The Hoor’s Last Sigh
Quran 056.035
We have created (their Companions) of special creation.056.036
And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled),
Quran 056.037
Beloved (by nature), equal in age,-
Quran 056.038
For the Companions of the Right Hand.
There is one murder I will willingly commit. So give me Gabriel’s guidance. Send for a winged stallion. Let me climb the seven rungged ladder to Paradise. There is one there I wish to entomb. I will bring my own scimitar. I will kill The Hoor.
Beautiful, ideal, alabaster skinned idol of men’s delight; delightful, virginal, dark eyed apple of the martyr’s appetite; cursed Helens of Troy for all the believers. Her sins are dual.
Her first is to have transgressed against love — against dirty, angry, dusty, earthly love. You see, the Uproarious One has not made this world, and these particular times, very easy for the believers. Where one is not engaged in proving his humanity, one must try and keep others from selling it to Iblis. Where neither, the believe battles Mammon and his younger brother Baal. He battles civilizational sleep and the insomnia of insecurity. Throughout this cavalcade of existential desperation and barely borne stoicism, there is only one thing which keeps the believer on his feet. Only one ‘pack animal’ who shares his load. Only one confessor who hears his sorrow. Only one soul who shares his smile. I’m speaking, of course, of the Muslima. I’m speaking of the Muslima who is ruby-lipped, wrapped in Chanel, but unheard in Arabia; of the Muslima who is brave and vociferous, alertly pulling her chador in Iran; of the Muslima who props on her head the entire village’s laundry and chases roosters to slaughter in Pakistan; of the Muslima who sneaks out Grameen loans and dives for crayfish before sleep in Bengladesh.
It is this Muslima, in all her manifestations, that The Hoor has transgressed against. We ask how it is that we have become unable to give dignity to our women, and the answer is because we have been wenching before their very eyes; because we have already bought our whores and found nothing reprehensible in this. What is the incentive for any man to his portion of the Earthly Eternal Feminine if he has access to the The Hoor in Paradise? Why bother to lay his spirit on the desert to keep the Muslima’s cracked heel from bleeding? Why drape her with protection instead of cheap cotton? Why, fundamentally, love the woman of the world at all; and as such, love life? No, The Hoor makes this impossible, and for my love of the Muslima I will murder The Hoor. For having had an appetite of the Muslima’s flesh perhaps I am a sinner, but in that pursuit a curious thing happened — I came to learn of her heart, which is sweet like pomegranates, and far more satisfying. If I should find myself in Paradise I will not whet my longing in a subservient Hoor’s dispassionate embrace. I will wish for immersion in the Muslima’s crooked smile. In her cantankerous elbow. In her happy knees. In her supined feet. Let Paradise be a celebration of woman’s inadequacy, because we men have been the greatest one.
Just as The Hoor makes impossible earthly love, she defiles the believer’s greater, more transcendental love. Is it acceptable when a man sits each day upon a measuring scale and enumerates his good deeds against his bad ones, then accounts for the “God’s Mercy” differential, and then resolves that he must “perform” (as if decency is an act), this many more good deeds to be with The Lovable? So, it is equally unacceptable that a believer aspire to Paradise based upon the pornographic lust for sculpted white thighs, of delicious aureolas, of edible lips. Since when did God become the greatest of the brothel owners? If He did, then do away with all talk of blasphemy and let us call Him pimp. I want none in Paradise who came to fulfill their ejaculatory impulse, unless that is the purpose of Paradise, in which case I will volunteer for hell. If it is the thought of an unearthly stripper that brings you to God, then be honest with us and make a great monument to your phallus and call it Islam; or, at the least, when we try to escape from you, we are not leaving Islam to become godless, just trying to be closer to God by leaving.
I have begun hunting The Hoor and will not respite till she is finished. Then we will gather together, man and woman, upon her funeral pyre, and take little pieces of her flesh.
And eat them like white raisins.
COPYRIGHT: Ali Eteraz
_______________________
Related @ U S-N:
In A Dream The Prophet Nietzsche Bid Me Write
Final Solution to American Reliance on Foreign Oil and The Muslim Problem
interesting post. didnt know you had it in you.
to save woman you will hunt the hoor? how about the neanderthal man who is in blind pursuit of her? as long as he exists - she will exist.
and, sadly, he will always exist.
well said khanzah.
i have said elsewhere that man must be reformed. see the link to my islamic reform interview at the top right.
also, my ‘hunt’ of the hoor represents that im not a neandrathal.
you feel me?
come on, feel me. ;) (maybe some neandrathal is left)
The question may be ‘what do men want’? Do we want women as equals or do we want them as ideals?
I suspect we ought to try them as equals- we haven’t done well with women as ideals.
They may want to be TREATED as ideals, but in the end, they want to BE equals.
[...] From a blog I just discovered, an incredible post on how the promise of virgins in paradise influences the Muslim man’s ideas of women on Earth. [...]
Do you see what you started, Eteraz!
sigmund, janum, in the end Woman wants to be treated like Fetus. as She should be. given Man’s rage towards Her ideal form.
islam is the religion of Woman, Slave, and Orphan. the qur’an enumerates patronizing rights in the same manner as a liberal constitution except it lets them be as they are without attempting to forcibly integrate them into the capitalist machinery. hence the persistence of the hoor, who i don’t mind. which makes islam superior.
Ouch.This hurts.
Thunk bout it befo. Dreaded the next (neccessary?)-err, superficial observation shared by Feministe. Maybe we can come to a ‘better’ conclusion than this. What do ya say ’sigmund carl and alfred,’ is it the transcendent ideals that tweek our perception of “women on earth” what bout the Others that aren’t skewed by muslim dogmas?
Interesting.
Thank you so much for this beautiful, moving piece so eloquently written.
Peace and Love.
Beautifully written, Ali.
One hair from a hoor’s plait let down into our reality would perfume all the world.
And an earthly woman granted Paradise will be infinitely more beautiful than that.
Men…always looking for heaven, while crushing her under their feet.
how about the neanderthal man who is in blind pursuit of her? as long as he exists - she will exist.
The problem being: She doesn’t really exist and she never will, except as a metaphor for the ideal and unattainable.
Let men and women in the real world deal with one another as real humans, here and now, warts and all, and perhaps the earth will be a bit more like paradise.
“Ouch.This hurts.
Thunk bout it befo. Dreaded the next (neccessary?)-err, superficial observation shared by Feministe. Maybe we can come to a ‘better’ conclusion than this. What do ya say ’sigmund carl and alfred,’ is it the transcendent ideals that tweek our perception of “women on earth” what bout the Others that aren’t skewed by muslim dogmas?
Interesting.”
I apologize if my post came off as condescending, or inferring that I think Muslims are all skewed by religious dogma. I clarified that post, and if you still think I’m wrong then please let me know. I’d love to hear your thoughts, as this is obviously an issue that I’m not exactly an expert in.
I thought the following, written by a non-Muslim woman, was a very interesting take on the cross-cultural presence of the ‘hoor.’
http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/
It’s no accident that her name — hoor or houri — is the same as our “whore,” which often reverts to the original in pronunciation, at least on the streets of South Boston. Her sacred Muslim manifestation is the virgin awaiting in paradise; her profane Western manifestation is the Penthouse Pet, spread-eagled for your delectation. She is man’s fantasy woman, to whom he is all too often faithful at real woman’s expense. She is his hourglass-shaped escape hatch from having to deal and get real. She is what lures men into monadic masturbatory solipsism, fucking only a projection of themselves. So powerful is her allure that real women suffer, starve and bleed to try to compete with her, to create her for him on earth. Prostitutes do it cynically and for money, but we almost all do it because it is the way to be wanted — to step into the shadow of his fantasy and try to merge with it. It’s a losing proposition. The Shadow moves on, always, leaving the real woman exposed for what she is — fleshly, flawed, aging, and worst of all, a subject revolving on her own center, not a satellite always facing and reflecting its master.
The hoor is you. Man. It is nothing more than a reversal to call women hoors. You are the pig that makes hoors out of women. You project everything that YOU do onto women.
Understand who the creator really is. Understand who has the real power. The planet is female. It is female created and female centered. It is females who give life to everything and everyone on this planet. Including you boys. It is only by our good graces that any of you boys even exist at all.
Males are insignificant. So insignificant that we could eliminate 99% of males off the planet and life wouldn’t skip a beat. You’re basically useless pieces of shit taking up space on the planet and destroying everything in your wake like some kind of cancerous virus. You are disrespectful of life. You are disrespectful of your creators. You are irresponsible with power. And you are disrespectful to our mother, the earth.
All of life on the planet now hangs in the balance because of the irresponsibility of you boys. I think women have given you more than enough time and chances to mend your ways. You refuse to do so. And for that reason, women must step up to the plate and take back control that has always been ours and take responsibility for the life that they give. And that is why many of us have decided to stop creating and producing the disease called man.
Go ahead and pray to your make believe gods that never were. Maybe he’ll produce you some sons. **chuckle** We both know better than that tho, now don’t we? I’m exposing you boys for the frauds that you are. Your gods are nothing more than pure delusional fantasy.
You boys are nothing but mutants. A mistake. Incomplete. A freak of nature. The Y chromosome is nothing more than a mutant X. It’s not even a Y. It’s half of an X. The mighty X chromsome carries 1500 characteristics and the entire blueprint for human DNA. The Y chromosome carries a mere 20. Males can’t create or produce anything other than a mess.
Even if women don’t decide to kick you boys off our planet, Mother Nature has decided to correct her mistake. The Y chromosome is degenerating. As science already knows your eventual fate will be: extinction.
How’s that for a religious reckoning?
No worries about the future of humankind. As science already knows, you boys never have been necessary. Women can reproduce with either males or females. You boys are neither here nor there. And never were.
But I’ve got to give you boys this. You’re got one helluva fantasy life. Enjoy it while you can. Before reality kicks you square between the eyes.
wow Luckynkl: reading your post was like watching XMen the movie. Which comes out next month, woo-hoo!
I, on the other hand, always kinda liked mutants.
Eteraz — great post! I just read it out loud to Dymphna. She’s having me send it to Shrinkwrapped, because it dovetails perfectly with his post today (which is here: http://shrinkwrapped.blogs.com/blog/2006/04/sex_islam.html).
woman as equal or ideal? Come on dude, the idea of an equal before god is the first and most basic of all ideals.
Baron,
thanks for the compliment, and feel free to send it; but i contend with the idea that it dovetails into the post you linked.
that post juxtaposes “islam” against “playboy” and faults muslims for having antipathy for the playboys of the world.
i think playboy is as much a disgrace to our culture as pornography of the hoor myth is to islam.
how about that? you might disagree but i bet dymphna thinks the same thing. in fact, she has often decried the “sluttification” of our culture.
i also refer you to ambivablog’s comments from above:
“Her sacred Muslim manifestation is the virgin awaiting in paradise; her profane Western manifestation is the Penthouse Pet, spread-eagled for your delectation.”
Salaamat Eteraz,
your eloquence is amazing mashaallah.
Poetics aside, don’t you think you are scapegoating the poor hoor?
i have no problems with her…it is our own skewed senses/perceptions that I have issues with.
Have you not read about the Prophet’s greatest love story with Khadijeh, or are you hell-bent on shedding what remains of your Muslim skin.
None of the Arabian women in my family, my aunts, my mother, my wife, my cousins, are submissive nor a victim of a domineering husband or father, none of them carry any burden nor have bleeding feet. They are doctors, lawyers, artists, researchers, on top of warm pious sensual wives.
So I take issue with your racist generalizations.
It is you who is sex-obsessed and are hiding your own ills by pretending to represent the Muslima. The last thing the Muslima needs is someone to validate all the myths and orientalist imagery that help kill and incarcerate the Muslima’s brother, father and son day in and day out.
Your whole theory is flawed. It is Islam who initiated the Sexual liberation for both women and men. It is Islam who made it not only lawful but a duty for a woman and a man to enjoy sex as long as it is within marriage. No hang-ups about it, unlike Judaism and Christianity which restrict it to procreation. It is not Islam that idealizes Woman and thus condemns her to continually disappoint the lustful man.
To reform means injecting new life into something that has intrinsic value through constructive criticism not stereotyping and bashing. It would seem that increasingly and pushed by the songs of praise coming from left and right, you seem to have lost the plot.
Speak to your fellow Muslims if you want to reform them. Don’t stab them in the back. They have enough on their plate.
Annafssul Ammaratu biSsu2
I understand that there is increasing pressure on you as a Muslim living in the United States to justify your existence. But don’t vent your frustration out on the wrong crowd.
You can’t publicly refer to the 7oor ‘al ‘een is such a blasphemous manner and still claim to be a Muslim.
Don’t stay on the fence, either you have the guts to shed your skin once and for all, or you have to accept to play by the rules.
You know, I can almost see the day when old Daniel Pipes the tireless Islamophobe will invite you over coffee.
It’s a difficult choice one is to make. To become a superstar, or suffer the burden of anonymity and persecution but under the grace of God InshAllah.
We can’t allow ourselves to succumb to the constant pressure being applied from all sides.
Don’t be an elitist and supremacist like Nietzsche was. He lacked love in his life and was anything but a healthy normal individual irrespective of his great literary and philosophical achievements.
There is much to be discovered still, don’t panic. And don’t despair.
Whoa, Marwan, chill. What’s with the censorship and takfir, yo?
Lucky also needs to chill.
I’ve seen the worst of man, myself. And the best. The worst of religion. And the best.
And I find a pretty compelling mix of it all on this blog.
Salaam Dear Ali:
If true believing men get 72 houris in paradise, what do true believing women get? 72 strapping male lovers who will be patient and loving and want to satisfy the woman, and not fall asleep right afterwards?
I would rather be with my beloved wife for eternity, than with all the houris ever created. Besides, why would i want to disappoint 72 more women? You can have my share. So that is 144 for you. Good luck, you’ll need it. :)
It is Islam who made it not only lawful but a duty for a woman and a man to enjoy sex as long as it is within marriage.
-apparently not a message yet received by all those practicing female genital mutilation, or marriage to child brides (Was Aisha raped? What about the Jewish captive Mohammed slept with the night after he wiped out her family and tribe? Let’s have a straight answer people, did he act according to the accepted mores of his day, yes or no? and are Mohammed’s mores still today’s mores among Muslims, yes or no?). One also wonders how much the temporary wives of Iran enjoy their men. But, anyhoo, what the heck is a “duty…to enjoy”. Sounds kind of leathery… Number three wife, time to perform your duty!!
Eteraz,
No, I was more thinking of the “Muslim male’s obsession with sex” end of the argument.
Baron,
Understood.
As long as we recognize that it is not the Muslim male who has an obsession with sex. Even in the most open Western cultures men are drawn to dehumanizing women through sex.
Marwan,
I find it incredibly curious that after your previous calls in various comments to the beauty of “Love” and “the heart of Muhammad” you have now chosen to express yourself in this acerbic manner. You don’t know me, yet last time you chose to attack my prayer habits and my submission to God. From some (now regrettable) sense of amiability, I let it go and responded in a manner that was congenial and receptive. I give an inch, you take Kashmir.
First of all, I’m not sure you are aware of this, but to suggest that someone steps out of the fold of Islam by talking as I did of the “hoor” is patently idiotic. 1) It betrays that you really don’t know anything about classical Islamic Law (which I’m going to assume you ascribe to), or the definition of “belief” or the definition of “apostasy.” Under classical Islamic Law, belief in the “hoor” is not an essential part of being a Muslim. So even under the strictest standard I am not a non-Muslim. In fact, I am even free to talk about raping a hoor.
Second, under many other interpretations of Islamic Law, an accusation of apostasy is, in itself, an act of heresy because the only people qualified to make that judgment — again, under Islamic Law — are the Prophet Muhammad (no longer alive), and the Islamic State (in which you and I are not). Call me apostate all you like, I’ll call you heretic. Real progress right, ya akhi?
I thank you for your offer to “play by the rules” - but what you forget is that it is I that the Quran has said gets to set the rules when it comes to belief. There is a verse in Surah Baqrah about it. I know it by heart but I rather prefer you go look it up for your personal improvement. I assure you, I neither need your assistance, nor will I look for your intercession on the Day of Judgment.
It’s really cute how you seem to believe that you have ‘figured me out’ — that I’m some devout Nietzsche phallus-sucking, Daniel Pipes loving, back-stabbing type of believer. It’s cute in the way that total absence of intelligence is cute; the way that a dumb dog is cute. You are damn right I’d accept a coffee date with Pipes and then I’d tell him where I think he is wrong and where I think he is right. Unlike you I am quite confident in my abilities to make an impact on people’s perceptions of Muslims. And I do this, despite the fact that I’m aware there are believers like you who would love nothing more than to have me shut up. Though I will try to make people aware of the true Islam, I won’t make apologies or excuses for the mad mullahs, the fgm, the terror, the crushing anti-semitism, and the other litany of evils that MY PEOPLE engage in. Because I’m not an apologist I should “shed the Muslim skin?” It seems to me that you wish for only those to remain with Islam who want to do nothing to improve it. Fact of the matter is, you may be perched within an enlightened family (though clearly they failed to impart that enlightened attitude to you), a large majority of OUR PEOPLE are not living in such families.
As to Nietzsche, I am not even going to bother. You know Nietzsche as well as you know me. Since you got everything wrong about me you cannot be expected to know much more about him.
Oh dear. People have accused me of being a ‘cheerleader’ for progressive Muslims in the past, but I gotta say, I’ll never be ashamed of breaking out my pom-poms for monsieur etereaz.
Of course, I express my admiration by sublimely butchering his nickname…
this is a great post Eteraz, and I definitely think you kicked Marwan’s ass.
I think some of the notions that women are ruby-lipped and wrapped in Chanel, chasing after stallions in Pakistan is more from a male perspective (how men romantisize women rather than how they view themselves), but nevertheless I believe your core idea was that conceptually an idealized false image of womanhood hould not be lusted after over more than real muslima’s! And this I very much agree with.
[Marwan,]
Eteraz,
[I find it incredibly curious that after your previous calls in various comments to the beauty of “Love” and “the heart of Muhammad” you have now chosen to express yourself in this acerbic manner. ]
Passion rather, and Love can be passionate.
[You don’t know me, yet last time you chose to attack my prayer habits and my submission to God. ]
What I actually said verbatime was “..Do you still hold your hands up and supplicate or is it of no useful merit any longer?..”
To which you replied “I must admit I haven’t prayed in a while. Largely from laziness. But supplicate? Plenty.”
At no point did I attack your prayer habits, how would I know whether you prayed or not. But it’s interesting how you divulged that which I didn’t ask for.
[ From some (now regrettable) sense of amiability, I let it go and responded in a manner that was congenial and receptive. I give an inch, you take Kashmir.]
I thank you for the amiability congeniality and patience you’ve shown. I was myself wondering how you were able to keep your cool. Now I know better..
[First of all, I’m not sure you are aware of this, but to suggest that someone steps out of the fold of Islam by talking as I did of the “hoor” is patently idiotic. ]
No it’s not. It’s common sense, when one can be so disrespectful about something that is explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an, it clearly is overstepping the boundaries and it sure doesn’t require knowledge in “classical Islam Law”. How about you survey it with your fellow co-religionists be they lay or gurus one of these days and come back and call me idiot if you are right. I’ll be waiting.
[It betrays that you really don’t know anything about classical Islamic Law (which I’m going to assume you ascribe to), or the definition of “belief” or the definition of “apostasy.” ]
I don’t need a silly “definition” of belief, I can recognize it. You’re putting words in my mouth; I find that sneaky and dishonest. Yes I meant to show my strongest disappointment at the direction you’re taking, you’re free to take heed of it or wipe your bottom with it. As far as I am concerned, a Muslim is not to take the Quranic Ayaats a subject of ridicule or contempt in public.
[ Under classical Islamic Law, belief in the “hoor” is not an essential part of being a Muslim. So even under the strictest standard I am not a non-Muslim. In fact, I am even free to talk about raping a hoor.]
A’uzubillah. You’re twisting the facts with such carelessness. Where did you get your apprenticeship in Islamic Law may I ask? Belief in 7oor may not be essential, I grant you this for who knows what it actually means to begin with. I don’t know really understand the whole concept of 7oor. But not believing in a vague concept mentioned a few times is one thing, and bashing the concept based on a personal interpretation in public is another. We can be as disrespectful privately about just about anything. But the moment we utter words in public, we become liable.
[Second, under many other interpretations of Islamic Law, an accusation of apostasy is, in itself, an act of heresy because the only people qualified to make that judgment — again, under Islamic Law — are the Prophet Muhammad (no longer alive), and the Islamic State (in which you and I are not). Call me apostate all you like, I’ll call you heretic. Real progress right, ya akhi?]
Ya Akhi, again, I did not suggest that you are an apostate. Prove me wrong. And yes I agree it might put the potential “accuser” in a state of heretic limbo.
[I thank you for your offer to “play by the rules” - but what you forget is that it is I that the Quran has said gets to set the rules when it comes to belief.]
As long as it’s privately expressed you can doubt the existence of God you can think anything you want even in the Name of God and his blessings. But when you articulate your capricious bursts of poetic energy in public, the whole situation changes. A Muslim is responsible. You cannot twist things around in the name of exercising your God given right to discuss.
[ There is a verse in Surah Baqrah about it. I know it by heart but I rather prefer you go look it up for your personal improvement.]
Not sure what I would be looking for but I’ll try.
[I assure you, I neither need your assistance, nor will I look for your intercession on the Day of Judgment.]
The Prophet is the only one would be of any help in that department apart from Allah.
[It’s really cute how you seem to believe that you have ‘figured me out’ — that I’m some devout Nietzsche phallus-sucking, Daniel Pipes loving, back-stabbing type of believer. ]
Well, I try. I don’t have to be 100% right. And you do have to agree that your sex-innuendos give ample clues. You pour your imagery out to the world, and ask that your site be advertised and whispered about but you get cranky and aggressive if some one starts connecting the dots.
[It’s cute in the way that total absence of intelligence is cute; the way that a dumb dog is cute.]
Well thank you. And I like you too.
[You are damn right I’d accept a coffee date with Pipes and then I’d tell him where I think he is wrong and where I think he is right.]
See I knew it.
[Unlike you I am quite confident in my abilities to make an impact on people’s perceptions of Muslims.]
You sure can make impact on people’s perceptions of Muslims, but what kind of impact. And is this what it’s all about? Making impact? As a Muslim you are to live for the benefit of the Ummah not by bashing it but caring and pointing out ways for progress. There’s a huge difference between the two.
[And I do this, despite the fact that I’m aware there are believers like you who would love nothing more than to have me shut up.]
What pompous rubbish. Your head is so inflated. And you dare talk of self-negation. Now I know what the “Unwilling” is for. I sure agree.
[Though I will try to make people aware of the true Islam, I won’t make apologies or excuses for the mad mullahs, the fgm, the terror, the crushing anti-semitism, and the other litany of evils that MY PEOPLE engage in. ]
You need to take a sabbatical and do a 3omra. You really don’t know what you’re talking about.
[Because I’m not an apologist I should “shed the Muslim skin?” It seems to me that you wish for only those to remain with Islam who want to do nothing to improve it. ]
I wish for those who care about Islam to try and offer their help not for those who keen on becoming superstars for bashing Islam so that Daniel Pipes and Co can get the satisfaction of having enlisted Muslims to do their dirty work for them.
[Fact of the matter is, you may be perched within an enlightened family (though clearly they failed to impart that enlightened attitude to you), a large majority of OUR PEOPLE are not living in such families.]
So now you can talk about the MAJORITY OF OUR PEOPLE just like that, perched within your Philadelphia zip code. Get off your wild horse dude.
[As to Nietzsche, I am not even going to bother. You know Nietzsche as well as you know me. Since you got everything wrong about me you cannot be expected to know much more about him.]
So I got things wrong about you. Time will tell.
Dear Steve,
you said on April 8, 2006 at 10:34 pm
[this is a great post Eteraz, and I definitely think you kicked Marwan’s ass. ]
I’ll try and impress you more next time.
[I think some of the notions that women are ruby-lipped and wrapped in Chanel, chasing after stallions in Pakistan is more from a male perspective(how men romantisize women rather than how they view themselves)]
Interesting.
[, but nevertheless I believe your core idea was that conceptually an idealized false image of womanhood hould not be lusted after over more than real muslima’s! And this I very much agree with.]
What load of rubbish. So the Muslim on the street, who barely knows how to read and make end’s meat is out there lusting for a “conceptually idealized false image of womanhood”.
You know, keyboards need to be regulated i tell you.
Who says Aye?
Mother goose said on April 8, 2006 at 3:53 pm
Has the avian flu reached the coast of the USA yet?
marwan - I took issue with your attempt to define who is and is not Muslim with your attack on Eteraz’s identity. Its not fair that simply because he has challenged certain ideas within the faith he should be maligned as a nonMuslim.
But with respect to your commentary, I think you’ve raised a good point about how most of the males who “lust after” hoor’s can barely read. As I’m sure you know, no one has died and come back to report on exactly what the afterlife is like let alone describe these hoor’s. This is pure conjecture based on weak reasoning. Worse, it harms muslima’s here by creating a false ideal that they will always fall short of. Hell, if you gotta die to get a good girl, something’s wrong in the umma. Nevertheless, when you get dumped for not having nice enough abs, you’ll understand.
Lastly, I find the entire concept of a hoor very amusing. On earth, trying to nail a bunch of 18 year old virgin’s is supposed to be wrong (unless you’re married) but in heaven all is ok? Why is heaven more sexually vulgar than earth? So people want their fantasies fulfilled… wouldn’t god consider people who have obscene fantasies like molesting a child not fit for heaven? Why does he consider perverts who like young virgin’s much better?
How any any real man get jacked up over a pair of big tits, shapely figure, nice legs, beautiful face…..wait a minute…., and uh oh,,,uh,,,,,, nevermind
As long as she keeps her mouth shut and doesn’t ruin everything by being a complete moron, the fantasy is intact
Sorry guys … for this to work she has to be Marie Curie also.
It must be something missing in me.
Marwan,
Let’s cut the fat. It seems that you are able to accept all doubt as long as it is private. Publicize negative elements or views about Islam or Muslims and you suddenly think the guy is either trying to become a superstar or his Islam is in question.
Here’s why you are wrong. All matters of dispute between Muslims get resolved using Islamic Law. It is our consent to God and his law — the Shariah — that makes us Muslim. Thus, for you to say that classical Islamic Law is irrelevant reveals that you don’t know what you are talking about.
Under Islamic Law one can only be ’shut up’ for questioning Islamic Theology if the Islamic State says so. It’s very simple: *you* are not imbued with the authority of an Islamic State. Therefore, your encouragment to me to keep it private is nice, but carries no weight. The fundamental problem with Muslim’s inability to deal with self-reflection is that they have no conception of the link between censorship and the authority of the state. Islamic Law — no law in fact — exists in a vacuum. You always need an ‘executive’ component. Without that executive component there is no *actual* Islamic Law, just a bunch of competing theories. To get to the point: all these distinctions about why I need to keep my doubts or my self-reflection private are meaningless in a place where Islamic Law is not part of the state apparatus. Let me put it another way: when Khomeini declared Rushdie an apostate, and said he should be killed: many Muslims took that to mean that Rushdie could be killed anywhere in the world. Under Islamic Law, though, Rushdie could only be killed within Iran. Islamic Law doesn’t exceed the bounds of the sovereign. Ibn Taymiyya. Muslims like to believe that because Islam’s moral prescriptions are universal that Islamic Law is suddenly universal too. It’s not. That’s part of the reason that Muslims have trouble consenting to the laws of the West even as they live there. I’m in America. I’ll say what I want. Got it? If I should ever end up living in an Islamic State, I’ll be that guy who tries to do away with the stupid blasphemy and apostasy laws so I can say whatever I want in public. So recite this simple mantra: public liability about questioning Islam can only attach where the Islamic States has passed laws on such matters.
As to the common Muslim guy being illiterate, you know fine well that is irrelevant. Actually, wait, the fact that you don’t know this tells me more about your exclusivity than mine. Most Muslims in most Islamic countries get their knowledge of Islamic Theology, and of the hoor, not by reading books, but by talking about them at the shop, hearing about them in the Friday sermons, and at halaqas, and when smoking behind the masjid. You don’t have to be able to read because there are plenty of priestly “ulama” telling you all about the hoor al ein.
You think I’m some kind of ivory tower American Muslim who has no idea how the Muslim world works. Give me a break. I was neither born nor raised in America. And when I go into the Muslim world I, like many of my American-Muslim peers, don’t return to the cosmpolitan centers and engage in pseudo-western behavior. There is plenty on this blog relating to my autobiography and what kind of social circumstance undergirds my development. Whether you look at it or not is irrelevant to me, but I know very clearly that when I speak about what gets said and what gets believed by the losers and the poor of the Muslim world, I know what I’m talking about, largely because I have lived as such.
As to the suggeston that I talk about the “conceptually idealized” notion of woman — those are not my words. So to accuse me of literary elitism is incorrect. In fact, all these problems with my ’sex-innuendos’ and lack of prudishness that you seem to be having, are due to my development *as a child in the Muslim world.* It was when I came to the U.S. that I realized that Islam didn’t have to be so, so - sexualized. I’m really curious: who do you hang out with when you go back to Egypt? Probably not the driver. Nor the Sa’eedi cart pusher, I’m sure. Mohandiseen doesn’t exactly have the kind of people who talk about bending hoories over and banging them (in their local vernacular). I say the same to you that I say to Islam bashers: get to know the Muslim world. It will surprise you.
By the way I laughed pretty loud when you suggested that an ‘umra would cure my alleged ills.
Do you have any idea how much money we Muslims (with money) spend going to the ‘umrahs, when so much of that money could be re-directed to charitable causes? There is no fard or wajib reason to go to ‘umra. In my mind, those who do it, are selfish people. I feel very strongly about this. To me the ‘umra is representative of a larger problem within Islam: if you spend enough money and go to a big mosque or some holy place you are now ‘fixed.’ That’s bunk. Everyone knows it. It’s the Muslim way of doing what the Catholic Church once did. They paid to become sinless. We fly to become sinless.
Welcome to Islam. Enough frequent flyer miles to Mecca make you saved.
how can you blame ali for his statement ” Fact of the matter is, you may be perched within an enlightened family (though clearly they failed to impart that enlightened attitude to you), a large majority of OUR PEOPLE are not living in such families.]”
to which you reply: So now you can talk about the MAJORITY OF OUR PEOPLE just like that, perched within your Philadelphia zip code. Get off your wild horse dude.
only to state to Steve:
So the Muslim on the street, who barely knows how to read and make end’s meat is out there lusting for a “conceptually idealized false image of womanhood”.
so one cannot say that some muslims dont live in enlightened families but you *can* claim that Muslims on the street can’t read or support himself??
get off your wild donkey dude.
oh the last comment was directed towards Marwan.
also I’m curious as to what you, Marwan, would accuse the Muslims on this blog who at times do agree with Ali. You basically are calling him a “bad” muslim [surely not an apostate] because a “good” muslim would keep their real thoughts at home and project only certain thoughts of Islam in public [surely thats not hypocrital]. For a Muslim to live in the manner you prescribe would lead one to think that Islam would not withstand public scrutiny. Sorry, but Islam is not that weak.
Anyway if Ali’s a so called bad muslim. Then what am I? I know you already think that I cannot read bc I am very much the average muslim on the street.
The mention to the “average Muslim” smoking behind the masjid is really heartening to me, because back home in Ukraine I’m more than happy to engage in elitism against Orthodox Christians. I’ve tried dialoguing, I’ve tried discussing, I’ve been called a “traitor bitch” and been threatened, now I mostly say “fuck you, your scraggly beard, your fat wife whom you beat, your snot-nosed sexually frustrated son, and your friends wearing potato-sacks to the cathedral.” I guess violent Ukraine has really stripped me of my compassion. I just want those people to die and leave me alone. I hate, and hate is painful.
ali, i am wif u as far as ur response to marwan’s futile line-in-the-sand. however, i am not wif u in ur characterization of the “average muslim”. it is a false caricature. illiterate people, poor people are not stupid. they act to benefit themselves given the tools they have– same as u and i– and it doesnt matter if their excuse is the maulvi saab at the nukkur or the libertarian ideologue at the student center.
Marwan said,
April 9, 2006 at 3:29 am
Mother goose said on April 8, 2006 at 3:53 pm
Has the avian flu reached the coast of the USA yet?
-nope, we’re still crapping as normal. But besides wishing me dead, could you please tell me why? I’ve always wondered if you Muslim guys admire Mohammed (pbuh) for getting his way with the ladies (if a nine-year-old, a captured slave, can be so described) or whether you understand his conquests as a sign of his less than perfect times. When you say Mohammed was the perfect man, do you admire him because he was bad, I mean because he was good as in the American colloquialism ” he baaad”, or because he really was good with the women if you understand the meaning of these stories in the proper light, or because he was good despite his manly weaknesses? Are these stories in the Sunna meant to be taken figuratively, literally, or what?
Genuinely confused and wishing someone would help me understand the Muslim world better so we can live in greater mutual espect, etc. etc.
Marwan: What load of rubbish. So the Muslim on the street, who barely knows how to read and make end’s meat is out there lusting for a “conceptually idealized false image of womanhood”.
The fact that the “Muslim on the street” wouldn’t (or perhaps couldn’t) use those words to describe the concept is neither here nor there. One does not need to be able to spell pneumosilicosis to be afflicted with it.
Wow, Ali, absolutely brilliant.
I need to blog a truly hedonistic response…
[...] Ali Eteraz, blogger extraordinaire, has put up a post on the houris, entitled “The hoor’s last sigh.” Cutesy title, but the post nonetheless opens up a whole lot of important questions. [...]
[...] Ali has many interesting posts, and you’ll have to go check out his site. Here are a few: Open Letter to Reformist Muslims A Message to Muslims - How to Protest Properly Muhammed on South Park Back to Patriarchy The Hoor’s last sigh Ali on the Couch; Sig talks w/ Reformist Muslim [...]
why don’t use just rename yourself christ dionysus?
Because I’m not a bleepin martyr Sana.
Ecce Homo references don’t impress me much.
***Because I’m not a bleepin martyr Sana.***
You’re not? Oops. I must be at the wrong party! :D
I have only been to your site a couple of times, commenting a little on your open letter to reformist muslims. Reading this post, I am impressed with your insight and your obvious writing talent. I believe I will pay much closer attention to your views in the future.
I find the debate between you and Marwan in the comments here to be very interesting and educational. That the debate exists, if only virtually, is a good thing.
Thanks Chris,
That’s actually only the first of such virtual debates of that sort I’ve had. They happen to me, more often, in person.
Re: the post.
White raisins? Ewwww, gross.
[...] This is the day for referrals. Last week in the Carnival of Feminists I spotlighted Unwilling Self-Negation’s piece The Hoor’s Last Sigh about the images of women in the Islamic afterlife and how it affects the treatment of women in this one. Now she’s back with a post entitled Dude, Muslim Lesbians! [...]
Ali, I haven’t read all the comments, but this post and your own answers to Marwan do disturb me. I do not judge people, but I do wonder when you said the belief in “hoor” is not part of classical Islam. Belief in the Quran as the Word of Allah (swt) (and hence everything in the Quran) is, and the hoorul ain is described in the Quran.
May we all see the light, and accept it.
aameen
I am awed yet I am disturbed by this belief in The Hoor. after reading this piece I did my research and found it really offending on my part as a woman. I may not be so knowledgeable in the Islam religion but what I learned is truely saddening for the Muslimah that is. It seems to me their men seek heaven thru ‘The Hoor’ without realizing they are trampling on heaven itself the women beside them, the Muslimah… :(
Wow. Wow. More of this, please, Ali.
I only follow religions for their historical clues. Most religions are built on mythologized versions of real events.
Didn’t the concept of “Paradise”, houris, grapes and wine come from the “R and R” (”rest and relaxation”) camps for jihadi soldiers?
The largest was near Mecca, and called “Heaven”; it was stocked with girl and boy slaves for sex (’houris’), wine (’rivers of wine’), etc.- everything forbidden to the common believer was supplied to the active fighters for Islam. These camps were originally real places that existed on earth.
Fight for Islam, go to “Heaven”!
alz,
please provide a reference. i have never heard of such a thing.
in a novel by rushdie, he sets up a fictionalized place that sounds similar to what you have described. however, that is fiction.
also, the hashisheen of alamut did provide such camps for their acolytes. but that was four hundred years after muhammad.
so i’d be interested in seeing your reference.
I can’t provide a reference. I’m well outmatched by by your intellect and scholarship. I’ve seen your comments at other debates and marvel at your honesty and fervor in defense of Islam.
(And yes, I do fear Islamism.)
This may be a “chicken and egg” question; which came first? The anecdotes or the camps? I can’t think of a more effective method for recruiting pagans to the cause of jihad- it simply sounded too plausible to resist repeating it.
Thanks for the hashisheen reference.
I subscribe to the ‘camp’ theory, as it seems the most likely explanation of the origination of the concept of ‘houris in Paradise’.
I appreciate it that we are both repulsed by the ‘heavenly brothel’ method of recruitment. It does seem do incite exactly the type of drones needed.
Jihadi rationales use rape psychology to breed soldiers- who then take territory, females, and the inventions of captive cultures. After exhausting the flow of slave tribute, and smothering the host society, more expansion is necessary.
The Hoor is one of these rationales. When it comes to establishing new bases for razzia raids and extracting the Jizya tax, she seems to be quite the incentive. Are the Christians right when they claim that the Hoor of Babylon will consort with the False Prophet at the end of time?
>>As a Muslim you are to live for the benefit of the Ummah
Bummer. And I thought I was worth more than a simple servant to be used and abused by the group, only to be thrown away of I voice my reservations in public…
no matter where one goes the pursuit is for the truth; keep it revving
hey the chicken came before the egg cos God created all the living creatures of the world and told them to multiply and fill the earth.
for some reason i have chosen to respond to the smallest, most insignificant phrase from the essay and the comments on it… lol
but yeah down with idolatry!
Bismillah
Most men deny it to the world, especially if they want to put down Islam.
Deny what?
Well, the fact behind the oldest profession in the world - that has always flourished in every part of the world, regardless of religion.
What is the oldest profession in the world?
Selling women’s bodies for a price. Prostitution.
Okay, let’s talk about another crime that has always taken place, regardless of time, place or people. Rape.
Any man who defies the fact that men are sex-obssessed hounds is a liar. If it weren’t for man’s lust after women, the above-mentioned profession and crime would not have existed in every era.
Have you ever heard of men’s bodies being sold to sex-hungry women for a price? Maybe it happens, but not the way it does with women.
Have you ever heard of women raping men? Again, maybe it happens, but rarely.
Fact of the matter? Sex drives men. It is their basic, everyday, incessant desire. Women’s bodies are their obssession.
Consequently, hoori’s.
If my Lord Allah had not given men the incentive of Hoori’s in Heaven, these sex-obssessed men would not have stopped lusting after and fornicating with the women of the world. Alhamdulillah, Allah promised them Hoori’s so that these sex-machines leave the women of the world in peace!!!
Me? I am a happily married Muslimah who is RELIEVED that her husband will be shared with Hoori’s in Heaven (if we make it there by Allah’s Mercy). I do have a life besides being my husband’s sex partner. Why not let lowly creations (Hoori’s) satisfy him why I have other pursuits of pleasure in Paradise? (May Allah grant us place in it, Amen).
Women should have a better pastime than serving men, both in and outside bed! In this world, or the next.
Allah, Most Just, has done us Muslim women a HUGE FAVOUR by making Hoori’s that will keep our husband’s occupied. If a woman of the world who enters Jannah will want sex there, she will have it as, how and when she desires it. No man-satisfying obligations in Jannah, alhamdulillah.
I pity those teenaged girls in the West who let their lusty boyfriends ram them in backseats of cars and in alleys. Even more those who allow the whole group of guys to have sex with them at one time. “Oh if I don’t let him f*** me, he’ll dump me and move on the next popular girl in school! If I am still a virgin by the age of 20, I will be considered the biggest loser! I am a nobody and a nothing unless I have been rammed on dates by all my boyfriends by the time I am 24. I am the FREE, LIBERATED, WESTERN WOMAN!”
Poor used, abused, “free” ladies. They are nothing if the guy on the street doesn’t admire their naked thighs or fake boobs popping out of their blouses. I pity you, O used woman of the world.
May Allah bless all women of the world with the guidance of Islam, and with a place in Allah’s Paradise where they will NEVER, EVER have to worry about satisfying some lusty guy in bed. They will be truly FREE, with all the lust-satisfying work being done by a creation lower than them. Any sex they want will be on their own terms, as and when and how they desire it.
ALLAHU AKBAR.
This is one of the saddest comments I have read. It makes me physically sad to read stuff like this.
You have essentially painted your entire marriage as one in which you are the object of derision and not the object of love.
It isn’t the hooris you should be concnerned with ukhti.
Whatever happened to a heaven where we unite with God and focus on spiritual, higher things and leave this base physical stuff behind us?
Heaven, a brothel? The thought makes me sick. Why must we keep living by the inequities and rules governed by living in physical bodies?
This concept of Heaven is purely a fantasy for men who don’t seem to understand at all that as spiritual beings we are freed from bodily lust and all other bodily related things. Heaven is existance with God, and union with His pureness. We serve Him, and apsire to heaven to be with him not because we selfishly focus on sexual pleasure in our eternal existance.
By the way, thank you so much for this blog, eteraz. I do not follow the Islamic faith and am trying very hard to understand those that do. Many people not familiar with Islam, who are limited to understanding it based on news broadcasts, feel that Muslims cannot question issues in their faith for fear of being ostrisized or, more severely, being given a death threat.
The non-Muslim world cannot do much when it comes to questioning the faith. The responsibility comes to progressive Muslims to do this. The comments of outsiders are written off as malice.
All faiths have to be questioned because the interference of human desires and delusions always threaten the purity of a faith. The corruptions in the Catholic Church are a clear example.
Keep writing, keep questioning and challenging and keep using that God-given gift: the brain.
Thank you so much for this blog!
For the BILLIONTH TIME, rape is first and foremost driven by the desire to humiliate and hurt, not by a desperate sexual need that can be quelled within minutes with the right hand. A class on human sexuality is in order for you, SadFar. I’m dead serious.
***I pity those teenaged girls in the West who let their lusty boyfriends ram them in backseats of cars and in alleys… They are nothing if the guy on the street doesn’t admire their naked thighs or fake boobs popping out of their blouses.***
Wow. What a saucy scenario. What an imagination. You ought to be writing smut. You could make a ton of money.
For the record, my boyfriend “rams” me in the bed we share, and only when I want it. I quite like it. He’s not a sex-crazed beast, and I am not a doormat. We are human beings and view ourselves as such. This is true of most women in mature, committed relationships.
Honestly, I can’t decide if you’re a man-hater or a woman-hater. Probably both. How sad.
Ask your boyfriend if there are times when - despite being in a mature, committed relationship with you - he wants to go to a club and get laid with the first girl with an attractive body that catches his eye [the key word of the question is "want"]. Tell me if he says “yes”.
Next, tell me why Playgirl is not so widely-sold a magazine as Playboy.
Next, answer my question about why there aren’t even half as many fashion magazines with men on their covers as there are with beautiful women on their covers?
Next, tell me why fashion in your part of the world (or even in ours, I accept) shortens a woman’s skirt, takes off her sleeves, and plunges her neckline, but puts a waistcoat AND a jacket on the man?
Next, explain to me why polygamy is illegal in your part of the world whereas Hugh Hefner’s public liasons with multiple girlfriends at his mansion are acceptable. [I am sure, his girlfriends are also in "mature, committed relationships". They are not the subservient sex-slaves in black shrouds stuck in Saudi Arabia that we read about in anti-Islamic bestselling novels, are they?].
Then come tell me about “mature, committed realtionships”.
Marriage? What’s a marriage? Oh yeah, the covenant restricting our sex partner to only one. Hummm.
SadFar,
The only thing that’s sad is your previous argument that it is the existence of hooris which assures that the men of the world do not turn into raving raping lunatics.
As a man in this world who deeply respects women, even as I flirt with them, that’s incredibly offensive to me.
Your critique is an interesting one: female supremacism under the guise of both traditional Islam and radical left feminism.
Interesting doesn’t make it any less specious.
“Me? I am a happily married Muslimah who is RELIEVED that her husband will be shared with Hoori’s in Heaven (if we make it there by Allah’s Mercy). I do have a life besides being my husband’s sex partner. Why not let lowly creations (Hoori’s) satisfy him why I have other pursuits of pleasure in Paradise? (May Allah grant us place in it, Amen).”
I’m also a happily married Muslimah who also has a life outside of the bedroom (I should be working at work rather than blogging, for example), but loves her husband enough to realize that keeping him happy in every way is not some chore or duty. I keep him happy because I love him. Simple as that. I also realize that if any woman comes near him, in this world or the next, I will scratch her eyes out. Again, simple as that.
“Allah, Most Just, has done us Muslim women a HUGE FAVOUR by making Hoori’s that will keep our husband’s occupied. If a woman of the world who enters Jannah will want sex there, she will have it as, how and when she desires it. No man-satisfying obligations in Jannah, alhamdulillah.”
Your husband has an obligation to satisfy you as well. If you cant have sex in this world
“as, how and when” you desire it, something is not right. Marriage is not just a sex-for-security bargain.
Also, I think it behooves a Muslim woman to not be so arrogant and look down upon non-Muslim women. You dont know whom Allah (swt) will elevate, and whom he will humiliate. That poor teenage girl getting “rammed” (sheesh, what wording) in the back of the car could have a heart of gold that Allah chooses to purify, and you could lose that Heaven that you feel entitled to because of your arrogance. Humility is always a good thing.
I wonder why nobody answered my questions. My opinions are more important to you? :-)
Definition of a “Good Muslimah” nowadays: “loves” her husband, but can not share him with a sister. *Memory Flash* A Sahaabi from the Ansaar of Madinah, offered his Muhaajir Muslim brother one of his wives to wed, that’s how much he loved his brother in Islam.
Does love teach us to be selfish? Or selfless? To love Allah, His laws, His decree (Oh Hoori! I am all for you! Come satisfy my husband, because its what HE wants and what His Creator wants for him) and to love our brothers and sisters in faith more than our own selfish desires?
Oh no, love teaches us to be selfish! Right? In Muslim marriage, sex is NOT a duty, its a you-give-then-I-give bargain, huh? I love you, yeah, but not if you even DARE to think of taking a second wife!
Answer my questions guys. Judge me later.
And the men? Whether Muslim or non-Muslim, the fact is that they want and desire the company of, and sex with, a multiple of young, beautiful women at one time.
SadFar
This is a sexual issue not a Muslim issue.
You kinky monkey!
“A Sahaabi from the Ansaar of Madinah, offered his Muhaajir Muslim brother one of his wives to wed, that’s how much he loved his brother in Islam.”
I want to see the source of this.
As to sex within marriage: it’s not a duty. Neither it is a bargain. It is born of willingness and mutual respect.
The Quran itself states that marriage is for companionship.
Your views about men are truly frightening.
Eteraz, I am with you on her views on men.
Sadfar, believe me I will love to answer you. I’m trying not get fired though, so I cant do it too much in detail. But ok, to the extent that your point is that men are *in general* more sexually aggressive than women, fine, I agree. Women’s bodies are a thing of beauty and naturally more pleasing than a man’s (in my heterosexual opinion). But are they all sex-starved, perverted, hyper-sexual beings that will rape you at the first glance of cleavage but for the promise of hoors in Heaven? No. You disrespect them by thinking that.
“Oh no, love teaches us to be selfish! Right? In Muslim marriage, sex is NOT a duty, its a you-give-then-I-give bargain, huh? I love you, yeah, but not if you even DARE to think of taking a second wife!”
If my husband came and told me he wants to marry a second wife, I will tell him “ahlan-wa-sahlan” - be my guest, because I want him to be happy. But for the misery that it will cause me and my kids (if I have any) I will ask him to leave me and marry as many women as he wants to make himself happy. I will do this without any bad feelings in my heart toward him, because well, I love him. But the funny thing is, he loves me too, and doesn’t want to be with anyone else. Now, I am not that stupid to think he is not attracted to other women - ofcourse he is. I am attracted to other men too, its human nature. But since marriage is more, much much more than sex and attraction, (both of which are not an issue between us) we are happy, alhumdullilah.
Does that answer your questions? Please answer one question for me -are you a convert? Just wondering. Thanks.
Ok, I’ll bite.
“Ask your boyfriend if there are times when - despite being in a mature, committed relationship with you - he wants to go to a club and get laid with the first girl with an attractive body that catches his eye [the key word of the question is “want”]. Tell me if he says “yes”.”
Well, my boyfriend doesn’t like clubs, and he’s always been paranoid about sex with random people, but a fantasy is a fantasy. He’s curious about my fantasies as well. He has a crush on Sophie Ellis Bexter, I on Orlando Bloom. Heck, we even watch erotica together. Being in a relationship does not automatically make on immune to the physical delights of other human beings. We don’t walk through our lives with blinders on. We don’t need them.
“Next, tell me why Playgirl is not so widely-sold a magazine as Playboy.”
Actually there are two reasons. One is that Playgirl is not as well-made, intelligent, or provocative. Two is that women are generally socialized to conceal their impulses.
You might be interested in a new study that recently came out, confirming what most have thought all along, women respond to erotic images just as easily as men.
The link is here:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/06/19/newsflash-women-react-to-erotic-images/
“Next, answer my question about why there aren’t even half as many fashion magazines with men on their covers as there are with beautiful women on their covers?”
There is a variety of conjectures out there, but one of the most readily accepted viewpoints in my circle has to do with the patriarchal commodification of the female body. Personally, I tend to buy magazines with beautiful men on the cover quite frequently. Then again, I also don’t fantasize about girls getting “rammed” in the back-seats of cars. *cough*
“Next, tell me why fashion in your part of the world (or even in ours, I accept) shortens a woman’s skirt, takes off her sleeves, and plunges her neckline, but puts a waistcoat AND a jacket on the man?”
That’s a very narrow definition of fashion and not at all indicative of the industry, which seeks to sexualize both genders, especially when you consider that a good portion of prominent designers are gay men. Personally, I saw more men in skin-tight jeans walking the streets of Amman than I have anywhere else, and I like to think of myself as well-traveled. Oopsies.
“Next, explain to me why polygamy is illegal in your part of the world whereas Hugh Hefner’s public liasons with multiple girlfriends at his mansion are acceptable. [I am sure, his girlfriends are also in “mature, committed relationships”. They are not the subservient sex-slaves in black shrouds stuck in Saudi Arabia that we read about in anti-Islamic bestselling novels, are they?].”
I think you’re playing on a false dichotomy here. Most women in the world do not fit into either category. For my part, I think that Hugh Hefner does it for the publicity and power, just like the rich men of Saudi do. It really is the same thing to ome. Though I have to say that Playboy bunnies not only have the authority to leave their relationship with Hugh, but also to simply come and go on their own accord. The money they make is also theirs to keep. They’re in there for the business aspect, and they commodify themselves knowing that their lifestyle is not, technically “acceptable.” I’m not sure just what kind of vision of life in America you subscribe to, but Hugh & his women are an oddity here, hence their perverse appeal.
“Then come tell me about “mature, committed realtionships”.”
Well, darling, what would you like to know? Perhaps I can put more fuel into your “ramming” fantasies, do tell me how I can help.
“Marriage? What’s a marriage? Oh yeah, the covenant restricting our sex partner to only one. Hummm.”
Wait, so NOW you’re saying that it restricts sex partners? What about those houris that you were so passionately defending? How do they fit into the “covenant”? This is bollocks, and you know it.
Sadfar - Natalia kicked your ass. Nevertheless, why both getting into a “which culture is better” war?
Let Natalia stay in her committed mature relationship. Just don’t call anybody in western society whores while you sleep with four wives (one wife being a rotating, temporary wife) and unlimited concubines - that would be hypocracy.
And if you feel I’ve predefined you unfairly given the fact you don’t personally act that way and neither do most Muslim, just remember the crap you said about western relationships might fall under the same level of stereotyping with grains of truth.
First:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Auf came (from Mecca to Medina) and the Prophet made a bond of brotherhood between him and Sad bin Ar-Rabi’ Al-Ansari. Al-Ansari had two wives, so he suggested that ‘Abdur-Rahman take half his wives and half his property. ‘Abdur-Rahman replied, “May Allah bless you with your wives and property. Kindly show me the market.”……..
[Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Al-Nikah: 262]
Thanks guys, for taking the time out to answer my questions. Especially sister Maleeha, I really wouldn’t want to jeopardize your job! To answer your question: no, I am not a convert. I was born into a Muslim family in the East (Alhamdulillah). And you’re right, being a Muslim I can not put all men in the category of sex-machines or rapists who are urged on by the mere glimpse of cleavage. All of Allah’s Prophets were men, weren’t they? They don’t fall in that category at all. Admittedly, others don’t either. I just tend to get very emotional whenever I hear of rape or incest or stuff like that – where ever it occurs in the world. And I do NOT 100% agree with Natalia about it being only about hurt and humiliation. Sexual frustration is very much a part of it. How else can we explain fathers raping their minor daughters (and not just once, but repeatedly)? That happens in our part of the world. Its so SAD.
Thanks to Natalia too, for answering my questions. I am grateful to you for sharing.
I do get some idea about the mature, committed relationship outside marriage. Its okay to look (“no blinders”) admiringly at other members of the opposite sex. You don’t have fantasies of girls being rammed, but you DO watch other (probably more explicit) stuff together with your boyfriend. And you both – as you said – have fantasies and discuss your crushes on other people. Hmm. Explains the divorce statistics in the West, but then that’s only my opinion again. Maleeha is right, its but natural to be attracted to the opposite sex, even if you are in a healthy marriage/love relationship. Now I understand even better why Allah has commanded Ghudde basar.
There are some issues of faith and belief involved here (on my part). Well, the line I said about “Marriage is the covenant restricting your sex partner to just one” was a sarcastic jest. It was meant to denote the beliefs of some people in the West, not what I believe.. Because I am a big supporter of polygamy and as you said, I passionately defended the Hoor (though she does not exist in this world). I definitely defend polygamy for men in the Paradise created by Allah: any fool can see that males (all species including the homo sapian) are polygamous. [No matter what they tell us women, they want multiple beautiful women simultaneously. Do they get what they want? Nah. Not here, anyway.]
Men have outnumbered women in all geographic areas, in any era of human history. Look at any demographic study, and you will see. Polygamy is a good solution for such a scenario, unless some women are to be left unmarried (sans children) for the rest of their lives. Why not provide a home and chances at motherhood to them too? For that, if some married women allow their husband to be shared, other women will benefit. And the husband will get variety. (ahem, my twisted opinion about men at work again!) Best of all, the oldest profession in the world will not flourish (as majority of prostitutes do what they do to earn money in order to eat and stay alive, not because they like being “rammed” every other night by a totally different male homo sapian….oops, I mean, man).
As for “ramming” in backseats of cars, I think you assumed that that was “my fantasy”. Actually, “darling” (sorry for borrowing your word) I read that in an article written by an ex MTV VJ describing how she lost her virginity to her boyfriend when she was 14, in the backseat of a car, how she disliked the whole experience, but did it because all her friends had been “deflowered” by their boyfriends, and she felt the peer pressure for being the only virgin among them. It was not my fantasy. Same goes for “being rammed in allies” that happens too…..date-rape and party-rape is, as of yet, a more Western phenomenon (just like harems and belly dancers and concubines for Mogul Emperors/Saudis is mostly an Eastern thing). Maybe I should have included “being ‘rammed’ after being drugged in the bathroom” as well, but it slipped my mind (it was on Sky News a few weeks ago, two Brit school girls were “done” this way by the whole school soccer team). Oh yeah, guess how that VJ ended her article? She said she had decided to not have sex for some time, because she “felt that that was the only reason guys wanted to date her, most of them expected to have sex with her on the first date”. Recently I read a quote by Halle Berry as well. What was it she said? “Men just want me for my body, nothing else”. Hmm.
If your boyfriend does not like clubs or frequent them, well, you could’ve re-phrased the question and asked him. Instead you answered for him. {What happened to freedom of expression?} I DID mention the keyword being “want”.
There’s no argument about women responding to erotic images. Studies on Internet pornography have shown that a significant percentage of users addicted to it (40%) are women. You yourself being an erotica customer (as you said). The point was understood better by sister Maleeha – in men, the urge to look and touch at members of the opposite sex (not erotic scenes) is greater. Simple as that.
Well at least I agree with the “commodification of women” in fashion that you spoke of.
I’m going to reply in detail on that hadith in due time.
For now, you need to realize that the hadith is NOT speaking about something that the Prophet did; but something done by his companions.
His companions were fallible and made many mistakes.
Assuming, in this case, that the women did not consent, I think this marriage was un-Islamic. If the women gave consent, then perhaps it was valid. Point is: we don’t know. You referenced it as if to suggest that the consent of the women did not even come up, which is a misuse of the hadith.
***Nevertheless, why both getting into a “which culture is better” war?***
That’s the thing, Steve. I don’t think one culture is inherently better than another.
I think mutual respect and love transcend culture.
***Hmm. Explains the divorce statistics in the West, but then that’s only my opinion again.***
Well, thank you for condescending, SadFar. I attempted to engage you on a personal basis, but it’s obvious now that we’re caricatures on legs to you.
***any fool can see that males (all species including the homo sapian) are polygamous.***
The current biological argument goes that our entire species is not inherently monogamous. Hence multiple orgasms in women, and a particular shape of the penis that was, as scientists at Duke argue, used to help push out the semen of rivals.
***she disliked the whole experience, but did it because all her friends had been “deflowered” by their boyfriends, and she felt the peer pressure for being the only virgin among them.***
On the other side of the fence, women get “peer-pressured” into marrying young, and sharing their husbands, even though some of them do not want to. It doesn’t matter if you think these women are “selfish.” They suffer, just like the VJ must have suffered.
My original point, however,FALSE was that you’re playing a DICHOTOMY. The polarized extremes that you provide in your argument do not engage human beings, they engage stereotypes and fringes.
I don’t fit into your dichotomy. I honestly don’t even know anyone personally who does. In America, or the Middle East.
***date-rape and party-rape is, as of yet, a more Western phenomenon (just like harems and belly dancers and concubines for Mogul Emperors/Saudis is mostly an Eastern thing).***
Rape is under-reported in the Middle East, South Asia, and the Far East.
***If your boyfriend does not like clubs or frequent them, well, you could’ve re-phrased the question and asked him. Instead you answered for him. {What happened to freedom of expression?} I DID mention the keyword being “want”.***
I already told you that my boyfriend and frequently have these sorts of conversations. Overall, he is more naturally monogamous than I. I come from a pretty wild family and a very permissive culture (not American, sorry, no, can’t reinforce your stereotypes there). I tend to turn my head for pretty men a whole lot more.
***Studies on Internet pornography have shown that a significant percentage of users addicted to it (40%) are women. You yourself being an erotica customer (as you said).***
What’s this “addicted” stuff? Oh, that’s right, all of us erotica consumers are hopeless perverts.
Sheesh. You know, the small cafe I frequent is also a meeting place for an entire clan of niqaabis, and somehow, we are all able to stay very pleasant to each other.
Where is the love?
And where is your claim to “men getting turned on more by images” than women? Oh, that’s right, it’s moot. :)
***Well at least I agree with the “commodification of women” in fashion that you spoke of.***
I think that women in veils are just as easily commodified. Not to mention the men.
I try not to worry about these things when I get dressed to leave the house, though. Other people’s hang-ups are not my problem. That’s the beauty of living in a relatively open, diverse community.
***FALSE was that you’re playing a DICHOTOMY.***
Oopsies. False is supposed to be next to Dichotomy. ;)
sorry to lower the tone but this thread is hilarious
“ramming”……
HOOR = EARTHLY BELIEVING WOMAN RECREATED VIRGIN IN PARADISE
Evidences:
1. Hasan Hadith of Tirmidhi
An old woman came to the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) and said: “O Messenger of Allah, pray to Allah (subhanahu wa ta`ala) that I will enter Paradise.” He said jokingly, “O Mother of So-and-so, no old women will enter Paradise.” The old woman went away crying, so the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) said, “Tell her that she will not enter Paradise as an old woman, for Allah (subhanahu wa ta`ala) says: (We have created [their Companions] of special creation, and made them virgin-pure [and undefiled]) (Qur’an 56:35-36).” (Reported by al-Tirmidhi, it is hasan because of the existence of corroborating reports.)
2. Tafsir Ibn Kathir in the saying of Abu Ubayda
Qur’an, Surah Al-Waqia(56):35
“””[إِنَّآ أَنشَأْنَـهُنَّ إِنشَآءً - فَجَعَلْنَـهُنَّ أَبْكَـراً - عُرُباً أَتْرَاباً - لاًّصْحَـبِ الْيَمِينِ ]
(Verily, We have created them a special creation. And made them virgins.`Urub, Atrab. For those on the right.) The Ayat describe the women who will be on the beds and couches, but since mentioning the beds hints to them, they were not directly mentioned. For instance, Allah said that Sulayman said,
[إِذْ عُرِضَ عَلَيْهِ بِالْعَشِىِّ الصَّـفِنَـتُ الْجِيَادُ - فَقَالَ إِنِّى أَحْبَبْتُ حُبَّ الْخَيْرِ عَن ذِكْرِ رَبِى حَتَّى تَوَارَتْ بِالْحِجَابِ ]
(When there were displayed before him, in the afternoon, well-trained horses of the highest breed. He said, “I did love the good instead of remembering my Lord,’’ till the time was over, and it had hidden in the veil (of night).) (38:31-32), “it’’ (Tawarat) refers to the sun setting, according to the scholars of Tafsir. Al-Akhfash said that Ayah,
[إِنَّآ أَنشَأْنَـهُنَّ]
(Verily, We have created them), implied the maidens of Paradise although it did not mention them directly. Abu `Ubaydah said that they were mentioned before in Allah’s statement,
[وَحُورٌ عِينٌ - كَأَمْثَـلِ اللُّؤْلُؤِ الْمَكْنُونِ ]
(And Hur (fair females) with wide lovely eyes. Like preserved pearls.) Therefore, Allah’s statement,
[إِنَّآ أَنشَأْنَـهُنَّ]
(Verily, We have created them), meaning, in the other life, after they became old in this life, they were brought back while virgin, youthful, being delightfully passionate with their husbands, beautiful, kind and cheerful. “””
3. Tafsir of Muhammad Asad in the saying of Al-Hasan Al-Basri
Surah Waqia (56)
(22) And [with them will be their] companions pure, most beautiful of eye, [The noun hur - rendered by me as “companions pure” - is a plural of both ahwar (masc.) and hawra (fem.), either of which describes “a person distinguished by hawar”, which latter term primarily denotes “intense whiteness of the eyeballs and lustrous black of the iris” (Qamus). In a more general sense, hawar signifies simply “whiteness” (Asas) or, as a moral qualification, “purity” (cf. Tabari, Razi and Ibn Kathir in their explanations of the term hawariyyun in 3: 52). Hence, the compound expression hurin signifies, approximately, “pure beings [or, more specifically, “companions pure”], most beautiful of eye” (which latter is the meaning of in, the plural of ayan). In his comments on the identical expression in 52: 20, Razi observes that inasmuch as a person’s eye reflects his soul more clearly than any other part of the human body, in may be understood as “rich of soul” or “soulful”. As regards the term hur in its more current, feminine connotation, quite a number of the earliest Quran-commentators - among them Al-Hasan al-Basri - understood it as signifying no more and no less than “the righteous among the women of the human kind” (Tabari) - “[even] those toothless old women of yours whom God will resurrect as new beings” (Al-Hasan, as quoted by Razi in his comments on 44: 54). See in this connection also note on 38: 52.]
4. “Imam Muslim recorded that Muhammad bin Sirin said, ‘Some people either boasted or just wondered who are more in Paradise,men or women. Abu Hurayrah said, `Has not Abu Al-Qasim (Muhammad) said,…”
“In his explanation on Sahih Muslim, Imam an-Nawawi said that the scholar, al-Qhadhi `Iyadh, said that, the apparent meaning for this Hadeeth indicates that women will be the majority of the People of Paradise, while another Hadeeth states that they will be the majority of the People of the Fire. Thus, al-Qhadhi continued, this collectively indicates that women comprise the majority of the Children of Adam. Al-Qhadhi continued by saying that, all this pertains to female Children of Adam, because there are Texts stating that one, among the People of Paradise, will have numerous Hurs [as wives].”
5. Imam Muslim (4495) reported that Jabir Ibn Abdullah narrated that the Prophet of Allah, peace be upon him, said,
“I was shown Paradise and I saw the wife of Abu Tal`hah (Umm Sulaim).”
6. Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalanai
Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalanai explained this Hadeeth, by saying, pertains to women of this life…Abu Hurairah relied on this Hadeeth for evidence that in Paradise, women [i.e., from among Children of Adam] are more numerous than men. This Hadeeth was collected [by Muslim (5062)]
7. Salahuddin Yusuf commentary on Nawawi, Riyadhus Salihin, Chapter 372
“The narration, which claims that everyone would have seventy-two wives has a weak chain of narrators”
8. Dual Case Extension
In Arabic the word can be found in singular and plural form. The plural form has two categories:
1. Plural of duality
2. Plural of three or more
In Sahih Bukhari we find the following hadiths:
Chapter 54: Beginning of Creation
Hadith nr 4.468 (3026) Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “The first group (of people) who will enter Paradise will be (glittering) like the moon when it is full. They will not spit or blow their noses or relieve nature. Their utensils will be of gold and their combs of gold and silver; in their centers the aloe wood will be used, and their sweat will smell like musk. Everyone of them will have two wives (zawjatani – dual form); the marrow of the bones of the wives’ legs will be seen through the flesh out of excessive beauty. They ( i.e. the people of Paradise) will neither have differences nor hatred amongst themselves; their hearts will be as if one heart and they will be glorifying Allah in the morning and in the evening.”
Hadith nr 4.469 (3027) Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “The first batch (of people) who will enter Paradise will be (glittering) like a full moon; and those who will enter next will be (glittering) like the brightest star. Their hearts will be as if the heart of a single man, for they will have no enmity amongst themselves, and everyone of them shall have two wives (zawjatani – dual form), each of whom will be so beautiful, pure and transparent that the marrow of the bones of their legs will be seen through the flesh. They will be glorifying Allah in the morning and evening, and will never fall ill, and they will neither blow their noses, nor spit. Their utensils will be of gold and silver, and their combs will be of gold, and the fuel used in their centers will be the aloes-wood, and their sweat will smell like musk.”
Hadith nr 4.476 (3034) Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “The first batch (of people) who will enter Paradise will be (glittering) like the full moon, and the batch next to them will be (glittering) like the most brilliant star in the sky. Their hearts will be as if the heart of a single man, for they will have neither enmity nor jealousy amongst themselves; everyone will have two wives (zawjatani – dual form) from the houris, (who will be so beautiful, pure and transparent that) the marrow of the bones of their legs will be seen through the bones and the flesh.”
Muhammad Salim al-Awwa, Ph.D:
“….in the dual case and it follows the habit of calling two objects or two persons after the more familiar or after either of them, giving it prominence. There are many examples of this in idiomatic Arabic usage, such as “the two Umars”, referring to Abu Bakr and Umar; “the two moons”, referring to the sun and moon; “the shining two”, making the same reference although the moon does not shine of itself and only reflects the light of the sun; “the two ‘ishas”, referring to maghreb and ‘isha, and “the two zhuhrs”, referring to zhuhr and ‘asr. Arabs usually choose the more prominent of the two or the easier in giving a dual form, and that is why they say for parents, “the two fathers”, although they are a father and a mother. Sometimes they choose the easier to pronounce as in their saying, “the two Umars” or the greater in status, such as in God’s saying, “Nor are the two seas alike, the one being potable and pleasant to drink, and the other salty and briny”. The first of these “two seas” is a river and the second, an actual sea. Sometimes the word with the female gender is chosen to make the dual form, such as in the expression “the two Marwas”, referring to the two hills of As-Safa and Al-Marwa in Mecca. This usage in the Arabic language is familiar to Arabic linguists. (One famous reference book available to students and dealing with this point is Abbas Hassan’s An-nahw al-wafi, I, 118–19).”
In the above mentioned hadith we have the dual form “two wives”, but why “two” and neither three or one? What happens if one is married to more or less than “two” wives. Is one going to marry or divorce if we take the restricted meaning “two” (neither less or more)? This definition has no basis.
Therefore the dual form “two wives” should be understood “himself as husband (zawj) and his wife (zawjati) – married” and this according to the dual case extension becomes “two wives – zawjatan” choosing the female gender to make the dual form, and not intending the limiting number “two”.
To farther make the point that everyone gets in paradise what he wishes and to shatter any doubts read the following hadith:
Sahih Bukhari, Book 39, Hadith 538
Narrated Abu Huraira: Once the Prophet was narrating (a story), while a bedouin was sitting with him. “One of the inhabitants of Paradise will ask Allah to allow him to cultivate the land. Allah will ask him, ‘Are you not living in the pleasures you like?’ He will say, ‘Yes, but I like to cultivate the land.’ ” The Prophet added, “When the man (will be permitted he) will sow the seeds and the plants will grow up and get ripe, ready for reaping and so on till it will be as huge as mountains within a wink. Allah will then say to him, ‘O son of Adam! Take here you are, gather (the yield); nothing satisfies you.’ ” On that, the bedouin said, “The man must be either from Quraish (i.e. an emigrant) or an Ansari,