On the loose sexual morality of Muslims

[Petr]

As I cited Thomas Fleming in here:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2515&page=2&highlight=braun

"The simple answer is that Gibbon was a religious skeptic, and like other skeptics of the 18th century, he was irritated by Christian morality that told him to take only one wife, whom he could not divorce. The sensuality of the Muslim view of life and the afterlife and the cynicism of its politics appeals to the imagination of anti-Christian skeptics of every age and, at the very least, prepares them to take the Muslim side in every Balkan war."

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Fleming/NewsTF100203.html


Yes, indeed - it may now seem quite incredible, but before secularist nihilism (and neo-pagan glorification of loose sex) had caused a nearly complete collapse of the strict sexual morality that had made the Western civilization possible, it was common for Westerners look down on Muslims as sexually promiscuous people.

For example, witness this comment from Martin Luther's Table Talk:

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19046&highlight=cazianus

"DCCCXXXI.

The Turks are the people of the wrath of God. `Tis horrible to see their contempt of marriage. `Twas not so with the Romans."


Here Luther comments further on the Islamic institution of muta marriage:

"The third point is that Mohammed’s Koran has no regard for marriage, but permits everyone to take wives as he will. It is customary among the Turks for one man to have ten or twenty wives and to desert or sell any whom he will, so that in Turkey women are held immeasurable cheap and are despised; they are bought and sold like cattle. Although there may be some few who do not take advantage of this law, nevertheless, this is the law and anyone who wants to can follow it. That kind of living is not and cannot be marriage, because none of them takes or has a wife with the intention of staying with her forever, as though the two were one body, as God’s word says in Genesis 3, “Therefore a man cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh.” Thus the marriage of the Turks closely resembles the chaste life soldiers lead with their harlots, for the Turks are soldiers and must act like soldiers; Mars and Venus, say the poets, must be together. These are the three points I wanted to mention. I am sure of them from the Koran of the Turks. … "

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1358055/posts


Here is a more detailed description on this system:

http://www.blessedquietness.com/alhaj/page20.htm

MUTA MARRIAGE

During a Jihad expedition (holy war) Muhammed's men came to him very frustrated. As reported in Al Hadis, Vol. 2, p. 686, Ibn Masud reported, "We were fighting with the Messenger of Allah, and our wives were not with us. We asked the Messenger of Allah, 'Should we castrate ourselves?' The Holy Prophet forbade us from that, and then he allowed us Muta (temporary) marriage. So, we all married wives for a fixed time (usually three days) for the dowry of a piece of cloth." Attested by agreement.

This is nothing but chasing whores with Allah's approval, and we note that the wife back home was purchased for life with a handful of dates, while the three-night-stand lady was worth a nice piece of cloth. The Muslim wife is a cheap commodity!


Petr

[daisy]

the wife back home was purchased for life with a handful of dates, while the three-night-stand lady was worth a nice piece of cloth. the muslim wife is a cheap commodity! that figures.
many treat strangers better than their own people.

[Petr]

Pinging, with some new info provided by gayboy Raimondo:

Not that there’s anything wrong with drag queens, provided they’re either entertaining or convincing. I once saw a group of them standing on a Jalan Sultan Ismail in Kuala Lumpur, on Christmas eve: they seemed like young and very girlish elves, so small and willowy were they, calling out in their singsong voices. More feminine than your average American woman, in any case: exclaiming on their beauty, I was corrected by my young, uh, guide, who assured me that these were “lady-boys.” (Another of life’s little ironies: there are more lady-boys on Jalan Sultan Ismail, a busy thoroughfare in a supposedly Islamic country, than there ever were on San Francisco’s Castro Street. )

http://www.takimag.com/site/article/giulianis_closet/


Petr

[Jimbo Gomez]

When Mehmed took Constantinople, he added both the Emperor's daughter AND his son to his harem. Gay marriage in the moslem world right there. :)

[Cyprian]

When Mehmed took Constantinople, he added both the Emperor's daughter AND his son to his harem. Gay marriage in the moslem world right there. :)I know these requests can be a little annoying, but do you know of any links to the relevant info? I'd be interested to read a bit about it.

[kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman]

Islam is a religion that makes people into bad people. Ideally, religion is supposed to make you a good person.

It encourages violance against non-muslims, encourages screwing everything that walks, encourages accepting a bunch of stuff with no evidence. The worst part is that it wants to spread, its not like Judaism, which just wants a small group of people to practice. It really disgusts me. It disgusts me that sexual degeneracy would be seen as a virtue, and self-control a vice. That is backwards.

Years ago, I used to respect Islam. I read a translation of the Koran. I used to see it as people with strong views and dicipline. Now I realize its no better than Planned Parenthood.

[Jimbo Gomez]

I know these requests can be a little annoying, but do you know of any links to the relevant info? I'd be interested to read a bit about it.

I read this somewhere in a book many years ago. I honestly can't remember where. Sorry.

w00t, post 12000

[delete]

ISLAM AND HOMOSEXUALITY

Before the emergence of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula, all kinds of sexuality was being experienced. Although we don't have many documents related to the age, it is understood from the references in the Kur'an that sexuality was not a taboo. Actually Islam didn't mention any strict sexual rules either. If we just take Kur'an as the reference, it may even be called a sex positive religion.The only reference to homosexuality is in the sections about Sodom and Gomorrah. But even in those sections homosexuality is not very clearly condemned. People are punished because of having done everything excessively. They don't only sleep with men, they sleep with women too, they drink too much, they got involved in pleasure too much. "Much" is the keyword here.

And the punishment for almost all crimes are mentioned in the Kur'an but there's no specific punishment for homosexuality. But these sections in Kur'an have always been the defending point of homophobic Islamic people.What brings condemnation to homosexuals is not the Kur'an but the Islamic societies. Cultures also shape the religion as well as the society itself.

During the first years of Islam, homosexuality was never mentioned as a crime. There are even rumors that Ali, one of the members of Mohammed's family had an affair with Mohammed. And in the famous 1001 Arabian Nights, there are some stories which are openly about homosexual relationships. But this did not mean that there was a conscious homosexual community. If those people knew the word "homosexual" they wouldn't call themselves so. It was just sleeping with men as well as with women.

In Islamic cultures homosexual relationships were not very open. But they were not in complete secrecy either. Everything was all right as long as it was done behind closed gates and was not talked about. But with modernization, this changed in the Islamic societies. AS it is easy to comment Kur'an in the negative way, homosexuality started to be accepted as a crime and it is punished.

Homosexuality is a legal crime and forbidden in most of Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.Whatever is forbidden is more attractive and homosexuality is not a habit that can be banned. So in all of these countries people are engaged in homosexual activity. As there are punishments for the act, everything is done in secret. Turkey is one of these countries where there is no problem when everything is done secretly.



OTTOMAN CULTURE

Ottomans ruled between 1299 and 1923 till the foundation of Turkish Republic. They had been Moslems long before and they didn't have much from their pre-Islamic period. Things were organized according to Islamic system, from state system to social services. So the rules about sex were from Islam too. Men could marry four women and even the way he should treat them were mentioned in the Kur'an. But as there are only vague references to homosexuality in Kur'an, it has never been an issue.Sleeping with men who are usually referred as "boys" was very common.It was not something looked upon.

The reputation of hamams (baths) in Turkey comes from this age. The "tellaks" (young boys who helped men to have a bath) did not only work for washing the men. They also served as male prostitutes. There is a book in the Ottoman archives called "Dellakname-i Dilkusa" (The Record of Tellaks). It tells about the most famous "tellaks" of Istanbul. The way they serve their customers, their price, how many times they can make you reach orgasm, the rate of their beauty and many more details are mentioned in this book.

Literature is one of the areas where there is eternal freedom of homosexuality. ottoman Literature is called "Divan Literature". In Divan Literature there are many poems written by male poets about their male lovers. These poems were about how beautiful these boy lovers were. None of these the poet talks about his boy lover and he complains that his beard is starting to grow and because of this his beauty is going away. Boys were maybe kind of substitutes for women who had smooth skin with no hairs. Those poems are in a very old fashioned, hard to understand Turkish which is called Ottoman and are in literature books for high school students.There was no pressure from the authorities on the poets for writing such poems about boys. Actually sex with boys were not legally forbidden and even the sultans were engaged in sex with male boys.

Some of the sultans had famous affairs with boys. There was even a palace for boys in Bursa. In this palace sultan kept many young boys who served the men in the army. In the Ottoman Times the army was at war away from home for months and sometimes years. It was not something logical to take women with them.SO they took those boys from the palace. They could fight soldiers during day time and at night they visited the soldiers` tents for their special service.This tradition just like in other Islamic cultures was not conscious homosexuality. These men were engaged in sex with women too and sex with boys were just something pleasant for them and they thought they really needed women. Because one of the main orders of Islam is to breed.That's why they needed women.

This tolerance for homosexuality disappeared in the early 19th century with the adoption of western culture. The sultans went on some renovations and the source was France. With the changes in the governmental and social system, the ideas were adopted too. Because of Christianity, male to male sex was strongly refused in the European culture. This effected ottoman society too and those kind of relationships were started to be looked upon.But of course a tradition that had been going on for such a long time didn't disappear. There is still a hamam culture which is still going on but not as common as it used to be. And extreme nationalists who take great pride in ottoman culture still deny this side of Ottomans.

http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/world/europe/turkey/islamottoman.htm

The Turkish army is supposed to be famous for buggery in Nato, by the way.

[Jimbo Gomez]

I think it's time I cleaned up this thread.

[Billy Score]

Whether these accounts are true or not (and they may not be THAT reliable, considering one even tries to claim the Romans were prudes), today there is no doubt that Muslims are morally far superior to europeans. If anything it should show how far Europe has declined spiritually rather than as praise to Muslims, although they certainly deserve it for resisting this same poison in their own community.

edit: holy christ this thread was 3 pages long when i responded... boro kash won't be happy.

[Slavic Enforcer]

Whether these accounts are true or not (and they may not be THAT reliable, considering one even tries to claim the Romans were prudes), today there is no doubt that Muslims are morally far superior to europeans. If anything it should show how far Europe has declined spiritually rather than as praise to Muslims, although they certainly deserve it for resisting this same poison in their own community.

To the most muslims it's "normal" that a 40-year old (or even older) guy marries a 14-years old girl.
So I wouldn't say that they are morally far superior.

edit: holy christ this thread was 3 pages long when i responded... boro kash won't be happy.

Boro Kash understands that Lord of the Dicks realized he made a mistake. :)

[Sean]

Islam is a religion that makes people into bad people. Ideally, religion is supposed to make you a good person.

It encourages violance against non-muslims, encourages screwing everything that walks, encourages accepting a bunch of stuff with no evidence. The worst part is that it wants to spread, its not like Judaism, which just wants a small group of people to practice. It really disgusts me. It disgusts me that sexual degeneracy would be seen as a virtue, and self-control a vice. That is backwards.

Though your claims are surely bloated, I should comment here that Islam, unlike Christianity, takes into account human nature. Islam, also unlike Christianity, doesn't see man as inherently depraved--and I see this as a mark in its favor.

[ZOGsoldier]

Islam, unlike Christianity, takes into account human nature.

So it takes into account that some people will be child molesters and then says marrying 10 year old girls is OK. How is that a good thing?

[Boleslaw]

There's quite a lot of overt eroticism within Arab poetry and culture in general.

Then there's the old image of the harem. In fact during the Victorian era, stories about the wild orgies in involved in them was often used to set young people on the straight path.

[Petr]

Then there's the old image of the harem. In fact during the Victorian era, stories about the wild orgies in involved in them was often used to set young people on the straight path.
Yeah, those horrendously un-PC times of prudery.

Here's some of that Victorian judgmentalism (1896):


As already stated, there are exceptions, but in the main the condition of the Turkish women is very low. This condition reacts upon the men and makes them vulgar and sensual in the extreme. The everyday language of the average Turk would shock the lowest of the slum boys in our own cities. Under ordinary circumstances sensualism is kept measurably in check by the inevitable restraints of community life, but once let those be broken and lust reigns supreme, dominating everything. As a gentleman who knows them well and never hesitates to recognize their good qualities, has said, “In a Turk’s eye all that a woman has is sex, and for it he lusts with absolute brutality.”

http://armenianhouse.org/bliss/turkey/04-turks.html


Petr

[B-Pep]

More proof of the inherit feminism of the buybull. Why shouldn't men have more than one wife, if he can provide for them? Men, unlike women, can make children more than once every 9 months, it's natural for men to have more sexual partners.

[Petr]

From The Wall Street Journal. Shows nicely the kind of hypocritical wink-and-nudge attitude Islamic world has throughout ages adopted towards buggery:

http://blogs.wsj.com/informedreader/2007/04/03/gay-life-thrives-quietly-in-saudi-arabia/print/


April 3, 2007, 6:47 pm

Gay Life Thrives, Quietly, in Saudi Arabia


Gay life is flourishing in Saudi Arabia, despite the country’s puritanical laws. The kingdom’s adherence to sharia, or Islamic law, as its sole legal code largely impedes socializing between men and women. Nadya Labi reports in the May issue of the Atlantic (subscription required) that such strict separation in many ways has made it easier to be gay than straight in a society that forbids all sexual activity outside of marriage.

Sodomy remains punishable by death in the kingdom, which maintains long lists of prohibitions — against smoking, drinking or going to discos. In many homes, families won’t allow a man to be alone with an unrelated woman, but that standard doesn’t apply to companions of the same sex. For some Saudis, the strict limits on gender-mixing have made homosexual relationships a safer or more accessible option, as long as the behavior is kept private. Consequently, cities like Riyadh and Jeddah have emerged as centers of gay life in the Middle East. As it has elsewhere, the Internet has provided a convenient way for people to connect privately — Web access has grown tenfold in the kingdom since 2000.

While the West associates homosexual behavior with sexual orientation, the Middle East traditionally hasn’t — homosexual behavior often is regarded as an act, not an orientation. Many people who act on sexual urges don’t consider themselves gay, and others dismiss past homosexual behavior in their lives as part of growing up. Even the 18th century religious scholar who founded Wahhabism, the fundamentalist form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, drew a distinction between homosexual desire and homosexual acts. Today, gays in Saudi Arabia operate under something akin to a Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell shield — parents who suspect their children are homosexual say nothing, rather than risk any shame that knowledge of the truth might bring.

Still, in a country where nearly everyone — gay and straight — lives a highly restricted life, gay rights aren’t a subject of discussion. Western gay pride advocacy is seen as “too much a masquerade for attention,” says one gay Saudi man. “Women’s rights, gay rights — why? Get your rights without being too loud.” – Nick Timiraos

[Ratatoskur]

A handful of fruit for some chicks versus running around in astoundingly stupid circles for what we term "woman" nowadays? Where does one sign up for this "Islam" thing?

[Petr]

And I guess we might now proceed to the very worst materials.

In Muhammad's Quran itself, there are passages (describing the Islamic paradise) that could be very easily interpreted as homo-pedo insinuations. And no, this is not mere WFHermanesque paranoia:

The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of "males") was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like "natural eunuchs," underage boys also lacked the "defining skill of males" (sexual potency with women). The Qur'an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:

52:17-29 And they shall have boys [ghilmaan] circulating among them as if they were hidden pearls.

56:22-23 and dark-eyed ones [hoorun 'eenun], the like of hidden pearls

76:19 And immortal boys [wildaanun mukhalladoona] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.

2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in [the gardens] …

4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in them …
...

These historical facts conform to the highly erotic Koranic description of the paradisaic boys, who are ever-young, pretty like pearls, dressed in silk and brocades, and wear bracelets. Above all, like Ganymede they serve wine in cups of crystal.
http://reactor-core.org/islamic-homosexuality.html

With such fabulous moral guidance available from their supreme spiritual leader, it's no wonder that Islamic societies got a certain reputation in the pre-PC Western countries...

A Moslem who is the active partner in sexual relations with other men is not considered a “homosexual” (the word has no pre-modern Arabic equivalent); quite the contrary, his sexual domination of another man may even confer a status of hyper-masculinity. He may use other men as substitutes for women, and at the same time have great contempt for them. This depraved view of sex, common in mainstream Moslem societies, is commonly found in the West only in prisons. In all cases it is the presence of love, affection, or equality among sexual partners that is intolerable. Equality in sexual relations is unimaginable in Islam, whether heterosexual or homosexual. Sex in Islamic societies has never been about mutuality between partners, but about the adult male’s achievement of pleasure through domination.

Historically, this state of affairs was not concealed from Western observers who were fascinated, shocked, and often attracted by the outward appearances of rampant, barely concealed pederasty. By 1800, a European traveler to Egypt wrote:

“The inconceivable inclination which has dishonored the Greeks and Persians of antiquity constitutes the delight, or, more properly speaking the infamy of the Egyptians ... the contagion has seized the poor as well as the rich.”

The “contagion” in question was spelled out more bluntly by an earlier writer, Thomas Sherley, describing the Turks:

“For their Sodommerye they use it soe publiquely and impudentlye as an honest Christian woulde shame to companye his wyffe as they do with their buggeringe boys (9).”

A 17th century French visitor to the Middle East went so far as to claim that Moslems were bisexual by nature, and many male authors gave descriptions of “licentiousness” (lesbianism) among women in harems and bath houses. Homosexuality became known to the English as the “Persian” or “Turkish” vice.

This peculiar aspect of the Middle East has never entirely disappeared. The sight of men, even soldiers in uniform, strolling along a street hand in hand, strikes first-time visitors as extraordinary even today. The Moslem world enjoyed a reputation as a haven for sex with boys and men well into the twentieth century. The proclivities of many Western authors like Gustave Flaubert, Oscar Wilde, or Andre Gide, reflected the pederast and homosexual attractions of the Islamic world; the fascination continues in the “gay culture” of our own time:
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={DE9BC115-7388-46A3-8ED9-813BD71AEA25}


And so it was with this cultural background that Turkish Sultan Mehmet II wanted to complete his conquest of Constantinople by defiling captured Greek youths - witness the martyrdom of Duke Notaras:

Notaras, his Palaiologina wife and his son were all captured by the Turks and originally granted clemency in the name of reestablishing order and in exchange for much of Notaras's fortune, which he had had the sense to invest elsewhere. Nonetheless, he was shortly executed along with his son and Kantakouzenos son-in-law. This may have simply been due to the capricious Sultan rethinking the wisdom of allowing a noble with ties to the Vatican and Venice to live; Gibbon believes he was caught already in the middle of such intrigue. The more common story, however, is that given by Runciman:

The kindness that Mehmed had shown to the Emperor's surviving ministers was of short duration.... Five days after the fall of the city [3 June] he gave a banquet. In the course of it, when he was well flushed with wine, someone whispered to him that Notaras's fourteen-year old son was a boy of exceptional beauty. The Sultan at once sent a eunuch to the house of the [Megas Doux] to demand that the boy be sent to him for his pleasure. Notaras, whose elder sons had been killed fighting, refused to sacrifice the boy to such a fate. Police were then sent to bring Notaras with his son and his young son-in-law, the son of the Grand Domestic Andronicus Cantacuzenus, into the Sultan's presence. When Notaras still defied the Sultan, orders were given for him and the two boys to be decapitated on the spot. Notaras merely asked that they should be slain before him, lest the sight of his death should make them waver. When they had both perished he bared his neck to the executioner. The following day nine other Greek notables were arrested and sent to the scaffold. (151)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loukas_Notaras

See also:

Libertine poets such as the Baghdad poet Abu Nuwas (750?–813?) flaunted their sexual conquests, often Christian wine boys, some of whom they plied with wine in order to subdue. [9] While some of these poems appear to describe affectionate relationships, others are clear depictions of rape, as is this quatrain by Mamayah al-Rumi:

The art of liwat is the way of masculinity and might
So leave Laylah to Majnun, and Azzah with Kuthayyir,
And go up to every beardless boy, strip him, and even if he cries,
Present him with your prick and fuck him by force. [10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_the_Islamic_lands#Literature_and_teachings

Some additional comments from a Christian former foreign missionary:

2) The point is clear-- sodomy is a vice common to many Arab Muslims, and this is well known to anyone familiar with Middle Eastern life. I have had Arab converts to Christ warn me of this as I told them I had a zeal to witness to Arabs. They were concerned for my sons. This picture is still very real in Saudi Arabia where the desert Bedouin are totally clean of sodomy, while the city-dwelling Arab men of the Hadhramaut, Riyadh, and the northern cities, Mecca and Jiddah, are well known for their lust for young boys. ( 19 )
http://www.blessedquietness.com/alhaj/page20.htm


It seems that Mullahs can also compete with Talmudic rabbis in legally institutionalizing perversions:

From the disgusting sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini

The Tahrirolvasyleh quotes seem to be doing the rounds on the net and are causing much distress to the Khomeini kids, who either feign ignorance or deny the book exists. Funny that, because Tahrirolvasyleh is one of Khomeini's major works and is studied in detail by the Akhoonds. Then again it was written in Arabic, making it inaccessible to most Iranians. Tahrirolvasyleh is an Iranicised version of its Arabic title 'Tahrir al Wasilah', Khomeini's ramblings on fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence). It comes in two volumes and was written by Khomeini whilst he was in Turkey. Not only does this literary masterpiece exist, but we have a downloadable version for your viewing pleasure.

Tahrir.zip

A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate vaginally, but sodomising the child is acceptable. If a man does penetrate and damage the child then, he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl will not count as one of his four permanent wives and the man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister... It is better for a girl to marry at such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband's house, rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven. ["Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth edition, Qom, Iran, 1990]

A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, but selling the meat to a neighbouring village is reasonable. ["Tahrirolvasyleh"]

If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned.

Wine and all intoxicating beverages are impure, but opium and hashish are not.

If a man sodomises the son, brother, or father of his wife after their marriage, the marriage remains valid.

...
http://ethnikoi.org/iran.html


Petr

[Petr]

A handful of fruit for some chicks versus running around in astoundingly stupid circles for what we term "woman" nowadays? Where does one sign up for this "Islam" thing?
Well, as Thomas Fleming already put it:

"The simple answer is that Gibbon was a religious skeptic, and like other skeptics of the 18th century, he was irritated by Christian morality that told him to take only one wife, whom he could not divorce. The sensuality of the Muslim view of life and the afterlife and the cynicism of its politics appeals to the imagination of anti-Christian skeptics of every age and, at the very least, prepares them to take the Muslim side in very Balkan war."

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=131193

In the bygone days, many unprincipled European wretches used to become renegadoes, mercenary converts to Islam who would go on employing their seafaring talents in the service of Moorish slave-hunters - one might call them yesterday's wiggers...

Take the Dutchman Jan Janszoon for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon


Petr

[Petr]

It is noteworthy detail that in the Western Christian culture-sphere, sodomistical decadence has openly surfaced only in wealthy countries - as one of the signs of materialistic self-indulgence and the following lack of moral focus. (Prophet Ezekiel notes that the city of Sodom itself enjoyed "fullness of bread and abundance of idleness.")

But in the Islamic world, sodomy is rampant not only in oil-rich Gulf Arab states but also in shitty-poor ones like Afghanistan...

Kandahar comes out of the closet

The Times | Saturday, January 12, 2002 / from Tim Reid in Kandahar

Our correspondent sees the gay capital of South Asia throw off strictures of the Taleban


NOW that Taleban rule is over in Mullah Omar’s former southern stronghold, it is not only televisions, kites and razors which have begun to emerge.

Visible again, too, are men with their ashna, or beloveds: young boys they have groomed for sex.

Kandahar’s Pashtuns have been notorious for their homosexuality for centuries, particularly their fondness for naive young boys. Before the Taleban arrived in 1994, the streets were filled with teenagers and their sugar daddies, flaunting their relationship.

It is called the homosexual capital of south Asia. Such is the Pashtun obsession with sodomy — locals tell you that birds fly over the city using only one wing, the other covering their posterior — that the rape of young boys by warlords was one of the key factors in Mullah Omar mobilising the Taleban.

In the summer of 1994, a few months before the Taleban took control of the city, two commanders confronted each other over a young boy whom they both wanted to sodomise.

In the ensuing fight civilians were killed. Omar’s group freed the boy and appeals began flooding in for Omar to help in other disputes.

By November, Omar and his Taleban were Kandahar’s new rulers. Despite the Taleban disdain for women, and the bizarre penchant of many for eyeliner, Omar immediately suppressed homosexuality.

Men accused of sodomy faced the punishment of having a wall toppled on to them, usually resulting in death. In February 1998 three men sentenced to death for sodomy in Kandahar were taken to the base of a huge mud and brick wall, which was pushed over by tank. Two of them died, but one managed to survive.

“In the days of the Mujahidin, there were men with their ashna everywhere, at every corner, in shops, on the streets, in hotels: it was completely open, a part of life,” said Torjan, 38, one of the soldiers loyal to Kandahar’s new governor, Gul Agha Sherzai.

“But in the later Mujahidin years, more and more soldiers would take boys by force, and keep them for as long as they wished. But when the Taleban came, they were very strict about the ban. Of course, it still happened — the Taleban could not enter every house — but one could not see it.”

But for the first time since the Taleban fled, in the past three days, one can see the pairs returning: usually a heavily bearded man, seated next to, or walking with, a clean-shaven, fresh faced youth. There appears to be no shame or furtiveness about them, although when approached, they refuse to talk to a western journalist.

“They are just emerging again,” Torjan said. “The fighters too now have the boys in their barracks. This was brought to the attention of Gul Agha, who ordered the boys to be expelled, but it continues. The boys live with the fighters very openly. In a short time, and certainly within a year, it will be like pre-Taleban: they will be everywhere.”

This Pashtun tradition is even reflected in Pashtun poetry, odes written to the beauty and complexion of an ashna, but it is usually a terrible fate for the boys concerned. It is practised at all levels of Pashtun society, but for the poorer men, having an ashna can raise his status.

“When a man sees a boy he likes — the age they like is 15 or 16 — they will approach him in the street and start talking to him, offering him tea,” said Muhammad Shah, a shop owner. “Sometimes they go looking in the football stadium, or in the cinema (which has yet to reopen).

“He then starts to give him presents, hashish, or a watch, a ring, or even a motorbike. One of the most valued presents is a fighting pigeon, which can be worth up to $400 (£277). These boys are nearly always innocent, but such is the poverty here, they cannot refuse.”

Once the boy falls into the man’s clutches — nearly always men with a wife and family — he is marked for life, although the Kandaharis accept these relationships as part of their culture.

When driven around, ashna sit in the front passenger seat. The back seat is simply for his friends. Even the parents of the boys know in their hearts the nature of the relationship, but will tell people that their son is working for the man. They, like everyone else, will know this is a lie. “They say birds flew with both wings with the Taleban,” Muhammad said. “But not any more.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/609028/posts

Startled marines find Afghan men all made up to see them

By Chris Stephen In Bagram

The Scotsman

British marines returning from an operation deep in the Afghan mountains spoke last night of an alarming new threat--being propositioned by swarms of gay local farmers.

An Arbroath marine, James Fletcher, said: "They were more terrifying than the al-Qaeda. One bloke who had painted toenails was offering to paint ours. They go about hand in hand, mincing around the village." While the marines failed to find any al-Qaeda during the seven-day Operation Condor, they were propositioned by dozens of men in villages the troops were ordered to search. "We were pretty shocked," Marine Fletcher said. "We discovered from the Afghan soldiers we had with us that a lot of men in this country have the same philosophy as ancient Greeks: 'a woman for babies, a man for pleasure'."

Originally, the marines had sent patrols into several villages in the mountains near the town of Khost, hoping to catch up with al-Qaeda suspects who last week fought a four-hour gun battle with soldiers of the Australian SAS. The hardened troops, their faces covered in camouflage cream and weighed down with weapons, radios and ammunition, were confronted with Afghans wanting to stroke their hair. "It was hell," said Corporal Paul Richard, 20. "Every village we went into we got a group of men wearing make-up coming up, stroking our hair and cheeks and making kissing noises."

At one stage, troops were invited into a house and asked to dance. Citing the need to keep momentum in their search and destroy mission, the marines made their excuses and left. "They put some music on and ask us to dance. I told them where to go," said Cpl Richard. "Some of the guys turned tail and fled. It was hideous."

The Afghan hill tribes live in some of the most isolated communities in the country. "I think a lot of the problem is that they don’t have the women around a lot," said another marine, Vaz Pickles. "We only saw about two women in the whole six days. It was all very disconcerting."

...

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?id=561752002&tid=1

From Name Witheld 6-4-2

Anyone who has lived in the Middle East could have told them this! The women are homosexual too! Although, this is a generalization, the thing about generalizations is that they are true of large portions of the populace. Homosexual is not really the right word, since they don't really consider it this. It is outlawed by the Koran, but like Catholics and the pill, it is largely an ignored prohibition. In countries where the sexes are so segregated (the home is separated into male and female rooms and when you visit the home, you go with the women to visit and your husband goes with the men) that they do not know or particularly care for one another. So they find amusement among their own kind.

It is so common, that a story from my 4 years in Saudi may illustrate: We lived for a time in a large Arab town (as opposed to a company compound like Dhahran) called Al Khobar. I was having real problems with the neighborhood boys, the 6-12 year olds. They were very destructive and roamed the neighborhood, bored and breaking out windows and smashing parked cars. My husband was a contractor in partnership with an Arab and we had rented an entire 6 unit apartment building for our own housing and for our higher level employees. The bottom floor was still empty.

After the men had gone to work, the boys would bang on the windows, breaking some, and once came in the building and slapped my daughter when she answered the door. We had tried everything, including speaking with parents and community leaders. But of course, young boys are not disciplined for harassing women. Sometimes, if I had to venture out, they would throw rocks at me with my baby in my arms! Our forman, a Yemeni, told us he would take care of it. He sat on the front stoop one day, and when the boys came around, he called and signaled to them to come over. This was an invitation to engage in sex that the boys all clearly understood, it being a common practice for men to fondle boys. They steered clear of our house after that.

In another case, my daughter used to go to an Arab neighbors house to play with their daughters when she was about 7. I had to put a stop to it when she told me they all took a bath together (children and women)! This from women that won't even take off a veil in front of a strange woman! They were obviously setting her up for sexual encounters, in fact, I consider what they did to be sexual abuse.

My daughter was too innocent to think of it in those terms at that age, so I did not make a big deal of it and make her feel victimized. Also, complaining to anyone would have probably resulted in her (or me) being jailed, not the Arabs! I just told her it was "weird" and that they should play over at our house from then on. You can imagine what 2-4 young, illiterate women do to amuse themselves when married to an old man and left home all day, unable to go out, work, or go to school. The homosexuality among the women is even more common, but less spoken of. I have many other stories from my time there that are illustrative of the common nature of homosexuality and pedophilia.
Originally posted at http://www.rense.com/general25/startledUKmarines.htm


Petr

[Felix the Cat]

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=16425

[Petr]

"The simple answer is that Gibbon was a religious skeptic, and like other skeptics of the 18th century, he was irritated by Christian morality that told him to take only one wife, whom he could not divorce. The sensuality of the Muslim view of life and the afterlife and the cynicism of its politics appeals to the imagination of anti-Christian skeptics of every age and, at the very least, prepares them to take the Muslim side in every Balkan war."
We might add that it has often been the very misogyny of Islam that has attracted anti-Christian Westerners towards it - they thus indirectly testify how important role Christianity has played in uniquely uplifting the status of women in the West.

Thus spake Arthur Schopenhauer, Nietzsche's mentor in misogyny - and yes, Schoppy also blatantly advocated polygamy too:

When nature divided the human race into two parts, she did not cut it exactly through the middle! The difference between the positive and negative poles, according to polarity, is not merely qualitative but also quantitative. And it was in this light that the ancients and people of the East regarded woman; they recognised her true position better than we, with our old French ideas of gallantry and absurd veneration, that highest product of Christian–Teutonic stupidity. These ideas have only served to make them arrogant and imperious, to such an extent as to remind one at times of the holy apes in Benares, who, in the consciousness of their holiness and inviolability, think they can do anything and everything they please.

In the West, the woman, that is to say the “lady,” finds herself in a fausse position; for woman, rightly named by the ancients sexus sequior, is by no means fit to be the object of our honour and veneration, or to hold her head higher than man and to have the same rights as he. The consequences of this fausse position are sufficiently clear. Accordingly, it would be a very desirable thing if this Number Two of the human race in Europe were assigned her natural position, and the lady-grievance got rid of, which is not only ridiculed by the whole of Asia, but would have been equally ridiculed by Greece and Rome.
http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/onwomen.html

Just like true Christianity knows the golden mean that goes between between justice and mercy, its straight and narrow path also goes between the ideals of misogyny and feminine effeminacy. Pagans always tend to head for either one of these extremes without sense of balance.


Petr

[Sean]

We might add that it has often been the very misogyny of Islam that has attracted anti-Christian Westerners towards it - they thus indirectly testify how important role Christianity has played in uniquely uplifting the status of women in the West.

Thus spake Arthur Schopenhauer, Nietzsche's mentor in misogyny:


http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/onwomen.html

To blunder over the fundamental problem of “man and woman,” to deny here the most abysmal antagonism and the necessity of an eternally hostile tension, perhaps to dream here of equal rights, equal education, equal claims and duties: this is a typical sign of shallow-mindedness, and a thinker who has proved himself to be shallow on this dangerous point shallow of instinct!—may be regarded as suspect in general, more, as betrayed, as found out: he will probably be too “short” for all the fundamental questions of life, those of life in the future too, incapable of any depth. On the other hand, a man who has depth, in his spirit as well as in his desires, and also that depth of benevolence which is capable of hardness and severity and is easily confused with them, can think of woman only in an oriental way—he must conceive of woman as a possession, as property with lock and key, as something predestined for service and attaining her fulfillment in service—in this matter he must take his stand on the tremendous intelligence of Asia, on Asia’s superiority of instinct, as the Greeks formerly did: they were Asia’s best heirs and pupils and, as is well known, from Homer to the age of Pericles, with the increase of their culture and the amplitude of their powers, also became step by step more strict with women, in short more oriental. How necessary, how logical, how humanly desirable even, this was: let each ponder for himself!

From Beyond Good and Evil, section 238.

[Petr]

The ironic fact is that the attitudes towards sodomy in Islamic culture (and also other Asian pagan cultures), used to be in many respects more tolerant than today - that is, before Western Christian colonization started to seriously influence them in the 19th century.

Thus originally, "modernization" during the 19th century and early 20th century meant suppression of homosexuality in third-world countries! Western Christians forced or just plain shamed Asians to sweep their more disgusting habits under the carpet.

It was only after the West sunk into post-Christian apostasy (especially after the 1960s) that "modernization" became synonymous with institutionally protecting sexual depravity!

Once upon the time, Westerners clearly understood that part of their duty in civilizing other peoples was forcing them to give up deviant sexual habits (at least in public, driving institutions such as boy brothels underground) - now its precisely the other way round, with liberal do-gooders lecturing third-worlders to be more "tolerant". What an utter shame how we are fallen from grace!


http://www.iranian.com/Shirazi/2005/December/Homosexuality/


Recognition vs. acceptance

Islamic discourses on ‘homosexuality’

December 22, 2005
iranian.com


“He who claims that he experiences no desire [when looking at beautiful boys or youth] is a liar, and if we could believe him, he would be an animal, not a human being.”

The claim of the 12th century jurisconsult Ibn al-Ghauzi, who was a scholar of the conservative Hanbalite school of Islamic law, plainly acknowledges the prevalence and normality of same-sex desire, specifically the desire to commit pederasty (or sexual relations between a man and a boy), among men in medieval Islamic society.

Such a statement would indeed seem shocking if voiced by clergy, Muslim or non-Muslim, today. It is appropriate to note before dealing with the subject matter at hand that to claim that pederasty represents some sort of inherent Muslim sexual depravity or Islamic endorsement of homosexuality, as some xenophobic and evangelical detractors have suggested in the past, would be as simplistic as it is wrong. In fact, even using the word ‘homosexuality’ to describe same-sex relations in an Islamic context, especially a historical one, is problematic.

Before European discourses about the ‘homosexual’ as a fixed and distinct sexual identity began to dominate perceptions of gender, no one was ‘heterosexual’ nor ‘homosexual’ in the Muslim world; sexuality was seen as much more fluid than late 19th century Western European/North American perceptions of gender (which were the first to demarcate the line between straight and gay) prescribed, and same-sex relations were seen as a simple consequence of carnal desire not necessarily based in a sexual orientation.

Labels denoting sexual orientation, at least as far as this debate is concerned, are relatively recent gender constructs of the wider Western intellectual tradition. Thus to speak of Islam and homosexuality as if both ideas have been developing parallel to one other since Islam’s inception is an exercise in futility.

This is not to say, however, that Islamic jurists throughout the centuries have not at times struggled with categorizing and judging same-sex relations, and have not at times even accommodated them in certain contexts. The stance taken by many apologists, who state that there is not and has never been a place in Islam for non-heterosexual intimate relations, is equally misleading.

Classical Islamic discourses surrounding sexuality outside the heterosexual marriage bed are numerous, often ambiguous, and certainly more complicated than both the detractors and the apologists would have one believe. Any attempt to categorize and place gay and ‘grey area’ sexualities in the Islamic consciousness requires taking into consideration the two main veins which sustain Islam: theological orthodoxy (further dependent on the specific school of jurisprudence), which has its own body of religious literature as well as myriad discourses and juristic opinions, and historical cultural practices, which vary according to pre-Islamic cultural identity, current nationality, ethnicity, degree of ‘Westernization’, and class, among other factors.

A look at some of these factors, coupled with an understanding of how sexuality is conceptualized in Islamic discourses, show that same-sex relations have until relatively recent times had accepted niches in cultures of the Islamic world. Trying to encompass all manifestations of gay and grey-area sexuality in Islam would certainly not do justice the topic at hand; for this reason, I shall limit my discussion to the scope of relevant background information surrounding the pre-Islamic world, pederasty (as opposed to alternative male sexualities as well as female and transgendered practices), the Qur’an, and certain Sunni juridical and non-juridical discourses encompassing the issue of same-sex desire and relations.

Turning first to the authoritative sources in Islam, namely religious texts and Islamic scholarship, one finds what amounts to a straightforward rejection of sodomy and ‘homosexuality’. The Qur’an is the Muslim holy book and the foremost authority in all issues surrounding lifestyle and religious fidelity, and the relevant passages therein concerning homosexuality are found primarily in reference to the story of Lot.

In fact, the closest indigenous Arabic word for ‘homosexuality’ is liwat, explained as ‘the doings of [Lot’s] people’, also known as sodomy (Schmitt & Sofer 8). In these Suras, sodomy is roundly condemned, and its practice by the men of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah is the chief reason for Allah’s destruction of the two cities: “You come with lust to men instead of women. You are indeed a depraved tribe… We rained down a rain upon them. See the final fate of the evildoers!” (Qur'an 7:80).

When such acts occur within the Islamic community as opposed to the pagans in the story of Lot, however, the Qur’an takes a conciliatory position towards legal prosecution of same-sex relations between men: “And as for the two of you who are guilty thereof, punish them both. And if they repent and improve, then let them be” (4:16). Not only does it prescribe this and only this guideline for punishing same-sex relations between believers in particular for the Islamic jurist, but historically it was also quite difficult to prosecute such cases in court, being that four reliable Muslim male witnesses were needed to prove such a crime. Reports of such cases in legal documents are accordingly hard to come by (Murray and Roscoe 89).

Islamic schools of law also tend to differ widely on designating the appropriate punishment for sex between males, although all schools regard the practice as unlawful. Abu Hanifa, founder of the Hanafite school of Islamic law, for instance, does not prescribe any set punishment for same-sex relations (89). According to Abu Hanifa, “If a man enters a woman from the odious opening or commits [male anal sex], it is no case of hadd”, or mandatory punishment (Schmitt & Sofer 14). Sentences for such crimes were a matter of [I]ta’zir[/I], or punishments left up to the discretion of the [I]qadi [/I](Islamic judge) himself.

On the other end of the spectrum, the conservative Hanbalite school, which is followed today in Saudi Arabia, specifies that sodomy is a crime worthy of hadd punishment; recipients of hadd rarely survive sentences ranging from stoning to having a wall pushed upon them (Murray and Roscoe 90). Even so, it is worth noting that even the most conservative jurisprudents (such as al-Ghauzi) viewed homosexual desire as a natural and ubiquitous impulse, to be guarded against rather than eradicated in the form of human beings designated as ‘homosexual’. According to the Prophet Mohammad, sodomy was not among the crimes that ran most contrary to God’s will. Murray writes:

Despite the Prophet’s familiarity with the Talmudic tradition, and his view that sodomy ran contrary to God’s will (fasiq), he did not include it among the “abominations” offensive to Allah for which he related specific punishments. Nor did subsequent Islamic commentators draw on accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah… to condemn homosexuality, as did biblical commentators.

Furthermore, it seems that as well as the acknowledgement by jurists of the adult male desire to have sex with male youth, there are also Suras describing the presence of beautiful boy servants in Heaven: "And there shall wait on them [the Muslim men] young boys of their own, as fair as virgin pearls." (Qur’an 50:24). If this Sura does not suggest the fulfillment of pederastic desire, it at least shows an awareness of male beauty and a desire to be attended by attractive male youth; why else make at least two references to immaculate boys in the Holy Book’s description of Heaven?

The description of Heaven also lends a perspective on how sexuality is perceived in Islam, that is, as the exclusive prerogative of the adult male believer. During the classical era of Islam, men had sexual access to their first wife as well as three additional wives, unlimited concubines, and slaves (male or female), and it was the duty of the wife to have sex with her husband whether she wanted to or not.

Some Islamic jurists, such as ‘Abd al-Fattah bin Darwish al-Tamimi, openly sanctioned the raping of one’s wife in the event that she did not submit to sexual advances (Tucker 44). Restrictions on sexual behavior such as sodomy were enumerated according to the nature of the act, not the sex of the person whom it was performed on, and not whether sex was consensual or forced.

Save for wives, adult Muslim males with the financial means to do so had the power to sexually objectify the rest of the human race, especially unbelievers. [U]In non-juridical texts, one finds countless references to pederasty as practiced on the [I]dhimmi[/I], or non-Muslims.[/U] The famous Arab poet Abu Nuwas “said that he slept with Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian boys because he regarded it as ‘the duty of every Muslim to sleep with them’”, and “a number of other poets also had a predilection for boys who were not Muslim” (Murray and Roscoe 92).

Another writer of the Golden Age, Ibn Falita, encouraged the Muslim male community at large that “Buggery is good for you, oh Arabs, bugger! Fuck a boy…” (Schmitt and Sofer 16). While this quote would certainly never be found in Islamic religious or juridical texts, the fact that it was published and tolerated in the 9th century Islamic world suggests that pederasty was an accepted practice both in the Arab Middle East and the Muslim world at large, as long as it was committed with non-Muslims in the case of the former.

However, it is hardly surprising that pederasty and same-sex relations would have a strong literary presence in the lands first conquered by Islam. Pederasty was openly practiced in the Sasanian Empire, and while Christian missionaries suppressed it in Egypt and the Byzantine Empire, it was still a common feature of pagan life.

According to Herodotus, “the Persians learned paiderastia from the Greeks, and… it was well-established in the fifth century B.C.E.” (Murray and Roscoe 61). Among the Greeks, this practice was institutionalized as an age and status-differentiated practice in the militaries of several city-states and appears frequently in classical Greek artwork as well as in literary accounts of such great minds as Socrates and Plato. Institutionalized or socially accepted same-sex relations and/or pederasty are certainly not due to exclusively Islamic cultural practices; it has a history which predates the religion and was absorbed into it to a certain extent.

All of this history brings us to the most recent, dominant Islamic discourses on ‘homosexuality’ and how it is dealt with in modern nation-states and religious communities. Today one finds less tolerance in predominantly Muslim countries for homosexual practices, perhaps due to the very fact that views on gay and grey area sexual relations [U]have absorbed a considerable amount of Western intellectual influence.[/U]

The reevaluation of the nature of homosexual acts in countries as diverse as Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia as a matter of sexual orientation (and in turn one that is identified today with ‘Western’ cultural influence/values almost as much as the practices of Sodom and Gomorrah) has heralded a more hostile and dangerous era for men and women who have sexual relationships with members of their own gender; what entailed [I]ta’zir[/I] punishment yesterday carries the death penalty today.

Pederasty has historically had both a secular and religious literary presence in the Islamic world and continues today as a frowned upon, unspoken, yet tolerated form of male sexual expression in many countries and cultures under the crescent of Islam. If one is skeptical of this theory, he would be hard-pressed to explain why the practice continues predominantly in the far-flung rural areas of the peripheral countries of the Islamic world, such as Morocco (Schmitt and Sofer 25) and the Peshawar valley of Pakistan, having most recently witnessed an actual marriage between two males aged 42 and 16 in a remote village that attracted the outrage of the local community but nonetheless proceeded as planned (Asia Times).

While an occurrence such as the aforementioned marriage is bound to attract criticism from people of all religious stripes, including Muslims themselves, it cannot be denied that avenues exist for the expression of this sort of sexual expression in many Islamic societies, regardless of whether it is sanctioned by religious authorities. In terms of its legal consequences, pederasty is difficult to prosecute because of the necessity of four reliable, Muslim, male eyewitnesses to confirm the act, and the fact that neither male youths nor their families are often inclined to take up such matters with the authorities.

Adding these factors to increasing Westernization and growth in gay sex tourism in several Muslim countries, one finds that the traditional divide between the Muslim and Judeo-Christian views of ‘homosexuality’ is fast crumbling. Whether or not the discourses that have historically delimited Muslim sexual mores will crumble with it remains to be seen, but it is clear that if the traditional Islamic recognition and marginal tolerance of gender-undifferentiated sexuality is to survive, new discussion will be needed to reaffirm its nature and reevaluate its acceptability today.


Works Cited

-- Murray, Stephen O., and Will Roscoe. Islamic Sexualities. New York: New York University Press, 1997.

-- Schmitt, Arno, and Johoeda Sofer. Sexuality and Eroticism Among Males in Moslem Societies. New York: The Haworth Press, 1990.

-- Tucker, Judith. In the House of the Law. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.

[Petr]

Save for wives, adult Muslim males with the financial means to do so had the power to sexually objectify the rest of the human race, especially unbelievers. In non-juridical texts, one finds countless references to pederasty as practiced on the dhimmi, or non-Muslims. The famous Arab poet Abu Nuwas “said that he slept with Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian boys because he regarded it as ‘the duty of every Muslim to sleep with them’”, and “a number of other poets also had a predilection for boys who were not Muslim” (Murray and Roscoe 92).
This is indeed the less well known part of the "child tax" that Muslim conquerors often levied from their infidel subjects: while the stronger male kids were turned into Mamluk or Janissary warriors, the more feminine ones were turned into eunuchs and Ghilmans:

The following is from the wonderfully un-PC 16th century Protestant work Foxe's Book of Martyrs (the 1566 edition). It is from time when Ottomans were still very much seen as a mortal threat to Europe:


134. A NOTICE TOUCHING THE MISERABLE PERSECUTION, SLAUGHTER, AND CAPTIVITY OF THE CHRISTIANS UNDER THE TURKS.

And thus much hitherto touching our Christian brethren which were slain and destroyed by these blasphemous Turks. Now forasmuch as, besides these aforesaid, many other were plucked away violently from their country, from their wives and children. from liberty, and from all their possessions, into wretched captivity and extreme penury, it remaineth likewise to treat somewhat also concerning the cruel manner of the Turks handling of the said Christian captives. And first here is to be noted, that the Turk never cometh into Europe to war against the Christians, but there followeth after his army a great number of brokers or merchants, such as buy men and children to sell again, bringing with them long chains in hope of great escheats. In the which chains they link them by fifty and sixty together, such as remain undestroyed with the sword, whom they buy of the spoils of them that rob and spoil the Christian countries; which is lawful for any of the Turk's army to do, so that the tenth of their spoil or prey, whatsoever it be, be reserved to the head Turk, that is, to the great master thief.

Of such as remain for tithe, if they be aged, of whom very few be reserved alive, because little profit cometh of that age, they be sold to the use of husbandry or keeping of beasts. If they be young men or women, they be sent to certain places, there to be instructed in their language and arts, as shall be most profitable for their advantage, and such are called in their tongue Sarai: and the first care of the Turks is this, to make them deny the Christian religion, and to be circumcised: and after that they are appointed, every one as he seemeth most apt, either to the learning of their laws, or else to learn the feats of war. Their first rudiment of war is to handle the bow, first beginning with a weak bow, and so as they grow in strength coming to a stronger bow, and if they miss the mark, they are sharply beaten; and their allowance is twopence or threepence a day, till they come and take wages to serve in war. Some are brought up for the purpose to be placed in the number of the wicked Janizaries, that is, the order of the Turk's champions, which is the most abominable condition of all other. Of these Janizaries, see before. And if any of the aforesaid young men or children shall appear to excel in any beauty, him they so cut, that no part of that which nature giveth to man remaineth to be seen in all his body, whereby, while the freshness of age continueth, he is compelled to serve their abominable abomination; and when age cometh, then they serve instead of eunuchs to wait upon matrons, or to keep horses and mules, or else to be scullions and drudges in their kitchens.
http://www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxe135.htm


These Ottoman practices had already been introduced by the Islamic Caliphate in the Early Middle Ages:

"The servants were almost all slaves recruited from non-Muslim peoples and captured by force, taken prisoners in time of war or purchased in time of peace. The white slaves (Mamluk) were mainly Greeks and Slavs, Armenians and Berbers. Certain slaves were eunuchs (khisyan) attached to the service of the harem. Others termed ghilman, who might also be eunuchs, were the recipients of special favour from their masters, wore rich and attractive uniforms and often beautified and perfumed their bodies in effeminate fashion. We read that ghilman in the reign of al-Rashid, but it was evidently al-Amin who, following the Persian precedent, established in the Arabic world the Ghilman institution for the practice of unnatural sexual relations. A judge under al-Mamun used four hundred such youths. Poets like abu-Nuwas did not disdain to give public expression to their perverted passions and to address amorous pieces of their composition to beardless young boys."

(Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, revised tenth edition, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; ISBN: 0-333-63142-0 paperback], p. 341;
http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/rahamim.htm


Petr

[Petr]

http://www.mideastyouth.com/2007/11/09/most-arabic-yahoo-groups-are-about-sex/


Most Arabic Yahoo groups are about sex

Author: Esra'a (Bahrain) - November 9, 2007


The following graph is provided by Internet Strategist: ...

I’m not sure how reliable this is, so I looked a bit further. About a year go, it appears that Cairo was the #1 city that searched for “sex” on Google. Sabbah provides a few graphs detailing who’s searching for sex on the internet. Here is who searched for sex by region: ...

Arabic is the 2nd most common language that is used to search for “gay sex.” It’s the number one language for search involving “sexy.” As you can see in that same graph, Iran is at 3 and Egypt is at 4, listed under regions where search on “sexy” was most conducted.

Arabic is the 2nd most common language that is used to search for “gay man.” The countries that most search for this is currently Malaysia (#1) and Indonesia (#2). For “gay girl,” Arabic is also the 2nd most common language.

For “child porn,” Turkey is the 2nd country where this is most searched. Turkish is the #1 language used.

Turkey has one of the most searches for the word “porno.” Morocco is at 5. Turkish is #1 language used to conduct the search in. Indonesia is currently #1 country that search for the word “vagina.”

Turkey is not an Arab country, nor are some of the other countries I listed. But they are Muslim, so I thought the findings were fascinating to say the least. All of this information is not in the least bit shocking, but it’s quite ironic.

What do you guys think?


Update:

Egypt is currently #1 for “fat sex.”

Pakistan, Morocco, Turkey and Egypt are at the top of the list when it comes to “animal sex.”

For “children sex,” Pakistan is at #1, Egypt #2 and Iran #3. The most common languages used to conduct the search in are Arabic and Turkish.

For “sexy children,” these results are probably the most disturbing. Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, followed by Turkey at #9.

For “sexy child,” Pakistan is #1, followed by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey. Common languages are Persian, Arabic, and Turkish.

For “homo sex,” Indonesia is #1, Morocco is at 6.

For “rape,” Pakistan is at 1. Malaysia is at 3.

For “bird sex,” Egypt is at 1. (Come ON!)

For “ass sex,” Saudi Arabia comes first, followed directly by Egypt and Morocco. Most common language is Arabic.

[Kamandi]

Probably not because the sexual morality of those fundamentalist societies is so "loose," but rather because they're so repressed.

The anonymity of the Internet makes it the only place they can turn to for an outlet.

[Niko Bellic]

Before European discourses about the ‘homosexual’ as a fixed and distinct sexual identity began to dominate perceptions of gender, no one was ‘heterosexual’ nor ‘homosexual’ in the Muslim world; sexuality was seen as much more fluid than late 19th century Western European/North American perceptions of gender (which were the first to demarcate the line between straight and gay) prescribed, and same-sex relations were seen as a simple consequence of carnal desire not necessarily based in a sexual orientation.

Do you remember recently when Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University? He answered a question about homosexuality in Iran by saying that they didn't have any homosexuals. Could this, possibly combined with some vaguery of translation been the basis of his answer?

[Petr]

Do you remember recently when Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University? He answered a question about homosexuality in Iran by saying that they didn't have any homosexuals. Could this, possibly combined with some vaguery of translation been the basis of his answer?
Could be so. "We have no homosexuals - in the Western sense of the word."


Petr

[Petr]

"The third point is that Mohammed’s Koran has no regard for marriage, but permits everyone to take wives as he will. It is customary among the Turks for one man to have ten or twenty wives and to desert or sell any whom he will, so that in Turkey women are held immeasurable cheap and are despised; they are bought and sold like cattle. Although there may be some few who do not take advantage of this law, nevertheless, this is the law and anyone who wants to can follow it. That kind of living is not and cannot be marriage, because none of them takes or has a wife with the intention of staying with her forever, as though the two were one body, as God’s word says in Genesis 3, “Therefore a man cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh.” Thus the marriage of the Turks closely resembles the chaste life soldiers lead with their harlots, for the Turks are soldiers and must act like soldiers; Mars and Venus, say the poets, must be together. "

http://www.lutherdansk.dk/On%20war%20against%20Islamic%20reign%20of%20terror/On%20war%20against%20Islamic%20reign%20of%20terror1.htm
Larry Auster commented thusly on the above excerpt from Luther:

"LA: The following is a corrective to the superficial modern Western belief that when it comes to women, Islam is to be seen as a threat only to modern feminist equality, as though the Europeans of any epoch would not have been repelled by the Islamic treatment of women. Luther in the 16th century, not a high point for women’s rights in the modern sense, is disgusted by the systematized oppression and inferior status of women under Islam and the derogation of monogamy. This shows us that Islam violates not only our liberal views of women’s status, but traditional Western views of women’s status as well; Islam is not just contra liberalism, it is contra Westernness itself."

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/007358.html


And now I have found some more no-nonsense, earthy commentary on the Islamic treatment of women by Martin Luther - I ironically came upon this when studying the Roman Catholic claim that Luther had promoted polygamy:

In his comment on the question of the Pharisees regarding divorce (Matt. 19, 3-6), Luther says: "Many divorces occur still among the Turks. If a wife does not yield to the husband, nor act according to his whim and fancy, he forthwith drives her out of the house, and takes one, two, three, or four additional wives, and defends his action by appealing to Moses. They have taken out of Moses such things as please them and pander to their lust. In Turkey they are very cruel to women; any woman that will not submit is cast aside. They toy with their women like a dog with a rag. When they are weary of one woman, they quickly put her beneath the turf and take another. Moses has said nothing to justify this practise. My opinion is that there is no real married life among the Turks; theirs is a whorish life. It is a terrible tyranny, all the more to be regretted because God does not withhold the common blessing from their intercourse: children are procreated thereby, and yet the mother is sent away by the husband. For this reason there is no true matrimony among the Turks. In my opinion, all the Turks at the present time are bastards." (7, 965.)
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/03/persepctives-of-luther-luther.html


Petr

[Petr]

Another insightful comment that shows while Islamic sexual ethics are grotesque and retard any development of higher civilization, there is a primitive but efficient "method in the madness":

RB writes:

Since Sailer only thinks in biological terms, perhaps the only way he can relate to the Islamic scriptural imperative is in terms of the effects of this ideology on the Muslim breeding system. Islam has the remarkable advantage of being highly patriarchal and polygamous with great sexual benefits for those warriors able to conquer in its name; Islam was and remains a great male racket. Furthermore, these advantages are not the temporary kind that have always been associated with warfare, but continue to exist within the peacetime new order. Wherever the warriors of Islam went they were able to commandeer large numbers of native women as wives and concubines. And unlike their counterparts in the West, they were able to do so with full religious and legal sanction. Their half-breed warrior sons, the mixed offspring of these matings, were acculturated into Islam as well as into the Arabic, and later the Turkish, language and in turn zealously spread their new religion and culture as they conquer still more territory; the process is repeated through several generations. In this way, a relatively small number of Arab and, at a later period, Berber and Turkish warriors, imprinted Islamic religion and culture on vast areas with large populations. Of course, such a permanent system also meant deterioration in the status of women; the latter lost even the limited rights they had managed to acquire under the preceding Greek and Roman civilization. This history also accounts for the continuing oppression of women extending even into modern times.

Other conquering cultures lacked the advantage of this system of sexual slavery in combination with the imperative of spreading their culture and religious ideology. The Macedonian Greeks like the Muslims had a desire to spread their way of life. However, Greek culture, lacking the institution of polygamous marriage and the extensive peacetime concubinage that characterized Islam, was unable to establish deep roots in the very lands that ultimately became Muslim. The Mongols, like the Muslims, also had widespread polygamy and sexual slavery. However, lacking a strong cultural imperative, the Mongols were ultimately absorbed by those they conquered.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011986.html


Petr

[Gregz]

Probably not because the sexual morality of those fundamentalist societies is so "loose," but rather because they're so repressed.

The anonymity of the Internet makes it the only place they can turn to for an outlet.

The reason why Islam is sexually repressive, is that it promotes aggression. Amongst young sexual frustrated Muslim men and I suspect that during the middle ages, that Catholicism and Islam greatly influenced each other in this regard. As both where in the business of perpetually raising and fielding armies against each other.

[Gregz]

Another insightful comment that shows while Islamic sexual ethics are grotesque and retard any development of higher civilization, there is a primitive but efficient "method in the madness":


Muslims are hypocrites of the worst kind. As on the one hand they ridicule the west's decadence. Yet behind closed doors they themselves engage in all sorts of deviant and immoral behaviour.

[PvtTitus]

On the loose sexual morality of Muslims

:rofl:

As they swarm over jew cryptos like jewrself I will be youtubing it with my cellphone camera.

Islam. the old testament plus another prophet. Big deal :jackoff:

[Jimbo Gomez]

On the loose sexual morality of Muslims

:rofl:

As they swarm over jew cryptos like jewrself I will be youtubing it with my cellphone camera.

Islam. the old testament plus another prophet. Big deal :jackoff:


Please, I beg you, start a blog. You'd be able to share your wit and insight with a much greater audience.

[Petr]

The following account comes from a 17th-century travel book by Adam Olearius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Olearius), and again shows how the image that pre-modern Europeans had about Islamic Persia was nothing like the puritanical image we today have about Iran:

But it is also true that this modesty is only as to the external part and that otherwise they are more luxurious than any other nation in the world. For not thinking it enough to marry several wives and besides them to have a great number of concubines, they have a kindness left for common whores. Accordingly there is no city, Ardebil only excepted, where there are not public places appointed for that sport under the protection of the magistrate.
...

Sodomy is no extraordinary sin among them, nor is it punished as a crime. Saru Taggi (who was chancellor of Persia at the time of our travels) was not punished for his sodomy, but for the violence he had done in the commission of it. The king himself was given to this vice, and so far from punishing it in another, as we were told, in the year 1634 Shah Safi being at the siege of Eruan, one of the colonels, who was got drunk at the king’s quarters, would at his return to his own, in the heat of his wine, have forced a young lad that served him and had often before refused to hearken to his lewd addresses. The boy, to prevent the violence which he now saw was unavoidable, laid hold on the poniard which his master whore at this girdle, and therewith ran him into the heart. The next day, the king missing the colonel, asked what was become of him. Somebody told him he had been killed by one of his domestics and gave him an account how it had been done. The boy was brought before him, who very ingenuously confessed what had passed between his master and him, and avowed that the horror he conceived at that sin had made him take that resolution. The king was so incensed that the commanded him to be cast to the dogs, to be torn to pieces by them. The two first that were brought would not meddle with him, but afterwards they got two English Mastiffs, which upon the first setting on tore him to pieces.

The Muhammadan Law allows them to be luxurious, not only by permitting polygamy, but also those other carnal enjoyments, wherein the chiefest part of the beatitude consists, even that which the Muslims of that religion expect after this life; it being their persuasion that in their celestial paradise they shall not only have the same lawful wives they had in this world, but that they shall also have as many concubines and servants as they please, and enjoy all other women as often as they have a mind to it.

They use all imaginable inventions to stir themselves up to lust, and to this end have they at all meetings, whether at common tippling houses or elsewhere, men and women dancers who provoke them to brutality by their obscene postures. They use also the seed and leaves of hemp to revive languishing nature, though our naturalists assign it a cold quality, which weakens and corrupts nature. I cannot imagine how this can add any fuel to their lustful inclinations, unless it be that the ventous humor of it be also expulsive, or that in these hot countries it hath other qualities than it hath in Europe. To prepare this drug, they gather the leaves before they come to seed, dry them in the shade, beat them to powder, which they mix with honey, and make pills thereof about the bigness of a pigeons egg. They take two or three of them at a time to fortify nature. As to the seed, they fry it, put a little salt thereto and eat it by way of desert. Imanculi, who was sent ambassador from the king of Persia to the duke of Holstein, took of it at every meal, after he had married a young woman at Astrakhan, he himself being seventy years of age. Persons of good repute in Persia will not eat of it, for they say that he who makes use of this remedy commits a greater sin than he that had ravished his own mother upon Muhammad’s sepulchre. They call those who use it, Bengi kendi bengi. But when all is done, the Persians think they have sufficiently expiated the sin of fornication, when immediately after they have had their pleasure of a woman, they either wash themselves or wash their bodies all over with cold water.
http://depts.washington.edu/silkroad/texts/olearius/travels.html#vices


Petr

[Petr]

It seems that Mullahs can also compete with Talmudic rabbis in legally institutionalizing perversions:
This stuff would have been too gruesome even for me to imagine:

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/04/25/210198.html


Egypt’s women urge MPs not to pass early marriage, sex-after-death laws: report

Egypt’s National Council for Women (NCW) has appealed to the Islamist-dominated parliament not to approve two controversial laws on the minimum age of marriage and allowing a husband to have sex with his dead wife within six hours of her death according to a report in an Egyptian newspaper.

The appeal came in a message sent by Dr. Mervat al-Talawi, head of the NCW, to the Egyptian People’s Assembly Speaker, Dr. Saad al-Katatni, addressing the woes of Egyptian women, especially after the popular uprising that toppled president Hosni Mubarak in February 2011.

She was referring to two laws: one that would legalize the marriage of girls starting from the age of 14 and the other that permits a husband to have sex with his dead wife within the six hours following her death.

According to Egyptian columnist Amro Abdul Samea in al-Ahram, Talawi’s message included an appeal to parliament to avoid the controversial legislations that rid women of their rights of getting education and employment, under alleged religious interpretations.

“Talawi tried to underline in her message that marginalizing and undermining the status of women in future development plans would undoubtedly negatively affect the country’s human development, simply because women represent half the population,” Abdul Samea said in his article.

The controversy about a husband having sex with his dead wife came about after a Moroccan cleric spoke about the issue in May 2011.

Zamzami Abdul Bari said that marriage remains valid even after death adding that a woman also too had the same right to engage in sex with her dead husband.

Two years ago, Zamzami incited further controversy in Morocco when he said it was permissible for pregnant women to drink alcohol.

But it seems his view on partners having sex with their deceased partners has found its way to Egypt one year on.

Egyptian prominent journalist and TV anchor Jaber al-Qarmouty on Tuesday referred to Abdul Samea’s article in his daily show on Egyptian ON TV and criticized the whole notion of “permitting a husband to have sex with his wife after her death under a so-called ‘Farewell Intercourse’ draft law.”

“This is very serious. Could the panel that will draft the Egyptian constitution possibly discuss such issues? Did Abdul Samea see by his own eyes the text of the message sent by Talawi to Katatni? This is unbelievable. It is a catastrophe to give the husband such a right! Has the Islamic trend reached that far? Is there really a draft law in this regard? Are there people thinking in this manner?”

Although it may be a bit hard to determine how much of this mess is due to Islamic tradition, and how much due to native depravity (Victorian-era explorer Sir Richard Burton called Egypt in his essay on pederasty as "that classical region of all abominations"):

http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2009/01/mohammed-necrophile.html

In ancient Egypt, there is record of the treatment of the bodies of young women that were set out to decompose for a few days before being delivered to embalmers. This practice originated from the need to discourage the men performing the funerary customs from having sexual interest in their charges. Herodotus writes in The Histories (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2707/2707-h/book2.htm#noteref-75) that, to discourage intercourse with a corpse, Ancient Egyptians left deceased beautiful women to decay for "three or four days" before giving them to the embalmers.

[catfish]

I have no problem with this law as long as women have this same right that they are contemplating giving to men.

[Petr]

I have no problem with this law as long as women have this same right that they are contemplating giving to men.
And YOU would like to pose as some sort of upholder of sexual decency around here?

[Petr]

"If a man sodomises the son, brother, or father of his wife after their marriage, the marriage remains valid."

http://ethnikoi.org/iran.html
This judicial sentence is not just abstractly theoretical. In today's Afghanistan, men can have their catamites married into the family:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=32317&highlight=bacha

But Shir Mohammad, at 24, was already getting too old to be a dancing boy. "I am grown up now and do not have the beauty of former years. So, I proposed to marry my lord's daughter and he has agreed to it."

[Petr]

It seems that there are many fringy "permissible opinions" in the Islamic corpus of traditions that even most modern Muslims would like to quietly bury and forget...

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11630/islam-death-sex-necrophilia

Islamic ‘Death-Sex’ in Context

Posted By Raymond Ibrahim On May 1, 2012


Aside from provoking shock, disgust, and denial, last week’s news of Egyptian parliamentarians trying to pass a “farewell intercourse (http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/04/25/210198.html)” law legalizing sex with one’s wife up to six hours after she dies has yet to be fully appreciated.

To start, consider the ultimate source of this practice: it’s neither the Muslim Brotherhood nor the Salafis; rather, as with most of Islam’s perversities—from adult breastfeeding (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11535/islam-fatwa-breastfeeding) to pedophilia (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/10011/rationalizing-pedophilia-in-islam) marriage (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9956/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage)—Islamic necrophilia is traced to the fount of Islam, its prophet Muhammad, as found in a hadith (or tradition) that exists in no less than six of Islam’s classical reference texts, including Kanz al-‘Umal by Mutaqi al-Hindi and Al-Hujja fi Biyan al-Mahujja, an authoritative text on Sunni Doctrine, by Abu Qassim al-Asbahani.

According to this hadith (http://www.islamweb.net/hadith/display_hbook.php?bk_no=4156&pid=556490&hid=208), Muhammad took off his shirt and placed it on a dead woman and “lay” with her in the grave. The buriers proceeded to bury the corpse and the prophet with dirt, exclaiming, “O Prophet, we see you do a thing you never did with anyone else,” to which Muhammad responded: “I have dressed her in my shirt so that she may be dressed in heavenly robes, and I have laid with her in her grave so that the pressures of the grave [also known as Islam’s “torments of the grave (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/7352/jihad-martyrdom-and-the-torments-of-the-grave)”] may be alleviated from her.”

What was Muhammad saying and doing? Perhaps his magical shirt would transport the dead woman to heaven, and his blessed body would protect her from the “pressures of the grave”? A more cynical—a more human—reading is that he stripped his shirt as a natural step before copulating; that he precisely meant the act of sex would “alleviate” the pressures of death from the corpse; and that the observers covered them with dirt for privacy and/or for shame.

This interpretation is given much more weight when one considers that the secondary meaning for the word I translated above as "lay with" is "intercourse," further demonstrating that the proposed Egyptian law is, in fact, based on this hadith: after all, the Arabic root-word used for "intercourse" in the phrase "farewell intercourse" is derived from the same root-word that Muhammad used to explain what he did with the dead woman (d-j-'). As if this was not enough, necrophilia finds more validation in Islam's legal texts. For example, according to al-Sharwani's Hawashi, "there is no punishment for having intercourse with a dead woman" and "it is not necessary to rewash the dead after penetration."

Incidentally, this issue of “death-sex” far precedes Egyptian parliamentarians. In fact, I first wrote about this macabre topic back in 2009, based on an episode of Father Zakaria Botros (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9873/zakaria-botros-islam-scourge-returns), where he explored the perverse sexual habits of the prophet Muhammad (see here (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9865/the-perverse-sexual-habits-of-the-prophet) for summaries). Interestingly, when that episode first aired, many Muslims were livid, denying the existence of the hadith, and renewing calls to assassinate the priest for trying to “defame” Islam: yet here it is, once again—only this time, the hadith is being passed into a “law,” further validating the existence and legitimacy of necrophilia in Islam.

Which leads to a final eye-opener: it is no longer this or that “radical” cleric, but parliament members who are, not merely acknowledging bizarre Islamic practices, but trying to implement them as “laws.” (Perhaps this should be unsurprising, considering weeks earlier in Egypt, suit-and-tie wearing Muslim court lawyers attacked with knives (http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11498/courtroom-terrorism) a Christian defendant for supposedly “blaspheming” Muhammad.)

What else do such "parliamentarians" and "lawyers" have in store for Egypt and its neighbors? If this little known, ghoulish practice is being endorsed simply because of one arcane hadith, how much more support must Egypt's Islamist-dominated parliament be giving to those other ironclad teachings of Islam—for instance, Muhammad's unequivocal commands, recorded in hundreds of canonical hadiths, to fight, deceive, and subjugate all non-Muslim infidels?

[Opus131]

Its also possible that those Egyptians are just too stupid to grasp the higher esoteric significance contained in the Quaran, so they often descent into the most bizarre of literalness, but its always nice when a member of a certain ethnic group comes under the influence of western liberalism and indulges in the most gross defamation of his own nation and culture. The first may be excusable to a point, the second is despicable any which way you look at. This tool would probably welcome a NATO "intervention" that would lay waste over the entire country under the rubric it would get rid of backward Islamic laws and implement democracy and freedhum.

[Petr]

And here is the subject where Islam probably most resembles post-Christian West - lenient attitude towards abortion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_abortion

Many Islamic thinkers recognize exceptions to this rule for certain circumstances; indeed, Azizah Y. al-Hibri notes that "the majority of Muslim scholars permit abortion, although they differ on the stage of fetal development beyond which it becomes prohibited."[2] According to Sherman Jackson, "while abortion, even during the first trimester, is forbidden according to a minority of jurists, it is not held to be an offense for which there are criminal or even civil sanctions. On this understanding, Muslim-Americans who oppose abortion should assiduously limit their activism to the moral sphere and avoid supporting positions that favor the imposition of criminal or civil sanctions in an area into which Islamic law itself never contemplated injecting these."[3]
Sharia lawyers certainly know how to be ruthlessly strict - and have consciously decided not to be strict on the subject of baby-killing. More information on this subject here:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?p=833756&highlight=hanbali#post833756

Overall, there doesn't seem to be anything very conservative (in the Western Christian sense of the word) about Muslim sexual ethics - besides that general sense of possessive macho hypocrisy ("I am allowed to fool around but my bitches are not") that one could find even among the most dissolute ghetto-chav types.

[Petr]

but its always nice when a member of a certain ethnic group comes under the influence of western liberalism and indulges in the most gross defamation of his own nation and culture. The first may be excusable to a point, the second is despicable any which way you look at.
Are you referring to Raymond Ibrahim? He is a Coptic Christian, and thus has zero reason to spare the precious feelings of Muslims:

http://www.inquisitr.com/213172/the-plight-of-egypts-coptic-christians/

[Petr]

In the 9th century AD - back when originally-Christian native peoples of the "Fertile Crescent" area were beginning to convert to Islam en masse - a Middle Eastern Christian apologist Al Kindy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_of_al-Kindy_(book)) wrote contemptuously of these apostates:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Al-Kindi/p086-087.htm

Al Kindy proceeds to enumerate various classes brought over to Islam, by sordid and unworthy motives.
...

Again, there are the idolatrous races, and the Magians and the Jews; low people of the baser sort, aspiring by the profession of Islam, to raise themselves to riches and power, and form alliances with the learned and honourable. Then there are hypocritical men of the world, who in this way obtain indulgences in marriage and concubinage, forbidden to such as hold by the Christian faith. There is moreover the dissolute class, given over wholly to the lusts of the flesh, who take Islam as a ladder to attain their object. Lastly, there are those who by this means obtain an easier livelihood.
Thus it was partly due to its greater tolerance of licentiousness that Islam overthrew Christianity among Levantine masses. This was the "carrot" element that made Muhammad's doctrine appealing to loose nominal Christians.

[Scotsman]

Thus it was partly due to its greater tolerance of licentiousness that Islam overthrew Christianity among Levantine masses. This was the "carrot" element that made Muhammad's doctrine appealing to loose nominal Christians.

Probably also explains its more recent popularity among the formerly animist blacks in Africa.

[Petr]

Probably also explains its more recent popularity among the formerly animist blacks in Africa.
A quite possible hypothesis, although the advance of Islam in Africa may be somewhat exaggerated.

Here is more on this subject - from an un-PC (written in 1934) History of Spain:

http://archive.org/stream/historyofspain008182mbp#page/n65/mode/2up

The old paganism revived, paganism in turban and long robe - this was the aspect in which Islam first presented itself to the Spaniards. This, perhaps - apart from reasons of self-interest - explains why so many of them abandoned Christianity. These sensual Southerners saw only one thing: that Islam was indulgent towards pleasure. While the religion of Christ severely condemned all carnal delights, that of Mahomet authorised polygamy and promised to its faithful a paradise of houris and endless enjoyments.

This was the reason why, in the eyes of the Christians of the Middle Ages, the Musulmans were pagans, just as the Christians, in the eyes of the Musulmans, were polytheists. In the Chanson de Roland the Saracens are never called by any other name than "the pagans" - not exactly because they were reputed to worship a statue of Mahomet, as the author naively believed, but above all because they led a basely materialist and corrupt life. That was the chief complaint of the Spanish clerics and monks against the Musulmans.

Those of them who lived at Cordova under the Caliphs reproached them with wallowing in debauchery. Not only did they hold up to the contempt of the Catholics this Paradise which was nothing but a brothel, these harems which were haunts of all the vices, these pretended asceticisms of Ramadan which were nothing but an excuse for renewed revelries and fornications. They also denounced with horror this return of the Musulmans to all the pagan vices: the abuse of wine, torchlight orgies, dancers, and singers, musicians and poets who sang of carnal love and all the concupiscences of life; and finally luxury in building, the use of hot baths which softened the body, those thermae which were places of illicit meetings and the refuge of every kind of vileness.

It is true that in all this they joined hands with the faquis and the Musulmans of strict observance. They, too, as we have already seen, proscribed dancing, music, hunting, and the usage of wine. But the influence of climate and environment was too strong.

Down to the very last day the Musulmans of Spain contrived to reconcile this paganism with the practice of their religion. As a result they lost their old warrior virtues; but they made it a kind of point of national honour to preserve their dancers, their singers, their musicians; and, on the eve of exile, they went on drinking, with their poets and their favourites, the heady, sweet wines of Andalusia.

This Musulman paganism exerted a regular fascination over the Spaniards. It was for this reason that the Christian priests regarded it as so dangerous for their flocks - not in the least from the doctrinal point of view, but because of the facilities which it accorded to the flesh. They might do what they liked and say what they liked, however: even the Christians who remained faithful to their ancestral religion allowed themselves to be contaminated by the pagan example.

The men of the North, the Franks especially, yielded at once to the attraction of these pagan pleasures. Many of them, who fought in the pay of Musulman princes, ended by living entirely in the Saracen way.

An Arab author tells us the strange adventure of a gallant Norman Count, who, after the taking of Barbastro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Barbastro) by his co-religionists in 1064, installed himself in a house in the town and, not content with wearing the clothes of the former owner, started living a lá Morisco. He was to be found sitting on a divan, in a room in which nothing - furniture or fittings - had been altered since the departure of the Musulman master, amid young slave-musicians. He had the lyre played for him and Arab songs sung to him. Around him silks and brocades were spread, jewel-caskets lay open, precious stones and metals were displayed. The hardy Norman had slid into the skin of the Saracen whose place he had taken.

[Petr]

Here is one especially nasty Islamic "tradition":

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9865/the-perverse-sexual-habits-of-the-prophet

Finally, with a most distasteful look on his face, the priest read from a hadith in al-Siyuti (6/395), where Muhammad asserts that, "In heaven, Mary mother of Jesus, will be one of my wives."

"Please, O prophet," quoth the Coptic Orthodox priest, "do not implicate our saints with your filthy practices…"

More here: http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/mary.htm


Mary the Mother of Jesus: A Houri in Paradise?

Our readers may be wondering what does this have to do with Mary, the mother of our risen Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Here is a quotation from Ibn Kathir which helps to put things in perspective:

"The Messenger of God ... said, ‘God MARRIED ME IN PARADISE TO MARY THE DAUGHTER OF 'IMRAN and to the wife of Pharaoh and the sister of Moses.’ (Tabarani)" (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya [Cairo: Dar al-Kutub, 1968/1388], p. 381- as cited in Aliah Schleifer's Mary The Blessed Virgin of Islam [Fons Vitae; ISBN: 1887752021; July 1, 1998], p. 64; bold and capital emphasis ours)

[banjo_billy]

Islam enforces immorality among Muslims and encourages immorality just as long as nobody knows about it except Allah.

Because Mohammad (mhrh) wanted as many of the goat and sheep molesters of Arabia as possible to join him in killing and plundering, he gave them "holy" permission to be as perverted as they wanted. In addition to "wives" and slave girls, he promised them young boys and girls in Paradise to "serve" them.

The basic ruling about sins in Islam is that the Muslims are permitted to do any kind of perversion they like, in private, but it is against Sharia Law to publish the sins of Muslims. The Muslims want the world to believe that they are holy people when they are, in fact, morons and perverts and sex fiends.

An example from Sharia Law is this: not a single case of fornication has ever been prosecuted in the entire 1400 year history of Islam!!!! This is because it takes four witnesses to convict in a case of sexual sinning.

The closest case in Sharia Law was that of three witsnesses who claimed that a man and woman had had sexual relations out of wedlock. But since there were only three witnesses, the two sinners were released unharmed and the three witnesses were lashed!!!!!:rofl:

This is known to Muslims as "the justice of Islam".

But what can you expect of a religon of goat-fuckers whose prophet promised them Paradise if only they would murder their neighbors and steal their stuff and rape their women. But that's Islam, the religion of Peace.

It is the teaching of Mohammad (mhrh) that Allah loves to have sins concealed.

[Columnist]

And here is the subject where Islam probably most resembles post-Christian West - lenient attitude towards abortion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_abortion


Sharia lawyers certainly know how to be ruthlessly strict - and have consciously decided not to be strict on the subject of baby-killing. More information on this subject here:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?p=833756&highlight=hanbali#post833756Muslims bomb everything except abortion clinics.

Overall, there doesn't seem to be anything very conservative (in the Western Christian sense of the word) about Muslim sexual ethics - besides that general sense of possessive macho hypocrisy ("I am allowed to fool around but my bitches are not") that one could find even among the most dissolute ghetto-chav types.
Hypocritical from the point of objective ethics, but not hypocritical from the Y-haplotype POV.

[Columnist]

In the 9th century AD - back when originally-Christian native peoples of the "Fertile Crescent" area were beginning to convert to Islam en masse - a Middle Eastern Christian apologist Al Kindy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_of_al-Kindy_(book)) wrote contemptuously of these apostates:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Al-Kindi/p086-087.htm


Thus it was partly due to its greater tolerance of licentiousness that Islam overthrew Christianity among Levantine masses. This was the "carrot" element that made Muhammad's doctrine appealing to loose nominal Christians.
Ironically, even male carnal delights are dimished by circumcision.

[Columnist]

Islam enforces immorality among Muslims and encourages immorality just as long as nobody knows about it except Allah.

Because Mohammad (mhrh) wanted as many of the goat and sheep molesters of Arabia as possible to join him in killing and plundering, he gave them "holy" permission to be as perverted as they wanted. In addition to "wives" and slave girls, he promised them young boys and girls in Paradise to "serve" them.

The basic ruling about sins in Islam is that the Muslims are permitted to do any kind of perversion they like, in private, but it is against Sharia Law to publish the sins of Muslims. The Muslims want the world to believe that they are holy people when they are, in fact, morons and perverts and sex fiends.

An example from Sharia Law is this: not a single case of fornication has ever been prosecuted in the entire 1400 year history of Islam!!!! This is because it takes four witnesses to convict in a case of sexual sinning.

The closest case in Sharia Law was that of three witsnesses who claimed that a man and woman had had sexual relations out of wedlock. But since there were only three witnesses, the two sinners were released unharmed and the three witnesses were lashed!!!!!:rofl:

This is known to Muslims as "the justice of Islam".

But what can you expect of a religon of goat-fuckers whose prophet promised them Paradise if only they would murder their neighbors and steal their stuff and rape their women. But that's Islam, the religion of Peace.

It is the teaching of Mohammad (mhrh) that Allah loves to have sins concealed.
Yes. Allah hate Al-Mujahiroon, those who sin publicly.

[Gregz]

Yes. Allah hate Al-Mujahiroon, those who sin publicly.


The Muslims are very touchy about fact that Pedo Muhammad was into little girls and you only have to qoute their filthy texts on Aisha to drive them up the wall.

http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Screen-shot-2012-01-31-at-1.28.11-PM-500x366.png

[Petr]

Yes. Allah hate Al-Mujahiroon, those who sin publicly.
Perhaps only through observing the Islamic system (or the Talmudic system) can Christians truly understand and appreciate the Gospel teachings about the dangers of Pharisaical morality.

From an ethical viewpoint, Muslims are basically a one big sect of Pharisees - sanctimonious and censorious in public, rather more flexible in private. As long as outward respectability is successfully maintained, secret or semi-secret sins can be brazenly practised.

Significantly, Muslims do not believe in Original Sin or depravity of man, so it's easier for them to be ignore their inner sinfulness and pretend to be holy.

Other rigidly structured Asian cultures largely share this tendency to Pharisaism - social decorum is much more important for Oriental pagans than individual's private virtue.

[Opus131]

Are you referring to Raymond Ibrahim? He is a Coptic Christian, and thus has zero reason to spare the precious feelings of Muslims:

http://www.inquisitr.com/213172/the-plight-of-egypts-coptic-christians/

My mistake on assuming he was a Muslim renegade.

[Occident]

During my first tour of Iraq, our base's security cameras (which had night vision lenses) on a number of occasions caught locals engaged in bestiality. I'm not just repeating rumor; a good friend of mine personally saw the footage live.

[Gregz]

During my first tour of Iraq, our base's security cameras (which had night vision lenses) on a number of occasions caught locals engaged in bestiality. I'm not just repeating rumor; a good friend of mine personally saw the footage live.

Iraqi Arabs and Kurds are pond slime. The Assyrians, Syrians and Lebanese are a much better class of people.

[Ixtab]

When it comes to bestiality, Arabs and Muslims (http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Bestiality#Pedophilia_and_Bestiality) seem to be the world's worst offenders. Pakistan ranks number 1 for such varied search terms as "animal sex," "camel sex," "donkey sex," "dog sex," and "horse sex":

Google ranks Pakistan No. 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches per person for certain sex-related content.

Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for "horse sex" since 2004, "donkey sex" since 2007, "rape pictures" between 2004 and 2009, "rape sex" since 2004, "child sex" between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, "animal sex" since 2004 and "dog sex" since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.
The country also is tops -- or has been No. 1 -- in searches for "sex," "camel sex," "rape video," "child sex video" and some other searches that can't be printed here.
No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan
Kelli Morgan, Fox News, July 13, 2010

Here are the Muslim countries and how they placed in the top five world ranking of various bestiality-related internet search terms:

Pig Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
Donkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
Dog Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
Cat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Egypt (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
Horse Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Turkey (No. 3)
Cow Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
Goat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1)
Animal Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Morocco (No. 2) Iran (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
Snake Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Malaysia (No. 3) Indonesia (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
Monkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Indonesia (No. 3) Malaysia (No. 4)
Bear Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 2)
Elephant Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 3) United Arab Emirates (No. 4) Malaysia (No. 5)
Fox Sex: Saudi Arabia (No. 1) Turkey (No. 4) Source (http://eye-on-the-world.blogspot.ca/2006/05/research-muslims-are-hungry-for.html?zx=8217155d54b475ad)

In 1923, the Director of Health in the British Mandate government in Palestine sent out a questionnaire to his Principal Medical and Health Officers in the country, asking them to report on various sexual practices and attitudes among the Muslim Arab population. As a result, the British discovered that the Muslim Arabs engaged in bestiality:

The Nablus officer finds sodomy and “similar vices” “not uncommon in some of the towns but less so in the villages where...bestiality is by no mean unknown” and “immorality...rather lightly regarded” in those villages that are closer to the larger towns. He comments, “in the villages there seems to be curiously little feeling against bestiality which I have heard admitted in a very airy way on more than one occasion. Sodomy is considered disgraceful but not I think more so than ordinary immorality” (III).
"Unnatural Vices" or Unnatural Rule? The Case of a Sex Questionnaire and the British Mandate
Ellen L. Fleischmann, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Issue 10, 2000

In Southern Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh and Balochistan, sex with animals is a common practice among rural youths and considered a rite of passage into adulthood:

In southern Punjab, much of NWFP, Sindh and Balochistan sodomy and bestiality are common among rural youths. In fact, he caught two boys trying to rape a goat in the vicinity of the mazar of Hazrat Sultan Bahu. The punishment meted out to them was 10 blows with a chhittar (shoe) each on their butts. They protested however that in many rural areas having sex with an animal was considered a rite of passage on the way to becoming full members of the male society!

Desegregation of the sexes and promiscuity
Ishtiaq Ahmed (associate professor of political science at Stockholm University), Daily Times, June 27, 2006

Bestiality is common among boys of tribal Arab cultures:

Miner and DeVos (1960) comment that amongst Arab tribal cultures, "Bestiality with goats, sheep, or camels provides another outlet. These practices are not approved but they are recognized as common among boys." Havelock-Ellis states "The Arabs, according to Kocher, chiefly practice bestiality with goats, sheep and mares. The Annamites, according to Mondiere, commonly employ sows and (more especially the young women) dogs."

http://www.servinghistory.com/topics/Historical_and_cultural_perspectives_on_zoophilia::sub::Zoophilia_Through_History

[Gregz]

When it comes to bestiality, Arabs and Muslims (http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Bestiality#Pedophilia_and_Bestiality) seem to be the world's worst offenders.

Take a look at this Ix! :rofl:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ6AD4TeqAQ&t=360

Heres the filthy pedo touching poor little Aisha between her legs while he was 'praying'.

Hadith no: 300
Narrated / Authority Of: Aisha
I used to stretch my legs towards the Qibla of the Prophet while he was praying; whenever he prostrated he touched me, and I would withdraw my legs, and whenever he stood up, I would restretch my legs.
http://ahadith.co.uk/chapter.php?page=2&cid=65

[Petr]

"LA: The following is a corrective to the superficial modern Western belief that when it comes to women, Islam is to be seen as a threat only to modern feminist equality, as though the Europeans of any epoch would not have been repelled by the Islamic treatment of women. Luther in the 16th century, not a high point for women’s rights in the modern sense, is disgusted by the systematized oppression and inferior status of women under Islam and the derogation of monogamy. This shows us that Islam violates not only our liberal views of women’s status, but traditional Western views of women’s status as well; Islam is not just contra liberalism, it is contra Westernness itself."

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/007358.html
This sort of liberal revisionism ("all patriarchal cultures have been equally wicked") is a common cliché in the egalitarian-relativist narrative.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/022375.html

Stoking up the lie that the West, until the day before yesterday, treated women the way Muslims do


James P. writes:

The UK Telegraph reports (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9258403/Asian-sex-gang-were-acting-within-cultural-norms.html) that British historian David Starkey believes that the actions of the Asian sex gang in abusing young white English girls were just an expression of their unique, vibrant culture: “Those men were acting within their own cultural norms. Nobody ever explained to them that the history of women in Britain was once rather similar to that in Pakistan and it had changed.”

LA replies:

Starkey’s ignorant equation of Muslim treatment of women with pre-feminist Western treatment of women is of a piece with the common Western view (constantly repeated by “conservatives” such as Daniel Pipes (http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/003025.html) and Condoleezza Rice (http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/008465.html) as well as liberals) that the West prior to the rise of modern liberalism was at least as tyrannical and cruel and bigoted as Islam. The Western liberal and conservative intelligentsia tell hateful lies about the traditional West, constantly describing Islamic extremism as “medieval,” i.e., as the equivalent of the medieval Western period which was the matrix and parent of the modern Western period, and then they expect that the West, having been taught to despise its own spiritual and historic roots, will somehow survive the challenge of an antithetical civilization that has been imported en masse within its borders.
Here is another example of such tripe:

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/10/the-hard-edge-of-empire.html

We know about the real world of the era steampunk is riffing off. And the picture is not good. If the past is another country, you really wouldn't want to emigrate there. Life was mostly unpleasant, brutish, and short; the legal status of women in the UK or US was lower than it is in Iran today: politics was by any modern standard horribly corrupt and dominated by authoritarian psychopaths and inbred hereditary aristocrats: it was a priest-ridden era that had barely climbed out of the age of witch-burning, and bigotry and discrimination were ever popular sports: for most of the population starvation was an ever-present threat.

In 1867, during one failed Cretan uprising (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretan_Revolt_(1866%E2%80%931869)), a man who represented the liberal avant-garde of his own day - an American abolitionist Samuel Gridley Howe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Gridley_Howe) (who had fought in his youth as a volunteer in the 1820s Greek War of Independence and later married Julia Ward Howe, the authoress of The Battle Hymn of the Republic) - wrote a letter to London Times where he explained to what extent Turkish standards of conduct differed from Western ones:

It is notorious that the Turks like to make prisoners of boys, girls, and women; and their treatment is often so cruel, and so abominable, that one can hardly find comprehensible language in which to speak of it. The deplorable truth is, that the social condition and institutions of the Turks have developed monstrous passions, and the moral standard among them is so low that crimes which of old called down fire from heaven, now excite no indignation, nor even surprise. The government cannot, if it would, restrain such monsters. Hundreds of Cretan mothers have solemnly, and with unmistakable simplicity, assured me that what causes them and all the women they know, to shudder at the thought of falling into the hands of the Turks, is the certainty that they and their children, of both sexes, will be exposed to personal outrages and abominations.

In a word, Turkey is chargeable, upon ample evidence, with cruel and unnatural treatment of women and children taken in war, or subjected to her sway, which ought to prevent her being admitted within the pale of civilized nations.
http://archive.org/stream/cretanrefugeesa00howegoog#page/n54/mode/2up


Indeed, how often were women and children so afraid of pre-modern Western armies that they preferred to be blown up rather than taken alive?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretan_Revolt_(1866%E2%80%931869)#Destruction

In the powder room, where the majority of the women and children hid, Konstantinos Giaboudakis gathered the people hiding in the neighboring rooms together. When the Turks arrived at the door of the powder room, Giaboudakis set the barrels of powder on fire and the resulting explosion resulted in numerous Turkish deaths[16].
The hegumen Gabriel gathering the besieged near the powder magazine

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Arkadi1866.jpg


To provide a comparison - even the "half-Western" Mexican army that besieged Alamo allowed enemy women to depart unharmed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamo#Aftermath

Impressed with Susanna Dickinson, Santa Anna offered to adopt her infant daughter Angelina and have the child educated in Mexico City. Dickinson refused the offer, which was not extended to Juana Navarro Alsbury for her son who was of similar age.[127] Each woman was given a blanket and two silver pesos.[140] Alsbury and the other Tejano women were allowed to return to their homes in Béxar; Dickinson, her daughter and Joe were sent to Gonzales, escorted by Ben. They were encouraged to relate the events of the battle, and to inform the remainder of the Texian forces that Santa Anna's army was unbeatable.[127]