Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Equal Pay For Equal Work? Not If Your Boss Is Named Allah
Islam consistently treats women like third-class citizens (and that's on a good day). You know how suicide bombers get the proverbial 72 virgins in exchange for doing the murderous bidding of "The Religion Of Peace"? Don't think for a second female suicide bombers get 72 hot young cabana boys to rub lotion over their...oh, never mind, I forgot the burkhas for a moment.

Check out this article on Slate, by Michelle Tsai, about the heavenly compensation for bitches who bomb:

If male martyrs can expect to find 72 virgin maidens in paradise when they die, what rewards can female suicide bombers expect?

Their husbands. The Quran itself describes little about the specifics of the afterlife, but it does note that believers will find huris, or maidens "of modest gaze, whom neither man nor jinni will have touched before them." (Every believer can end up in heaven; martyrs just get there faster.) Respected commentator Al-Tirmidhi said in a hadith that every man will have six dozen huris in heaven, but very few commentators enumerated the rewards for women. Ninth-century scholar Al-Tabarani did argue that women will be reunited with their husbands in the next world, and those who had multiple husbands can pick the best one to be their eternal spouse. (Other commentators added that a woman who never married can marry any man she wants in paradise.)

Uh-oh...sounds like a suicide bombing sales pitch for those ladies who aren't making it on Match.com. And here's another choice passage, complete with rear entry:

From the 9th through the 12th centuries, Muslim scholars described paradise as a place of sensual delights—for men. They debated whether men remained married to their wives in heaven, whether they could have sex with the virgins, and whether the heavenly virgins had anuses. (Some said there was no need for elimination in the afterlife.)

Somehow, I don't think that's why they were all pondering the existence of the anus.

P.S. If you believe this shit, you're an anus in this life, or my favorite word of the week, an "ignoranus." Here's what we know about the "afterlife": When you die, you decompose and are eaten by worms. Period. Hang onto life with everything you've got, and enjoy it while you have it, because soon, the maggots will be enjoying you.

Just another helpful message from an atheist bitch who thinks it's wrong to murder other people -- even if all the women around you are wearing pup tents, the men are too busy fucking young boys, and/or you, yourself, haven't been fucked in forever.

Posted by aalkon at March 5, 2007 1:17 PM

Comments

If I were going to make this garbage up, at least I'd give equal rewards. Let the ladies have a whole stable of 72 young studs to wait upon her every need. But I wouldn't be doling out the rewards for suicide bombing, that's for sure.

Posted by: Patrick at March 5, 2007 2:03 AM

I guess there won’t be any anal retentive folks in Islam heaven?

Posted by: Roger at March 5, 2007 4:36 AM

"From the 9th through the 12th centuries, Muslim scholars described paradise as a place of sensual delights—for men."

The faithful (Momins) who will ascend into heaven with all the sensual delights and all the available women would makes sense under the Islamic teachings of Paradise. The waiting ladies are considered Hur/Huriyah. (Houri, Huris in English)

These are entities are known as pure beings or creatures who were never defiled by evil spirits and are populated in Jannah. (Heaven/Paradise) These creatures are often described as women, because of the feminine symbolism of the word 'Huwar' and 'Ahwar' is the masculine form in Arabic.

Here are some Qu'ran passages on Houri:

"Thus shall it be. And We shall pair them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye." Surah Ad-Dukhan (The Smoke)44:54

"In these gardens will be mates of modest gaze, whom neither man nor invisible being will have touched ere then." Surah Ar-Rahman (The Most Beneficent)55:56

"There the blest will live with their companions pure and modest, in pavilions" [splendid] Surah Ar-Rahman (The Most Beneficent) 55:72

"reclining on couches of happiness ranged in rows!” And in that paradise, We shall mate them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye Surah At-Tur (The Mount)52:20

I will not bore anyone further with the commentaries on the Houris found in the various Hadiths. These commentaries can be contradicting, similar in views with Qu'ran and based on the various interpretations (Sunni/Shia) of Islam through the centuries.

There are many moderates within Islam who will say these quotes misinterpretations of the various Holy writings. Yes, this may be true, but these are the same passages that are used to recruit and convince young Muslim men into strapping bombs on their persons and walking into a building full of civilians.

What are the odds of any religious text full of contradictions? Abuse over the literal versus the symbolic interpretations found in the particular texts? Instead of blaming the interpretations, begin to focus the actual text itself?

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 5:53 AM

It always made perfect sense to me to offer 72 virgins in a place you never saw if you want to have a not-too-bright young guy with raging hormones blow himself up. At least if he is living a sexually repressed life in the name of Allah, Jesus or whatever.

Because if he had half a brain, you'd have to offer him at least one smart and experienced woman. He wouldn't get around to the virgins for a long time, I think. And he'd never get to blow himself up, as smart women don't go to heaven; he'd just have to enjoy her in his pre-explosive days and then pass on his knowledge to virgins who'd rather have some experience themselves instead of a trip to a place that doesn't really exist.

(I'm such a lucky guy to live in a society with free speech. In the Middle East they'd blow me up before I could say "agnosticism"...)

Posted by: Rainer at March 5, 2007 5:59 AM

(I'm such a lucky guy to live in a society with free speech. In the Middle East they'd blow me up before I could say "agnosticism"...)

That's the funny thing about the Islamic societies versus our "infidel" one. Muslim tolerance is so often an oxymoron, from taxing and third-class-citizening those of other religions...and worse. Here's an example of "worse," via the BBC, posted on Dhimmiwatch:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/015497.php

The Sabian Mandaeans - one of the oldest religious groups in the world - are facing extinction, according to its leaders.

They claim that Islamic extremists in Iraq are trying to wipe them out through forced conversions, rape and murder.

The Mandaeans are pacifists, followers of Adam, Noah and John the Baptist.

They have lived in what is now Iraq since before Islam and Christianity.

And here's the big question: Many atheists have not really been "out" until recently (and still, studies show that atheists are the only people pretty much nobody would vote for for U.S. president). I have little luck persuading Jews and Christians that it makes no sense to believe, without evidence, in god. How much of a chance do you think there is to convince people whose culture makes them even more easily lead by the most outrageous irrationalities in their religion?

Posted by: Amy Alkon at March 5, 2007 6:38 AM

It's good to know that the genies haven't been having their way with them either.

Posted by: Casca at March 5, 2007 6:47 AM

How much of a chance do you think there is to convince people whose culture makes them even more easily lead by the most outrageous irrationalities in their religion?

Almost none at all, Amy. I'm very pessimistic about that. Religious education is almost always a big, long and early lesson in irrationality. And since it starts so very early for most of us, it's so hard to overcome, even in adult life.

On the other hand, atheism and agnosticism are concepts that really haven't even begun to trickle through the many layers of human culture. At least we have reached a point where almost no scientist believes in the existence of a god. But the general public chooses to use the blessings of science and to largely ignore the way to create them. So if we don't start a new age of enlightenment anytime soon, two generations from now no one will remember how school used to be when topics like biological evolution actually were taught without being called "traditional Darwinism" or something like that... (Actually I'm exaggerating my point a bit here. At least let's hope so ;-)

Amy, have you ever read the novel or seen the movie "Contact" by Carl Sagan? If there is a better comment on how the public in general (and religious people in particular) react to science and rationality, I yet have to find it. (At times, the novel is even more subtle at this than the movie.)

Posted by: Rainer at March 5, 2007 7:18 AM

Re the term "hereafter": It's all here, there's nothing after.

Posted by: Bill Henry at March 5, 2007 7:30 AM

Regarding Sagan's "Contact," I haven't read it, Rainer. Will have to check it out.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at March 5, 2007 7:37 AM

Agreed Amy and Rainer.

This is a glimpse of Osama bin Laden's Dream World. Here is the Islamic Caste system and some background information:

Momins (believers) people who have submitted to the will of Allah through the teachings of its Prophet Muhammad. There is a 2 tier subclass within Momins. Male (higher) and Female (lower). Now the male Momins will have access to the feminine houris, but it is very vague in any of the writings that female Momins will have access to hurrahs/hurras (male virgins)

Kafirs (infidels) any faith that is not rooted in the Abrahamic faiths. Kafirs have to pay the Jaziya tax to practice their faith or are condemned to die. A Kafir's life is only worth 1/15 of that of a Momin. A Muslim man may marry a Kafir woman and allow her to practice her faith, but only under the status of a concubine. Any testimony given by a Kafir is only worth 1/2 when given under a Fiqh system.

The land of the Kafirs is known as Dar ul Harb, which means Land of War. All believers are in a state of constant war with nonbelievers until Qiyamah. (Their version of Armageddon) Many radical clerics use Dar ul Harb as an expression towards the USA, West and Israel.

Dhimmis are the people of the book (Jews and Christians) They are only tolerated because their scriptures have descended from the Abrahamic faiths, but were incorrectly interpreted. Of course, Muhammud was the only one who got it right. They have to pay the Jaziya tax for their faith. No Muslim should be friends with Dhimmis, marry them or trust them in any way. Also, they are under the Covenant of Umar (717 A.D.)

We, Dhimmis: (more in reference towards Christians)

1. We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, churches, convents or monk's cells

2. Nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims. . . .

3. We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor hide him from the Muslims. We shall not teach the Qu’ran to our children.

4. We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it.

5. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

6. We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and
we shall rise from our seats if they wish to sit.

7. We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the headgear, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair.

8. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their honorific names.

9. We shall not mount on saddles.

The final caste are the Untouchables or the Apostates and Hypocrites.

Now all of us infidels will go to Jannaham (Hell), but all the male infidels will eventually ascend to Jannah (Paradise) before the ladies. Of course after our tenure has run its course and we have submitted ourselves to Allah.

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 7:51 AM

Its Jahannam, not Jahanaham.

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 8:05 AM

love your columns - nice to see real, unsugar coated advice and opinions.

in the same vein, I think you would enjoy "A Devil's Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science and Love" by Richard Dawkins... particularly the last chapter, a letter to his 10 yr old daughter about the necessity of basing any belief on strong evidence.

Posted by: Tami at March 5, 2007 8:51 AM

This is something where I'm going to hope for the inequality. A heaven where all a woman gets is 72 virgins sounds more like the other place.

Posted by: christina at March 5, 2007 9:16 AM

In my personal version of the afterlife, there is an abundance of anuses -- freshly scrubbed!

Posted by: Lena at March 5, 2007 9:59 AM

Christina you made me laugh. The whole problem of Muslims is the fear of a beautiful woman. Hence, their need to always cover them up. Why the hell is everyone afraid of a beautiful woman? Because generally we cant control our reaction to beautiful women. Women like looking at beautiful women, men like looking at beautiful women........its in our nature. (Even homo dudes are compelled to make beautiful women)Its an urge. Muslims promise beautiful women because they know what these men want is a beautiful woman without the crap that comes along with it (i.e. the realization that she prolly doesnt need you). Nobody needs anybody, why cant people just accept that?

Posted by: PurplePen at March 5, 2007 10:07 AM

They have a morbid fear of getting a woody in public, and have gone to a lot of trouble to make sure it doesn't happen. Sheesh, just carry a clipboard with you at all times, and voila! problem solved (or at least hidden)!

Posted by: Chris at March 5, 2007 11:48 AM

I went to a fancy dress dance in an arabic cloak-thing I made. It was realistic - I copied what I had seen in North Africa, and an arab at the dance complimented me on it - but there was no way to hide an erection. I had to dance bent double. There's a real question here: what are male arab undergarments like? Anyone know?

Posted by: Norman at March 5, 2007 12:49 PM

Norman,

They wore what is called a Sirwal. Sort of a light fabric (cotton) pants or loose leggings. Was your cloak in Arabic or Berber design?

Purplepen,

The mandatory veiling of women didn't begin until around the 14th Century.

All women are the source of shahwa, which is a force or aura of desire. Shahwa comes from the Devil and this is the reason behind the teaching of veiling women. All good Muslim men need to control this force until marriage. In the Hadiths, you will find numerous references of women and the Devil within the same sentences.

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 1:47 PM

72 virgins might be just enough to get a woman somewhere.

Posted by: justin case at March 5, 2007 2:01 PM

Arabic or Berber - I don't know. I based it on ones I saw in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. It was made from a "bothy blanket" - a rough greyish brown blanket - with the long edges sewn together to make a tube; one end was then turned into a hood. You put it on over your head, and it reached the floor. Loose sleeves were attached. Or perhaps they were formed by cutting the sides away to form a sort of T shape. It was a long time ago!

Posted by: Norman at March 5, 2007 2:26 PM

72 virgins would get a woman past crazy into homicidal.

Posted by: Christina at March 5, 2007 2:28 PM

Joe,

On a side note that has slightly to do with this topic, have you ever been to Pakistan and seen any Kalash?

Posted by: PurplePen at March 5, 2007 4:04 PM

I've been to Islamabad for 2 weeks. Before Musharaf regime take over in 1999. Never met any Kalashi while I was there visiting friends.

Personally, I've met Afghan-Americans while living in Washington D.C. claiming to be Kalashi. They all had blue or hazel eyes and light brown hair.

I highly doubt they are the direct descendents of Alexander the Great's army, but part of the Proto Indo European expansion that occurred between 4000 to 1000 BCE.

A great many people do not understand the basics of population genetics. It would take a lot longer for Alexander the Greats army to populate a native population in less than 300 years. Actually, the Hellenistic Seleucid Empire only lasted 263 years.

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 4:49 PM

Amy, you are doing a superb job at bringing attention to this vile religion and culture, and I appreciate it. But I still don't see, given all the evidence of their sworn intent to destroy western civilization, that you don't agree that going into Iraq was the right thing to do. Look, it may have been botched because the US Forces were hobbled from the beginning to actually win this thing, at the very least, Saddam and his minions and his sons are dead, not to mention thousands and thousand of really, really bad guys. I think that the Islamofasists appreciate this in the sense the we had to the guts to take out Saddam's regime; they respect that.

Posted by: Ally at March 5, 2007 7:26 PM

In an earlier comment, Amy, you wrote:

I have little luck persuading Jews and Christians that it makes no sense to believe, without evidence, in god.

Gee, why is that so hard to believe? Maybe it's because of your letting yourself post hateful bullshit tantrums like the following:

If you believe this shit, you're an anus in this life, or my favorite word of the week, an "ignoranus." Here's what we know about the "afterlife": When you die, you decompose and are eaten by worms. Period. ... Just another helpful message from an atheist bitch who thinks it's wrong to murder other people

So apparently because I'm a believer, I must be okay with murder in the name of religion. This is wonderful. Bigotry in the name of enlightenment. Apparently you've been spending too much time around those sugar-fitting kids at your favorite bistros. But then I'm just positive you'd continue forever to visit a website that spewed forth the same venom at people like you, just because you choose not to believe.

For the record, I'm sick of your rhetoric lumping me in with the likes of Falwell, Robertson, or Bin Laden simply because I choose to disagree with you on this topic. It makes just about as much sense as assuming you, Joe, or Bill Henry must be the reincarnation(s) of Joseph Stalin because you're atheists.

Then again, you're someone who's obtained an inordinate amount of success relatively early in life--at least to the point that it appears money is no burden for you--and proven to be right about a lot of things. So you must be right about everything in life, even the afterlife, right? Guess so. But it would be nice if you could at least learn to take a deep breath before hitting the 'send' button. I know I had to before submitting this.

Posted by: qdpsteve at March 5, 2007 7:46 PM

Amy, you are doing a superb job at bringing attention to this vile religion and culture, and I appreciate it. But I still don't see, given all the evidence of their sworn intent to destroy western civilization, that you don't agree that going into Iraq was the right thing to do.

Ally, I believe going into Afghanistan was the right thing to do.

As for qpdsteve:

"If you believe in this shit" means murder in the name of religion. I say time and time again which religion advocates that, and hint: It isn't Judaism, Christianity, or Buddhism.

Is it bigotry to say the belief, without evidence, in god is ridiculous? I don't think so, and it IS ridiculous to believe in anything without evidence. I have to get that Dawkins book -- you might pick yourself up a copy as well. Never too late to start thinking rationally!

Beyond a trip to the bookstore, what you need is a mix of reading comprehension, a sense of humor, and probably a good blow job.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at March 5, 2007 8:22 PM

Lena, could you expand on that?

Posted by: Casca at March 5, 2007 10:44 PM

You want me to, um, expand the anus comment?

Posted by: Lena at March 6, 2007 9:28 AM

Did someone say something about expanding anuses?

Posted by: Chris at March 6, 2007 10:37 AM

Don't look now, Chris, but there's one right behind you, coming to swallow you up. Whole.

Posted by: Lena at March 6, 2007 1:10 PM

That's strangely arousing...

Posted by: Chris at March 6, 2007 3:06 PM

You should hear me over the phone, babe.

Posted by: Lena at March 6, 2007 3:34 PM

You stop that, Lena!

qdpsteve, I don't see any hate in Amy stating a fact. I think you should just admit that your religious belief is irrational, makes you feel good, and completely unexplainable using your intellect. Accepting this would also hopefully stop you from trying to convert others, and trying to control other people's behavior, or judge them.

Posted by: Chris at March 6, 2007 4:23 PM

Thanks, Chris -- at least you get it!

Posted by: Amy Alkon at March 6, 2007 4:43 PM

@qdpsteve, after quoting Amy..

I have little luck persuading Jews and Christians that it makes no sense to believe, without evidence, in god.

..you wrote:

Gee, why is that so hard to believe?

Case in point: Reading comprehension. Amy didn't say it's hard to believe, she just said she doesn't have a lot of luck in persuading Jews and Christians that it makes no sense to believe without evidence. An entirely different thing, isn't it? (By the way: I have made similar experiences with people who believe in astrology, homeopathy and related esoteric B.S.)

Apart from the fact that your reply has nothing to do with Amy having little luck in trying to make people think, I agree with you: It's not hard to believe in God. Not at all. On the contrary, it's quite easy: People you've been trusting all your life keep telling you about "Him", they take you into a building with a very high ceiling, they tell you that the building was erected to worship "Him", you get very impressed, you notice that at least one of your parents is equally impressed, and so on.

To challenge these beliefs rationally as you grow up, live (and hopefully: learn) is entirely optional. For instance: As a kid you didn't know that being in a building with a high ceiling has the tendency to make you feel small and unimportant, whether there is a God or not. As an adult you have a chance to reflect on that. You don't have to, but please don't be so angry with people like Amy who have actually done that kind of homework.

Just my two Euro cents.

Posted by: Rainer at March 6, 2007 5:00 PM

Well, qdpsteve just has to come to an understanding that all religious texts no matter how they are interpreted (orthodox or liberally) are inapplicable in this day and age.

The texts belong in their proper place... literature studies. You want to understand the origins Western cannon? Read the Bible. Arabic literature? Read the Qu'ran. Persian literature? Read the yasnas of Zartosht and so on.

The real controversy over the Da Vinci Code wasn't over who had the correct interpretation of Christianity. It was quite simple. An ancient form of fiction is threatened by a contemporary and popular work of fiction.

It doesn't matter on how you personally interpret your faith. What matters is that religion is a no evidence based system that interferes into the lives of people through legislation to ritual killings. i.e. terrorism


Posted by: Joe at March 6, 2007 8:00 PM

Well, qdpsteve just has to come to an understanding that all religious texts no matter how they are interpreted (orthodox or liberally) are inapplicable in this day and age.

Exactly. Bible as literature is about the only thing that makes sense to study.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at March 6, 2007 8:26 PM

It's not much good as literature. The Bible's interesting mainly because it's old, though there are good bits in it. The Epic of Gilgamesh, The Odessy, The Iliad are much better literature. But even they are primitive - writing has come a long way since then!

Posted by: Norman at March 6, 2007 11:36 PM

Leave a comment