Islam Views on Females exploring sexuality

[ZylitoL]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4g_QwiYxvkY

A friend sent me this video today, and I'd like to know what OP9 thinks of it. I've been questioning my own religion (Christianity) a lot lately, and this just grinds my gears. Some questions that originate from this pertain not only to Islam, but to religion in general too.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.....turns out, Mr Orwell wasn't lying.

I found it extremely uncomfortable to know that oppression is taking crazy forms. I strongly believe that expression of sexuality should be a fundamental right, but more importantly, should not be suppressed so rigidly. There doesn't seem to be a gray area here; you're either with them or against them.

Is it wrong for someone to use (perhaps "exploit"?) religion to lay out such rigid rules suppressing sexual exploration? Or is it a mere part of their set of doctrines set out as part of the religion?

I believe that religion is a way to tell people how to live their lives, by doing X and not doing Y. This requires tremendous amount of unconditional faith, which is very hard to establish for many people. However, if such faith may be instituted, all else follows, because that can be used to justify the orders and commands given by the religion. Unfortunately, the problem occurs when certain people take advantage of the circumstances and spread non sensical, illogical and incoherent bullshit, AND the recipients swallow it naively. So, I for one, think that this is wrong.

But at the same time, how is anyone to change something as fundamentally core to the Islam community such as this? And who are we to say what's right for them?

I'm still very young and am immature and inexperienced when it comes to stuff like this. I'd like to hear what some of you folks have to say. I'd appreciate it if you guys could cut back on smart ass, 1-liner sarcastic remarks cuz...this is no laughing matter.

[MeneerDijk]

Religion has always been used to control people in every aspect of their life, and i think a lot of people accept being told what to do because they are seeking for answers to their questions. If religion is the only source to get your answers, you're likely to accept them as truth. Mix this with the human trait of wanting to conform and you have a group of people pressuring eachother to stay in line and preventing independent thought.

These days we're a bit better informed on how the world works, wich puts the religious answers in a different perspective. This also applies to sex. We know now that the hymen isn't a 'seal' that can only be broken through intercourse, and that using it to determine virginity is innaccurate. But still there are people rejecting any answer that isn't provided by religion (or tradition really) Why? Maybe out of fear of the unknown? Being thought all your life how the world works according to religion and having this turned upside down? Or maybe more sinister reasons like oppression of people? Who knows.

It took christianity centuries to change to a point where people had a choice to live without it (relatively speaking) And maybe Islam will go through the same evolution. It's going to take a long time though, and as long people fight with eachother over religion, you'll have hardliners clinging to the Bible or Koran.

[Kwiz]

If there's a chance anyone on the board speaks Arabic, I'd greatly appreciate it if we could get a review of that translation job.

You know, despite the fact that Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi is, quite obviously, yet another conservative Islamic hard-liner... I actually found it reassuring that he condemns "honor killings."

At the same time, the fact that some people are uncritical enough to go along with the idea of killing over a broken hymen can only come across as disturbing. That's why I've always insisted that the root of the problem is indeed cultural; the core principles of Islam - or any religion for that matter - never revolved around ideas such as "female masturbation is morally wrong." It's not so much about the vehicle itself, but in how you use it.

[Beowulf]

How many times have I had to educate on Islam on this board?

I found it extremely uncomfortable to know that oppression is taking crazy forms. I strongly believe that expression of sexuality should be a fundamental right, but more importantly, should not be suppressed so rigidly. There doesn't seem to be a gray area here; you're either with them or against them.

Is it wrong for someone to use (perhaps "exploit"?) religion to lay out such rigid rules suppressing sexual exploration? Or is it a mere part of their set of doctrines set out as part of the religion?
Yes it is wrong. No it is not part of Islam.


I believe that religion is a way to tell people how to live their lives, by doing X and not doing Y. This requires tremendous amount of unconditional faith, which is very hard to establish for many people. However, if such faith may be instituted, all else follows, because that can be used to justify the orders and commands given by the religion. Unfortunately, the problem occurs when certain people take advantage of the circumstances and spread non sensical, illogical and incoherent bullshit, AND the recipients swallow it naively. So, I for one, think that this is wrong.
That is not a good description of religion at all. Religion can be a new way to view the world, a new way of looking at yourself and your place in it. There need not be restrictions. My religion (an amalgamation of my own forming between Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and various eastern "religions"). People will always take advantage of religion because these people want power. Exploiting religion is just another way of getting it.
As for people "swallowing" religion, religion will only control you as much as you want to be controlled. If you are a weak-willed, alienated, or damaged individual then you are more likely to allow religion to make the tough decisions in your life.
But at the same time, how is anyone to change something as fundamentally core to the Islam community such as this? And who are we to say what's right for them?
It isn't a "fundamental core" belief. It isn't part of Islam as outlined in the Quran.

You know, despite the fact that Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi is, quite obviously, yet another conservative Islamic hard-liner... I actually found it reassuring that he condemns "honor killings."
I agree, though his extremist contemporaries will probably come down on him for that.
At the same time, the fact that some people are uncritical enough to go along with the idea of killing over a broken hymen can only come across as disturbing. That's why I've always insisted that the root of the problem is indeed cultural; the core principles of Islam - or any religion for that matter - never revolved around ideas such as "female masturbation is morally wrong." It's not so much about the vehicle itself, but in how you use it.
Exactly right!
You see, before Islam came to the Middle East it was populated by various clans and tribes. These groups followed pagan gods. The women in these groups were, quite literally, property. They were treated absolutely horribly. Honor killings, stonings, burying alive, you name it they did it to women. In fact when Muhammad wrote the Quran he purposefully put passages into it forbidding treating women as the pagan clans did. The Quran actually stresses equality and fidelity between man and woman.

Edit: And what Meneer said was right too, don't want to leave him out.

[Campion]

I don't believe that all subjugation of women comes down to religion and I find it slightly disturbing that one religion should be highlighted in this thread as being a particular problem in this matter, almost all world religions preach of gender inequality, but I do accept that this is most obvious to us in the Abrahamic religions.

As far as I am concered however this isn't even half of the story, almost all members of our cultural hegemony have participated or are still enforcing gender inequalities. The Law, Education, Politics et al, all have, or are still working to ensure a subjugation of women. It's a long and difficult subject with myriad answers, but religion like most structures humans have built are control systems that can highlight such iniquity.

ZylitoL, I would suggest you pick up a copy of Simone de Bouvier's fine work 'The Second Sex' if you want to understand more about this subject.


Campion.

[ZylitoL]

Beowolf,

I don't think something has to be outlined in a holy book (aka Quran or Bible) in order to establish itself as a core value of a religion/culture.
This probably means that there's less point/substance to substantiate one's argument, but doesn't mean that it still can't be a core value of society. Many will cherish it because they're being told to do so by preachers/ministers/etc and those are the people that many go to for interpretation of the holy book, are they not?

I think most religions DO have restrictions, and those restrictions are what make them unique. Your's just happens to be a combination of a few things that probably suit your ideals/thoughts/needs. That's fine.
....Hell wasn't the video linking to exactly that? Restrictions on women's rights. I thought that's what disturbed me in the first place.



Campion,

I'm not highlighting Islam as the square root of all problems for subjugation of women. It just so happens that the particular subjugation in question is that of freedom to masturbate and practice their sexuality and that really turned me off.
but religion like most structures humans have built are control systems that can highlight such iniquity.
That was exactly what I was talking about when I said religion is a way of telling people how to live their lives. The concept seems good when you look at it from an extremely parochial, one sided view of the dice, but when you realize there's 19 other sides to that very dice, that's when the problems occur, internally and externally.

I think I will rent it from the library. Thanks a lot.

-------------------------------------------------------------

......fuck I'm disgressing.

And I don't think I can word the question without getting another 2 paragraph answer from others for wrong usage of words or w/e, so I'm gonna give it some thought.

...I got a long way to go.

[Kwiz]

...I got a long way to go.

Take your time. If I understand correctly you're in the process of questioning the very ideas you grew up being conditioned with, correct? That isn't easy.

[Fred]

I thought that was a very interesting video clip. My sense is that Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi was coming from a position of genuine concern for women. He didn’t actually say masturbation was morally wrong. He said it was risky, more so for women than for men, and against religious law.

He also said that women would be better off engaging in activities that improve themselves rather than seeking self-gratification. I think this statement is true in general for all people. There is certainly nothing inherently wrong with the act of watching TV, or eating donuts, or masturbating, or any other form of self-gratification. In fact, there is nothing wrong with watching TV while eating donuts and masturbating at the same time (except if you get yucky stuff on the remote). It’s just that when people live their lives focused primarily on self-gratification, they are not going to reach their full potential as individuals. When a significant portion of a population lives their lives in such a manner, then society suffers. I know it is not my place to tell anyone how to live their lives. In fact, it is my fundamental belief that we all need to find our own paths in life. At the same time, I think there is too much focus on self-gratification in my country.

When I think about religion, I am reminded of mental health studies. I heard that one of the criticisms of Freud’s work was that he only studied mentally ill patients, which skewed his results. I don’t know if that is an accurate criticism, but I can understand the concept. So, when I think about religion, I don’t define “normal” religious behavior based upon the actions of people who use religion destructively. I think about the people I respect the most and how they use religion, and, of course, I think about how I want religion to fit into my own life.

[Roxie]

Freud was crazy, imo.

[Campion]

Freud was crazy, imo.

Freud has been called any number of things and in modern psychology not a lot of them have been complimentary, but crazy? I am interested to know which of his works you think contributed to you forming this opinion.


Campion.

[Roxie]

Alright, not literally crazy...but definently nutty.
penis envy, oy.

[Kaji]

Say what you will about him, but it must a couple things must be remembered to his credit here:

1) He was one of the first to view mental illness as something treatable by science as opposed to magic or abuse

2) His theories were formed in an era where societal views differed vastly from those we hold today, and naturally were skewed thereby

I personally don't give much credibility to many of his theories, however in all fairness he did open the door to more credible discoveries by successive generations of psychologists.

[Roxie]

Didn't he perscribe cocaine?
OH, and used it himself. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frued#Early_work)

[Hatsumomo]

I suggest the book Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women for a bit more about this sort of topic.

[Campion]

Alright, not literally crazy...but definently nutty.
penis envy, oy.

'On Narcissism'? Yes, he had some rather interesting views that reflected the society at the time, one of the reasons that I think he was so popular was that he was talking 'scientifically' about a still rather taboo subject.

Penis Envy was one of his more interesting viewpoints, although to be fair to him, contemporary psychoanalysts have bastardised it into a new meaning; that of being 'the adult females envy of the penis', whereas what Freud actually meant it to refer to was 'a single epiphany within the development of any female childs sexuality' (during the phallic stage) The male equivalent is of course called 'Castration Anxiety'.



Campion.

[Kaji]

Didn't he perscribe cocaine?
OH, and used it himself. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frued#Early_work)

And it was also in Coca-Cola as well, on up until about the 20s. Once again, Freud's theories and practices were in many ways a product of his times.

[Roxie]

Freud actually meant it to refer to was 'a single epiphany within the development of any female childs sexuality' (during the phallic stage) The male equivalent is of course called 'Castration Anxiety'.
I know. Still think he was nutty.
And it was also in Coca-Cola as well, on up until about the 20s. Once again, Freud's theories and practices were in many ways a product of his times.And still nutty.
And what I don't get is, even though I do agree he was a product of his time (whatever justification that's supposed to be--I know hindsight is 20/20 and all), why ppl still refer to him today as if he's still relevant? Like penis envy still holds some weight.

I mean, it may have been new and exciting back then--but to me, ppl still talk about him with (seemingly) some expectation that I should be just excited. As if we just discovered that we go around the sun and are in fact not the center of the universe.

gah, I dunno. I'm no great study of Freud or psychotherapy (or any of that) but I did read the penis envy theory and I really couldn't take anymore.

If I'm getting it all wrong, pls educate me.

[Hatsumomo]

Penis envy is not really relevant in modern psychology, but Freud's studies on defense mechanisms, providing a basis in psychosexual development, the unconcious, the "talking cure" (that is, psychotherapy where the patient talks about their issues), and the id/superego/ego are. I can't tell you how many times I've had to go over Freud in my psychology classes.

I mean, very few psychologists today are going to be carrying full subscriptions to Freud's theories, but every clinical psychologist does employ his work in some way.

[Roxie]

Ohhhh~

Thanks for the clarification. I truly apperciate it :)

[Jetsetlemming]

Like penis envy still holds some weight.
I dunno, some girls I've known....

[D-pad]

"At most, she should get a flogging..."

*dies laughing*

[Hatsumomo]

Ohhhh~

Thanks for the clarification. I truly apperciate it :)


No problem. Put this B.A. in psychology of mine into use.

[Darth_E_]

It took christianity centuries to change to a point where people had a choice to live without it (relatively speaking) And maybe Islam will go through the same evolution. It's going to take a long time though, and as long people fight with eachother over religion, you'll have hardliners clinging to the Bible or Koran.

Christianity had a justification for secularism in the bible. The Qura'n doesn't. Plus the fact that the Qura'n and Mohammad emphasized in the Hadith literature that Islam is finalized, and that religion and life go hand in hand make such statement IMPOSSIBLE.

The problem in the middle east isn't a problem in Islam as much as its a problem in ignorance and illiteracy. Most folks there barely read or write, and heck, those of them who are lucky enough to be educated don't know jack s*** about their own religion.

Honor killings btw have been present before Islam. Arabs back then used to kill their new-born female infants because they brought disgrace to their names. When Islam came, such acts were outlawed.

The clip isn't 100% translated accurately. They get the main gist of things, however there are translation errors - for example, one of the points the Sheik recommends female Muslims to do was attend religious talks/lectures....that somehow got translated to "do her homework"...haha

Finally, many Muslims don't even listen to the sheiks ( Qardawi included ) because they are hypocrities...as they do not speak about the injustices committed under the name of Islam or otherwise in the muslim world in fear of the wrath of the rulers. Those who did are either dead or jailed, and those sheiks you'll never hear or see in western ( or otherwise ) media.

[manrush]

I know that somewhere, JihadWatch, Gates of Vienna, and that damned Fjordman are at work using this video to justify their bigotry.