myrrh bait

[Strangelet]

the guardian posted a video of a young girl being flogged in public by the taliban because "She came out of her house with another guy who was not her husband, so we must punish her."

here's the account


Two men hold her arms and feet while a third, a black-turbaned fighter with a flowing beard, whips her repeatedly. "Please stop it," she begs, alternately whimpering or screaming in pain with each blow to the backside. "Either kill me or stop it now." A crowd of men stands by, watching silently. Off camera a voice issues instructions.
"Hold her legs tightly," he says as she squirms and yelps.


It strikes me that her punishment for committing a "promiscuous" act reads like the screen play of a sado masochist porn scene. In fact its hard to argue that there isn't more sexual charge in the public display than there ever was in her walking out of her damn house with a guy.

or is that just my diseased western mentality?

[BeautifulBurnout]

And of course the guy got beaten too, for walking out of the house with her?

Thought not...:mad:

[Sean]

When I hear about how great a state under Sharia law would be, this is what I think of.

[Rog]

bunch of fuckin aresholes

[dubman]

gentlemen, i have invented the auto-response mechanicisimal in case of such an abscence by thee member in question. [/frink]

*click*
*whirr*
*chunka-chunk... printing*
*tear*

a-ha! yes and now to read it...

"these are just the stories the media takes and exaggerates to paint a disproportionate picture to make sure the antagonistic relationship with muslim countries continues. i'm sure if there was an equally keen focus on ahorrent acts committed in the US those countries not under a democracy would shudder and be relieved with their own form of rule."

gentlemen you may now PROCEED.

[dubman]

oh and this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/31/karzai-accused-of-bid-to_n_181153.html) is also a baggo fun (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/5080797/Hamid-Karzai-signs-law-legalising-rape-in-marriage.html)

[Deckard]

Obviously no argument from me about the 'delights' of any society governed by such a strict, literal reading of a text that's only ever been the product of bronze age (or in Islam's case, iron age) ignorance and barbarity.

That Washington installed Karzai, a former member of the moujahadeen with his intimate contacts to Bush Snr and the CIA should explain why women's rights aren't exactly high on the agenda here. Despite the 2002 rodeo-rhetoric about freedom being on the march and women walking the streets liberated, did we honestly expect any different? Because the growth of the moujahadeen is the last significant point at which it all changed direction, isn't it?

Women's rights in Afghanistan have been on a continuous downward path ever since the late 70s-early 80s, when Afghanistan did have a government committed to them: equal education, equal access to health provisions, the abolition of the veil, the introduction of women into politics, etc. A government that was genuinely trying to drag the country into the (then) 20th century.

Remind me what we did about that?

[BeautifulBurnout]

In fairness, this extreme form of Islam is just that - extreme, and doesn't represent Islam in Pakistan. The Pakistani Supreme court (http://geo.tv/4-3-2009/38980.htm) is forming a Bench to investigate it, and the majority of Pakistanis are in uproar about it.

So, to a certain extent, I suppose I am parroting the Myrrh "boilerplate response" provided by Dubman, in that it is easy to take these incidents as representative of all Islam. That would be a little like taking the persecution of "witches" in Kenya (http://www.alternet.org/election08/99118/sarah_palin_linked_her_electoral_success_to_prayer _of_kenyan_witch_hunter/) as representative of all of Christianity, which it clearly isn't.

[Strangelet]

I suppose I am parroting the Myrrh "boilerplate response" provided by Dubman, in that it is easy to take these incidents as representative of all Islam. That would be a little like taking the persecution of "witches" in Kenya (http://www.alternet.org/election08/99118/sarah_palin_linked_her_electoral_success_to_prayer _of_kenyan_witch_hunter/) as representative of all of Christianity, which it clearly isn't.

But why is it possible to clearly describe the positive affects a religion has on a culture but impossible to discuss the negative affects a religion has on a culture? For example. you hear all the time that religious community x is one that is more honest and charitable. But I don't often see people taken seriously when they say that religous community x is one that is promotes child abuse and subjugated will.

I guess I'm thinking one *can* take these incidents as representative of Islam, as much as witch hunting with christianity. Which is not saying that Islam is inherently evil or even does more evil than good. Its simply saying that the religion *is* a contributing cause to unethical behavior.

I mean I can come up with a great religion that has its own code of laws: Rexia Law. And Rexia law is written in pheonician poetry by a revered but eccentric person in a small truck stop town in wyoming. And it says we should do x,y,z but its not Rexia law that's to blame when the inevitable side affects and adverse consequences arise from everyone doing x,y,z. That's human error. Because Rexia Law is perfect as God is perfect. So basically anything that is indefensible and smacking against common sense and prima facie human understanding of ethics : that's a singular rotten apple that's spoiling the bunch. But all the good stuff? that's Rexia law man.

[Deckard]

In fairness, this extreme form of Islam is just that - extreme, and doesn't represent Islam in Pakistan. The Pakistani Supreme court is forming a Bench to investigate it, and the majority of Pakistanis are in uproar about it.

So, to a certain extent, I suppose I am parroting the Myrrh "boilerplate response" provided by Dubman, in that it is easy to take these incidents as representative of all Islam. That would be a little like taking the persecution of "witches" in Kenya as representative of all of Christianity, which it clearly isn't.
...and before anyone says it - yes of course there's a deeper and more widespread problem with Islamic fundamentalism than Christian fundamentalism (including Kenyan witches(!)) - but your point stands.

Funnily enough, I started typing (but deleted) my own boilerplate response, about the futility of asking "what is the real Islam" and how, through a few different twists of the dial of history, a few battles going the other way, we might easily have ended up with Islam as the dominant moderate religion of secular states today, and Christianity or Judaism as the religion latched onto by countries taking a literalist approach to the Bible and using it to justify all manner of oppression.

I accept that the Qur'an isn't the Bible, but there still seems to be sufficient barbaric nonsense in both should a society ever choose to take ANY of them literally and strictly - and I include treatment of women in that. I think we get a bit obsessed with the current extreme notion of violent jihad and Sharia Law that we often forget how much of modern Islamic extremism has its roots in 1980s Afghanistan rather than in some inherent difference in values between Islam and other religions. Personally I'm interested in the political reasons of why this slide away from Afghan progress happened, and why it's continuing to happen. You often hear people dismissing it simply as "that's Islam" or "that's what it says in the Qur'an" or even "that's just how the natives think and behave" - and I think that's just refusing to see the bigger picture, even though Islam is quite clearly the lynchpin.

But then I'm personally sceptical of the belief that we owe our own supposed enlightenment and progressive values to the fact that our societies happened to come from a Judeo-Christian rather than a Muslim origin. I think we (GB followed by the US) just happened to be the victors in enough battles and the wielders of enough power for our own societies to evolve to their current ways (evolve in the sense of affording equal rights, tolerance, free speech, etc to our own citizens if not other countries')

I can only imagine how much further we'd have evolved had we decided to instigate Rexia Law. :D

[Strangelet]

I can only imagine how much further we'd have evolved had we decided to instigate Rexia Law. :D

it boggles the mind. I can confidently say that instead of burhkas, women would wear purple feather boas.

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

... women would wear purple feather boas.


I'd have never thought you'd lend yours' out. How thoughtful of you.

[bas_I_am]

In fact its hard to argue that there isn't more sexual charge in the public display than there ever was in her walking out of her damn house with a guy.

or is that just my diseased western mentality?

I don't know, it may be just that. . . I read the response of an Islamic elder saying that while the punishment was warranted, its execution was flawwed in that it called for the beating to be administered in private by a prepubescent boy.

I could't help but feel that there was some pedophelic misogynistic eroticism at the root of it all. that may be MY diseased western mentality, too

PS please excuse any spelling errors. alot of 4 syllable words I am too lazy to look up right now :confused:

[myrrh]

I am leading a group out in the countryside and will not be around proper civilisation for another week, so sorry to disappoint in the slow responce to this. I actually didn't even know this happened, but when I am working like now, I am basically cut off from the world (I guide tourists).




I guess I'm thinking one *can* take these incidents as representative of Islam, as much as witch hunting with christianity. Which is not saying that Islam is inherently evil or even does more evil than good. Its simply saying that the religion *is* a contributing cause to unethical behavior.




I would agree with you here in the fact that you can discuss all aspects of religions. However, this is based on what you considered ethical and unethical.

I am not sure what exactly the point that this thread was going to bring up - was it the woman issue, or the punishment for the crimes issue.

If it is the woman issue, then we know that the Taliban oppresses women. However, Islam does not. The evidence is clear all around in this, and if you actually speak to muslim women on this, they will tell you.

If it is about the flogging, then I have no issues with flogging as a punishment. Everyone talks about this being barbaric, but the reality is this type of punishment works to stop crime. The criminal system in the US, for example, does not work. It does nothing to prevent crime from happening, and it is generally repeat criminals.

As of 2007, 7.2 million Americans were incarcerated, on probation or parole. This is 1 out of 100 Americans, which is the highest rate in the world. These numbers are signs of a dysfunctional society.

So, if you are going to this route, then I can't see how saying the Wests way of doing things is any better. In fact, I would say it is worse because it is not solving the issues with crime.

[King of Snake]

If it is about the flogging, then I have no issues with flogging as a punishment. Everyone talks about this being barbaric, but the reality is this type of punishment works to stop crime.

please provide evidence to back up this "reality". Generally speaking, I think it's more realistic to say that no form of punishment has ever served (or worked very well) to stop crime, but is rather a form of retribution by society.
If a person is going to kill someone, it hardly matters if the punishment is 15 years in prison or a good old public flogging, neither is gonna deter him from his act.


As of 2007, 7.2 million Americans were incarcerated, on probation or parole. This is 1 out of 100 Americans, which is the highest rate in the world. These numbers are signs of a dysfunctional society.


Actually I think they are signs of a dysfunctional justice system more than a dysfunctional society in general.
Most of these people are incarcerated for drug-related offenses because we've collectively decided that smoking certain plants is a crime. And in the USA they take this crime just a little bit more seriously than in most other western countries (europe).

I think if something like cannabis use and posession would be completely decriminalised you'd see that incarceration rate drop quite rapidly to more normal levels.

[//\/\/]

i think that the woman's 'crime' (if you can call it so in a so-called unrepressive society) was disproportionately punished. so much so as to show the legal system to be hatstand, and repressive towards women. it's using the law as a tool of repression against women, as it's not applied across the sexes.

[Strangelet]

please provide evidence to back up this "reality". Generally speaking, I think it's more realistic to say that no form of punishment has ever served (or worked very well) to stop crime, but is rather a form of retribution by society.
If a person is going to kill someone, it hardly matters if the punishment is 15 years in prison or a good old public flogging, neither is gonna deter him from his act.

capital punishment has been shown so many times over to *not* deter crime that its supporters have generally stopped using the the crime deterrent argument.

but hey maybe flogging will work where electrocution has failed. Makes perfect sense.

[Deckard]

Everyone talks about this being barbaric...
That's because it is.

...but the reality is this type of punishment works to stop crime. The criminal system in the US, for example, does not work.
Those are two separate assertions. The latter doesn't validate the former, which incidentally is based on the outdated assumption that criminal decision-making is principally rational. It isn't, though it raises the question of which crime we're talking about here...

to stop crime
"She came out of her house with another guy who was not her husband". What a miserable, repressive, misogynistic society that must be, for that to be a crime. And you talk about other countries being dysfunctional!

I can't see how saying the Wests way of doing things is any better
First, the West does not equal the US, as these incarceration rates (admittedly from about 5 years ago) show:

US: 714 per 100,000 residents
Russia: 548
England/Wales: 141
Canada: 116
Australia: 114
France: 95
Japan: 58

Second, pointing out "the West's" failures does not make your way of doing things the right way, either morally or effectively (correlation does not equal causation and all that)

As of 2007, 7.2 million Americans were incarcerated, on probation or parole. This is 1 out of 100 Americans, which is the highest rate in the world. These numbers are signs of a dysfunctional society.
Discounting probation or parole, nearly 2.1 million people are locked up in prison in the US. You're absolutely right, that's appalling and more than any other country in the world. Keep in mind though that almost half a million of those are there for what is termed (perhaps misleadingly) 'victimless crimes' - mainly drug related (source: sentencingproject.org) We're not talking millions of murderers or rapists here.

(And of course we can only guess at the number of rapes that occur in countries like Afghanistan, which is a not-insignificant point)

Look, I don't think many people here would disagree that there's something seriously amiss about the US penal system. That's actually besides the point. That doesn't make it right to flog someone. That doesn't make it normal to punish women for exercising personal freedom when a man doing the same thing clearly wouldn't be punished. That doesn't make it right. Essentially what I'm saying is we're fucked up, but we're not that fucked up.

[Strangelet]

well done deckard. just like to add an observation to myrrh: the fact that your argument basically boils down to "yeah we'll we're not as dysfunction as thou art" means deep down you know this is bullshit, along with every other clitoral circumcision, honor killing, and 1000 witnesses to prosecute a rape, and all the other nonsense that happens all over the islamic world.

[Strangelet]

Anyway, myrrh, the point of this thread wasn't to give you shit. And you're a good sport about the copious amounts that are thrown at you.

I just wanted to make the claim that religions that have draconian sexual prohibitions end up acting out sexually charged rituals that can be considered more lusty than the actual behaviors they are trying to control.

In mormonism and catholicism it comes across as seedy one on one "confessionals" where exact visceral details of people's sexual history is expected to be spilled out to a sweaty guy behind a desk or wire mesh. Mormon temple rituals involve getting your bits and pieces "blessed" or simply invaded depending on how you look at it. And what's more pornographic? A couple teens making out or having to spill the dirt like a phone sex operator.

The example that this thread started with, the flogging, is prime example. Extra care is placed in making it a voyeuristic/exhibitionist act, putting her in the right position, etc.

I mean you have to be *really* into girls to put that much attention on what they wear, what they show, and who are their company.

Its like the scene in persepolis, where the girl gets stopped by the iranian culture police because her gait makes her ass move suggestively. Her reply is stop looking at my ass. indeed.

[Sean]

Its like the scene in persepolis, where the girl gets stopped by the iranian culture police because her gait makes her ass move suggestively. Her reply is stop looking at my ass. indeed.Classic. :D

Anyway, yeah, that's probably what troubles me the most about laws created to keep women's bodies hidden and such - why in the world do men in these societies lack the basic self-control required to be able to see a woman without objectifying her to the point that restrictive laws are even necessary? It's not the woman who's shown the skin of her calf that should be punished, it's the misogynistic jerk who can't handle seeing that skin who should be.

[Deckard]

Quite.

Tbh I think much of it is coming from this "sex is sin" meme that dominates primitive cultures. The old sexual desire=>guilt=>self-disgust thing. Not that that's a green card for promiscuity, 24/7 nudity and sex with animals (where IS jOHN today?) but it's an unhealthy extreme all the same.

[Strangelet]

Quite.

Tbh I think much of it is coming from this "sex is sin" meme that dominates primitive cultures. The old sexual desire=>guilt=>self-disgust thing. Not that that's a green card for promiscuity, 24/7 nudity and sex with animals (where IS jOHN today?) but it's an unhealthy extreme all the same.

its funny that your thought process went from sex with animals to jOHN.

how are you using the word primitive? i just started thinking of the trobriand islanders who are apparently quite frisky. Then there's the victorian era....

i'm thinking that the sex is sin thing pops in and out of western culture. One minute we're at woodstock, the next we're taking a turn about the garden pinky locked with Mr. Darcy. One minute we're wearing white doilies, black robes and sober hats, the next we're watching Mrs. Loveit perform in the country wife.

Anyway, my shocking assertion is that this flogging, like several other judeo-christian rituals, are an actual sex act. One that is intended without admission, to titilate (god I love that word).

[taoyoyo]

Anyway, myrrh, the point of this thread wasn't to give you shit.

... Sorry, I very rarely post these days but I still read the forums.

I just wondered... if that was not the point of your thread, why did you use the title 'myrrh bait'?

Seems like almost every time something controversial goes down in the middle east we expect myrrh to just pop in and justify it because of his path?

Anyway, just an observation. Maybe even food for thought. Carry on.

[Strangelet]

Seems like almost every time something controversial goes down in the middle east we expect myrrh to just pop in and justify it because of his path?


glad you brought that up.

I came up with the phrase "myrrh bait" on another thread, feeling guilty that I was talking a lot of trash about something that he's devoted his whole life towards. The phrase is a form of self mockery *because* i know that we expect him to be our islamist whipping boy. The fact that his responses are always mature and gracious has been the greatest argument he's ever made for Islam. It doesn't mean I want to walk on egg shells around him either.

Ever notice that the two forbidden subjects in polite society: religion and politics, are same two dominant tools humans use to control other humans?

edit: weird. i did a search and couldn't find any post where I used the term before this thread. maybe I dreamed it. maybe I need to up the meds.

[IsiliRunite]

ad campaigns successful on how much skin is shown and the many other ways in which the reproductive perspective and conduct have been weeded out of western society less than in the middle east, which is arguably primitive, as well.

perhaps there is slightly more meritocracy in the scale in which women are treated in the middle east, although the most deserving of women are still treated relatively poorly. pretty women get things in the west. good caretakers are valued more elsewhere?

there are some appaling things all over, i've just noticed how readily people see the horror in OTHER regions first, if they happen to stumble on the horror they live in at all...

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

... maybe I need to up the meds.


Ya knooowwww, I'm reading this book right now titled "Beat the Reaper". It's quite funny, I'm laughing during most every page, & no, it's not crack addiction or pot or anything. But you may get some perspective on the medical community from it.

It's a bit like the DaVince Code, with truths about history intermingled with a fictional story as the plot.


And I know your meds bit is a joke. :rollseyes: smiley thingy, you guys suck cock bad.


***

Oh, and taoyoyo, if this was YOUR idea of a science project gone horribly wrong, you suck too.

[Deckard]

how are you using the word primitive?
Quite broadly. Overall, societies or cultures dominated by a certain sexual immaturity, whether that's a repressive and misogynistic Middle Eastern country like Afghanistan, or pass-the-smelling-salts Victorian-era Britain (or, for that matter, the crass "Ooo saucy!" Britain of the 1970s).

i've just noticed how readily people see the horror in OTHER regions first, if they happen to stumble on the horror they live in at all...
For my part, the point I'm making is a relative one. To recognize that the majority of women in my country and yours have far greater freedom than women in Afghanistan is not to deny our own countries' sexual inequality or ingrained misogyny. I have no problem acknowledging the faults in our own backyard, whether that's violence against women, salary inequality, or that every other Michelle Obama "article" focuses on what she's wearing and whether her arms are covered up. But we're a damn sight further ahead in terms of womens rights, no? If we're talking sexual immaturity and barbarism more generally, again I have no problem admitting that my country and yours are pretty pathetic when compared to, say, Scandinavia. But we're nowhere near as pathetic as a country where flogging and rape are accepted (explicitly or implicitly).