What Is The Attraction To Moslem Men?

[Anonymouse]

Next time be sure to write down on a notepad what you wrote.

 

I wrote:

You replied:

Where in that reply did you challenge my usage of the term causality? And moreover, if you had had a problem with it, why did you actually respond to that? If you were not arguing about causality, you would have seen no need to 'demonstrate' your point in response to my reply. Why now, all of a sudden, you make a fuss about "causality" vs "correlation"? Is it because you cannot discuss something without a string of ad hominems?

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you have not found anything that I directly state there is a causal link between Islam and repression of women. There are patterns and correlations. The evidence I was stating is merely the face of those patterns that are codified in the Islamic creed. More likely than not, does not equate to absolute causation.

 

 

Only when you can actually read Arabic, to be able to read the Qur'an "as is", rather than some inaccurate translations by people who are not even religious scholars or for that matter historians or linguists. Or at the very least, base your understanding on the explanations of verses by clerics. Viewing the explanations of Qur'anic verses provided by clerics (some available in English also), would enable you to have a grasp about the range of interpretations, as well as definitions of "vague" terms in the Qur'an. But instead you cite me Churchill & Von Mises, and pseudo-academics like Bernard Lewis and Bat Ye'or. ABOUT THE QUR'AN. And if you cannot do any of my suggestions, then may I suggest that you shut the hell up and go and busy yourself with heaping praises on the U.S constitution and alleged U.S "secularism"?

 

Ahh, the old excuse of "If you don't know Arabic you can't discuss" because everything that is not in Arabic "is wrong". I guess by that logic we shouldn't read Cervantes if we don't know Spanish, and we shouldn't read Confucius' Analects unless we know Mandarin. And to close off your rant you then tell me to "go shut the hell up". That's not very polite for a Musulman, now is it?

 

First, the "4 witnesses" thing is a myth. Which CLEARLY proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt (if there ever was a doubt, that is), that you have NO CLUE about Islam. And moreover, why are you asking ME, you asked the question, if you are arguing that it (your "4 witnesses" myth) does, then please prove a correlation between it and rape.

 

So it's a myth because you say so, eh? I guess the sources that do talk about it are all fabricated too? By the way, this last paragraph of yours is such an abomination of the English language that I should get 1000 posts added to my post count for reading through it and still coming out sane.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Anonymouse

[Anonymouse]

Sorry guys couldn't help myself,

Hey Sip those ladies are they twins?

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v96/Anonymouse/interesting2.jpg

[Sassun]

So why do you make the conclusoin that "rapists in the US are necessarily unreligious"? Why in the US? If rape transcends religion (as you claim), shouldn't rapists everywhere be considered "unreligious" by your standards? Why did you make it sound like the rapists in the US are somehow worse than rapists in other places?

Sorry I was away watching Khaled Mesha'al's very interesting press conference ....

Where did I make it sound like rapists in USA are worse than rapists in other places? I did not know that rapists could be categorized ...

[Sip]

What does repression have to do with this?

 

Police: Miss, did your husband beat you?

Woman: Yes.

Police: Would you like to press charges?

Woman: Why?

Police: Did you ask him to beat you up?

Woman: No he beats me all the time. That's the way things are.

Police: Miss, that's domestic abuse. You can file charges and he can go to jail.

Woman: What does domestic abuse have anything to do with this?

 

[Sip]

Where did I make it sound like rapists in USA are worse than rapists in other places? I did not know that rapists could be categorized ...

 

Most rapists are the most unreligious of people. At least the ones in USA...

 

Right there. You are implying US rapists are unreligious where as rapists in other places may not be.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Sip

[Sassun]

Police: Miss, did your husband beat you?

Woman: Yes.

Police: Would you like to press charges?

Woman: Why?

Police: Did you ask him to beat you up?

Woman: No he beats me all the time. That's the way things are.

Police: Miss, that's domestic abuse. You can file charges and he can go to jail.

Woman: What does domestic abuse have anything to do with this?

Sip , are you saying I am repressing my sexuality? LOL

[Sip]

Sip , are you saying I am repressing my sexuality? LOL

 

Yes.

[Sassun]

Right there. You are implying US rapists are unreligious where as rapists in other places may not be.

hahaha... so you ARE in fact admitting that unreligious = bad? :D Or else how could I be, according to you, making it sound like U.S rapists are "worse" than other rapists?

[Sip]

hahaha... so you ARE in fact admitting that unreligious = bad? :D Or else how could I be, according to you, making it sound like U.S rapists are "worse" than other rapists?

 

I didn't say that. I said it sounds like you are making the US rapist sound like they are worse by being "unreligous". If you didn't mean that, then no big deal. Why are you trying to twist your statement into something that I might have said?

 

The main question still remains. HOW did you come to the conclusion that the rapists in the US are mostly "unreligious" when according to your own statement, rape trascends religion so all rapists everywhere must be unreligious. How then are the rapists in the US any different and why did you bother making a distinction?

[Anileve]

Only when you can actually read Arabic, to be able to read the Qur'an "as is", rather than some inaccurate translations by people who are not even religious scholars or for that matter historians or linguists.

 

Most muslims do not need to KNOW Arabic, but only to read it (which I believe is a requirenment to being a true muslim). Big difference, because you can read something without understanding it. Same can be said of any other religion, the fact that it was altered in one way or the other.

 

I also don't understand the concept of being able to read it without understanding a word of it. What the heck is the point?

 

Muslims are also not allowed to listen to anything which degrades Muhammad, also it's a grave sin to question the Quran or the actions of the prophet.

 

The answer you gave me about Hijab was not what I asked for. I asked you of its origins and how it came about. By the way, did you know that the hijab was the responsibility of the men and not the wives of Muhammad? So, basically it wasn't really the women's decision but rather men's imposition.

 

By the way, for those of you who are bashing Islam, this is what's in store for you:

 

Those who harass believing men and believing women unjustifiably shall bear the guilt of slander and a grievous sin. O Prophet! Enjoin your wives, your daughters, and the wives of true believers to draw their cloaks over them [when they go out]. That is more proper, so that they may be distinguished and not be harassed. God is ever forgiving and merciful. If the hypocrites and those who have the ailment [of jealousy] in their hearts and the scandal mongers of Madinah do not desist, We will rouse you against them, and their days in that city will be numbered. Cursed be they; wherever found, they would be seized and put to death.

— Qur'an , 33:58-61

 

Zainab bint Jahsh bin Riyab - she was Muhammad’s paternal cousin, and even the Qur'an has a text about her marriage to him: "So when Zaid had accomplished his desire from her (i.e., divorced her), We gave her to you in marriage" (Q. 33:37). Muhammad married her in Dhul-Qa‘dah, the fifth year of Al-Hijra.

 

The veil tradition starte with the above story. Muhammad lusted after his cousin's wife, Zaynab, when his cousin found out he divorced her, out of guilt. Muhammad immediately married her and felt guilty (it seems that he felt guilty often, that's when Allah came to his rescue usually, to justify his actions and clear the guilt). So he declared that all women must from now on veil themselves not to intice men and not to arouse any devious thoughts. So it was really the women's fault. So you see, it wasn't just a message from above, it was convenient for Muhammad, because he basically could have any woman he wanted even if she was his cousin's wife.

Muhammad had 12 wives, one of which was 9 years old when he first had sex with her. He also married Sawda one month after the death of his first wife Khadija. I am sure that one month he suffered a LOT!

 

There was also Maria al-Qibtiyya (maria the copt) who was given to him as a gift and turned into a slave. Basically he had his way with her any time he felt like itn. Hence the anger from his other wives.

 

So Sassun, do you think that the 9 year old girl wanted to have sex with Muhammad or did Maria the Copt gladly welcomed her fate as his sex slave? Perhaps, that's what they would want you to believe, after all he was a magnificent person, why wouldn't a 9 year old want to have sex with a 40 year old man with an impressive number of wives?

 

 

A very moral guy, it seems. So great that there was a religion created based on his pious character.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Anileve

[Sassun]

Most muslims do not need to KNOW Arabic, but only to read it (which I believe is a requirenment to being a true muslim). Big difference, because you can read something without understanding it. Same can be said of any other religion, the fact that it was altered in one way or the other.

A religious education, as well as teaching sessions in the Mosque or community center (which are prevalent esp. in the West) , and prayers at the Mosque , allow for a full understanding of the text of the Qur'an. And in fact a great many non-Arab Muslims also do know and learn Arabic. Another misconception on your part. I bet wikipedia did not tell you that.

 

Muslims are also not allowed to listen to anything which degrades Muhammad, also it's a grave sin to question the Quran or the actions of the prophet.

 

The answer you gave me about Hijab was not what I asked for. I asked you of its origins and how it came about. By the way, did you know that the hijab was the responsibility of the men and not the wives of Muhammad? So, basically it wasn't really the women's decision but rather men's imposition.

 

By the way, for those of you who are bashing Islam, this is what's in store for you:

Zainab bint Jahsh bin Riyab - she was Muhammad’s paternal cousin, and even the Qur'an has a text about her marriage to him: "So when Zaid had accomplished his desire from her (i.e., divorced her), We gave her to you in marriage" (Q. 33:37). Muhammad married her in Dhul-Qa‘dah, the fifth year of Al-Hijra.

 

The veil tradition starte with the above story. Muhammad lusted after his cousin's wife, Zaynab, when his cousin found out he divorced her, out of guilt. Muhammad immediately married her and felt guilty (it seems that he felt guilty often, that's when Allah came to his rescue usually, to justify his actions and clear the guilt). So he declared that all women must from now on veil themselves not to intice men and not to arouse any devious thoughts. So it was really the women's fault. So you see, it wasn't just a message from above, it was convenient for Muhammad, because he basically could have any woman he wanted even if she was his cousin's wife.

Muhammad had 12 wives, one of which was 9 years old when he first had sex with her. He also married Sawda one month after the death of his first wife Khadija. I am sure that one month he suffered a LOT!

 

There was also Maria al-Qibtiyya (maria the copt) who was given to him as a gift and turned into a slave. Basically he had his way with her any time he felt like itn. Hence the anger from his other wives.

 

So Sassun, do you think that the 9 year old girl wanted to have sex with Muhammad or did Maria the Copt gladly welcomed her fate as his sex slave? Perhaps, that's what they would want you to believe, after all he was a magnificent person, why wouldn't a 9 year old want to have sex with a 40 year old man with an impressive number of wives?

A very moral guy, it seems. So great that there was a religion created based on his pious character.

Oh wow , so Muslims are not allowd to listen to anything degrading about Muhammad, so I bet you are trying to say you are oh-so-brave by bashing the Prophet ... very nice indeed. You seem to suffer from some sort of lack in your ego and probably needed to boost it. For the record, if I had wanted to read what "wikipedia" has to say about the Prophet, I would have gone and read it myself.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Sassun

[hijabbed]

Muhammad had 12 wives, one of which was 9 years old when he first had sex with her.

why wouldn't a 9 year old want to have sex with a 40 year old man with an impressive number of wives?

 

First of all, there is uncertainty over what age Aisha (ra) was at the time of marriage to the Prophet (saw). but yes she was young. now you see your lack of knowledge has once again defeated you in your aim to shame Muhammed (saw). Let me lay it down simple for you.

 

2000's - in this society we believe the "right" age to marry is in our mid to late 20's and early 30's. ..is it really right or merely just an evolved culture? eiether way theres nothing wrong with that.

 

Only a few centuries back, if a girl was in her 20's and unmarried she would be frowned upon. Society believed the age was to old for marriage. the gap ages between a husband n wife were also much more bigger...it was the norm then, but now we think its backward. give it a few centuries and our society will be backward to the future idiots..but we think its pretty damn good, modern etc etc.

 

The point im trying to make is, that in the time of prophet muhammed, it was a COMMON thing for girls who reached their puberty to get married to men. as soon as a girl started her mestruation she was considered, and became a women-all this teenage crap is new and was never their before. this is a fact, not my own theory to prove something to myself.

[vahan79]

Wow you guys are pretty damn racist.

fyi, the treatment of women in islam isnt 2nd class. get yo facts right.

 

The following should give you an insight into the status of a wife/women in islam.

[im not preaching, just tryna get rid of the stereotypes and misunderstandings]

 

"The Holy Prophet has said: O people, your wives have a certain right over you and you have certain rights over them. Treat them well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. (Tirmidhi)" (quote)

 

"Fair dealings and good behaviour is necessary towards everyone, but the Prophet , emphasised it especially towards women."

 

"Kindness to the wife, an aspect of faith"

 

The best men are those...

"The believers who show the most perfect faith are those who have the best disposition and the best of you are those who are best to their wives " (Tirmidhi)

 

i quote again, im not preaching.i just find it irratating when poeple act so ignorant.

 

 

 

Do you not see how those are not pro-woman at ALL!?!??! It assumes that men are the superior gender and all goodness to women is by and through their "grace." That is, in commanding men to treat women "fairly," "kind[ly]," etc., the subtext is that the treatment is at the mercy of men in the first place. And "helpers"..."HELPERS"!?!?!? That sounds like back-up singers. Helpers are ALWAYS second class. "I am the president of the company and this is my assistant (i.e., helper)" Does that scenario seem equal to you?

[vahan79]

Of course I know.

 

For starters, see Verse 31, Chapter 24 of the Qur'an.

 

First, the Hijab is a symbol of a woman's modesty. Second, the Hijab allows women to present themselves to society as human beings and not as "women". Since women's bodies cause sexual arousal (more than the other way around), then to safeguard a woman and also society from any ills, and to be able to function in society as an individual rather than a sex object, a woman should cover herself up.

 

(1) I think your statement that "the Hijab allows women to present themselves to society as human beings and not as 'women'" is actually a modern spin on the text. I think this smacks of one of the rationalizations or progressive interpretations that you disfavor. That is, it is a post hoc justification, rather than the true reason behind the rule.

 

(2) As for the real reason, i.e., preventing men from getting aroused (which, by the way, you earlier stated that I was wrong that that was the purpose of hijab, but whatever). You are so inculcated in this belief system that you don't see the glaring fault in this line of reasoning. First, why does female sexuality bring about ills unto society. Second, why is the onus not on these "horny" men (that's essentially what you are saying) to CONTROL THEMSELVES. Why should women have to cover up so that men not be tempted and society not fall into dysfunction? By inhibiting female sexuality you are in effect demonizing it, treating IT as the root of the problem; the problem, if any are the MEN who are unable to control themselves. This is like putting the potential murder victims in prison to protect them from the murderers, instead of the other way around!! It's illogical.

 

(3) That female sexual impulse is any less is far from scientifically proven. Women are socialized (especially in certain cultures, the Islamic one being a huge one) to not be sexual. Men, on the other hand, are allowed to be sexual openly and overtly. It is not true that "women's bodies cause sexual arousal (more than the other way around)"...men's bodies cause arousal, too, but women are socialized to fight their arousal.

 

(4) Men should cover up, too, because gay men in society will be sexually aroused by men (assuming men are the more sexual). Isn't the arousal of gay men even MORE dangerous in Islam to the undermining of society than that of straight men?

[Sassun]

(1) I think your statement that "the Hijab allows women to present themselves to society as human beings and not as 'women'" is actually a modern spin on the text. I think this smacks of one of the rationalizations or progressive interpretations that you disfavor. That is, it is a post hoc justification, rather than the true reason behind the rule.

It is not a progressive spin. It is the reason for it.

 

(2) As for the real reason, i.e., preventing men from getting aroused (which, by the way, you earlier stated that I was wrong that that was the purpose of hijab, but whatever). You are so inculcated in this belief system that you don't see the glaring fault in this line of reasoning. First, why does female sexuality bring about ills unto society. Second, why is the onus not on these "horny" men (that's essentially what you are saying) to CONTROL THEMSELVES. Why should women have to cover up so that men not be tempted and society not fall into dysfunction? By inhibiting female sexuality you are in effect demonizing it, treating IT as the root of the problem; the problem, if any are the MEN who are unable to control themselves. This is like putting the potential murder victims in prison to protect them from the murderers, instead of the other way around!! It's illogical.

First, it is not the "real reason". It is one of the reasons/aspects of why women are to wear the Hijab. Second, I did not single out female sexuality as bringing ills upon society, but rather, unrestrained sexuality in general, whether male or female, doing so. In that respect my discourse is not gendered! Third, the onus is on both the female and the male. The female is expected to cover up, and the male is expected to control himself. The two are complementary.

 

(3) That female sexual impulse is any less is far from scientifically proven. Women are socialized (especially in certain cultures, the Islamic one being a huge one) to not be sexual. Men, on the other hand, are allowed to be sexual openly and overtly. It is not true that "women's bodies cause sexual arousal (more than the other way around)"...men's bodies cause arousal, too, but women are socialized to fight their arousal.

What is there to 'like' about men's bodies? I mean, when a woman looks at a man, she looks at his body? His legs? And anyway, men are also supposed to cover up parts of their body including their chest, and cannot wear shorts up to a certain length.

 

(4) Men should cover up, too, because gay men in society will be sexually aroused by men (assuming men are the more sexual). Isn't the arousal of gay men even MORE dangerous in Islam to the undermining of society than that of straight men?

See above reply on men covering up.

 

[vahan79]

A religious education, as well as teaching sessions in the Mosque or community center (which are prevalent esp. in the West) , and prayers at the Mosque , allow for a full understanding of the text of the Qur'an. And in fact a great many non-Arab Muslims also do know and learn Arabic. Another misconception on your part. I bet wikipedia did not tell you that.

Oh wow , so Muslims are not allowd to listen to anything degrading about Muhammad, so I bet you are trying to say you are oh-so-brave by bashing the Prophet ... very nice indeed. You seem to suffer from some sort of lack in your ego and probably needed to boost it. For the record, if I had wanted to read what "wikipedia" has to say about the Prophet, I would have gone and read it myself.

 

A note on learning Arabic to read the Qur'an.

 

(1) Whenever you learn any second language through study (i.e., not as a child), you learn it through your native language, right? So you gain no more understanding of the language than you ever will. For example, if I learn that "sabah" is Arabic for "morning", then when I read "sabah" I am understanding Arabic, BUT my understanding of Arabic always comes back to how I learned the word, i.e., from the English word morning. Yes, you can learn nuances about the language and understand it, but just as those will have to be explained to you, they can be explained to you in an English text (or your native language) text. See? So it doesn't matter if you learn Arabic or not.

 

(2) Even Arabs have to learn the Arabic in the Qur'an. Yes, they might learn this type of Arabic in school, but it is STILL NOT THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE. Their native language is whatever region they are from. For instance, I guarantee that the Qur'an doesn't use the word "shoo" for "what?" as a Lebanese person does. So even the Lebonese has to learn the standard/classical Arabic (albeit at a young age and in school), but their understanding of the Qur'an based on their native language is like an American's of Shakespeare. The point being, NO ONE can really REALLY understand the Qur'an in the truest sense.

 

 

[vahan79]

It is not a progressive spin. It is the reason for it.

First, it is not the "real reason". It is one of the reasons/aspects of why women are to wear the Hijab. Second, I did not single out female sexuality as bringing ills upon society, but rather, unrestrained sexuality in general, whether male or female, doing so. In that respect my discourse is not gendered! Third, the onus is on both the female and the male. The female is expected to cover up, and the male is expected to control himself. The two are complementary.

What is there to 'like' about men's bodies? I mean, when a woman looks at a man, she looks at his body? His legs? And anyway, men are also supposed to cover up parts of their body including their chest, and cannot wear shorts up to a certain length.

See above reply on men covering up.

 

(1) I know that men are supposed to cover up; however, other than an Indonesian friend I had growing up, it seems that NO other Muslims I have met observe this rule. So, what's up with that? (btw, my friend would cover his chest, below the elbows, and below the knee)

 

(2) You are saying that is the reason, but where do you get that from? It is not in the text, right?

 

(3) The men is not expected to control himself really, though, right? Because there is no NEED for control because no one is attracted to a black blob of cloth! Sorry, but I'm just keeping it real. Also, if men controled themselves, there would be no need for women to cover up. Problem solved. (Also, where does it talk about men controling themselves...specifically men, and specifically as complementary to a woman's hijab?) I think that is progressive spin, too.

[Sassun]

A note on learning Arabic to read the Qur'an.

 

(1) Whenever you learn any second language through study (i.e., not as a child), you learn it through your native language, right? So you gain no more understanding of the language than you ever will. For example, if I learn that "sabah" is Arabic for "morning", then when I read "sabah" I am understanding Arabic, BUT my understanding of Arabic always comes back to how I learned the word, i.e., from the English word morning. Yes, you can learn nuances about the language and understand it, but just as those will have to be explained to you, they can be explained to you in an English text (or your native language) text. See? So it doesn't matter if you learn Arabic or not.

First, that is untrue... I have learned both Arabic and English, aside from Armenian, as 2nd and third languages (Arabic is 2nd if not 3rd language in Armenian schools), and my command of Arabic is better than that of Arabs (I think in Arabic), and whenever I speak in English, I think in English.

Yes, a translation can explain things, but my point is, is that translation accurate? In most cases, it is not. And anyway, there is much debate even among clerics about the context of some words in ARABIC, so when a translator translates that word into English, then he is automatically choosing one context over another...

 

(2) Even Arabs have to learn the Arabic in the Qur'an. Yes, they might learn this type of Arabic in school, but it is STILL NOT THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE. Their native language is whatever region they are from. For instance, I guarantee that the Qur'an doesn't use the word "shoo" for "what?" as a Lebanese person does. So even the Lebonese has to learn the standard/classical Arabic (albeit at a young age and in school), but their understanding of the Qur'an based on their native language is like an American's of Shakespeare. The point being, NO ONE can really REALLY understand the Qur'an in the truest sense.

What is your point here? We all learn classical Arabic / written English / written Armenian. All of which are different than the spoken versions / slang / different dialects. Someone who has knowledge of classical Arabic can understand most of the Qur'an, with some exceptions. And for the exceptions (and explanations of contextual material), there are clerics, as well as debate sessions on explanation of Qur'an! It is a give-and-take, to arrive at a better understanding of the Qur'an!

 

[Sassun]

(1) I know that men are supposed to cover up; however, other than an Indonesian friend I had growing up, it seems that NO other Muslims I have met observe this rule. So, what's up with that? (btw, my friend would cover his chest, below the elbows, and below the knee)

All the practicing Muslim men I know observe this and cover up...

 

(2) You are saying that is the reason, but where do you get that from? It is not in the text, right?

What isn't in the text? Everything I have said thus far comes from either the Qur'an or the Hadiths.

 

(3) The men is not expected to control himself really, though, right? Because there is no NEED for control because no one is attracted to a black blob of cloth! Sorry, but I'm just keeping it real. Also, if men controled themselves, there would be no need for women to cover up. Problem solved. (Also, where does it talk about men controling themselves...specifically men, and specifically as complementary to a woman's hijab?) I think that is progressive spin, too.

It is not a progressive spin, I repeat. You might want to check out some of the Hadiths (I will dig out some for you) on this issue. Men are expected to control themselves just as much as women are. Of course men are attracted to women, but this attraction is far more controlled than it would have been if women went around half-naked... If we control ourselves there would still be the need for women to cover up, because men are human beings and can be tempted by their arousal and therefore there need to be limits on the way women dress. And second, because that is not the ONLY reason that women cover up....

[Sip]

Does Islam recognize the fact that women are also attracted to men?

[Sassun]

By the way, I must add, that there is a long history of dislike betw. Ali (and thus the Shiites) and Aisha...

[Sassun]

Does Islam recognize the fact that women are also attracted to men?

Of course !

[Sip]

Oh ok so men are attracted to women, women need to cover head to toe. Women are attracted to men yet men don't need to cover head to toe. As is being discussed. I just wanted to make sure I understood correctly that in fact Islam is unfair to women in this case too.

[Sassun]

Oh ok so men are attracted to women, women need to cover head to toe. Women are attracted to men yet men don't need to cover head to toe. As is being discussed. I just wanted to make sure I understood correctly that in fact Islam is unfair to women in this case too.

Sip, women's bodies have historically been emphasized in terms of sexuality far more than the male body! For a good reason, too.

[Sassun]

btw , i think we are boring Nairi with our disappointing discussion hahaha.