on the cheek.
Okay, enough on trashy pop tarts.
Posted by: Le Femme Crickita at May 25, 2004 5:27:10 PM
Without getting TOO graphic, after the good Islamic doctor takes it off, he sews up the sides until just a small opening remains. OUCH!
But their culture is much superior to ours.
Posted by: Purple Raider at May 25, 2004 6:11:13 PM
Oh c'mon Cricket. Don't you remember from the Clinton years that nothing short of actual intercourse is technically adultery or sex?
I'm surprised at you.
Posted by: Cassandra at May 25, 2004 6:11:24 PM
*hanging head in shame*
Posted by: La Femme Crickita at May 28, 2004 9:13:18 AM