Waiter, There's A Harem In My Soup!
Dating sites are mostly the same, with loads and loads of people looking for somebody for "long walks on the beach, blah, blah, blah."
Well, you see a different kind of request from Muslim women living in America on Muslima.com, a Muslim dating site (photos at the links, and check out the ladies posed with just their eyes showing through their headscarves).
A 38-year-old woman writes:
I hope I find a suitable person who is as a good muslim, honest, educated, good looking, and has responsible to the his prospective family. He should be one who would be interested in one wife only.
A 37-year-old woman writes:
I'm looking for a Muslim husband who will be respective and faithful only to me. I don't believe in a man having up to 4 wives...
Shockingly, there were a number of women -- redheaded American women, for example -- who said they'd converted to Islam; perhaps because they're attracted to the way Islamic law says women should be treated -- like these examples from ex-Muslim Abul Kasem:
The husband's permission is required for a wife to work (Doi, p.117).The guardian of a woman must be a male. A woman cannot be married by herself. A widow can marry by herself (Doi, p.141).
A Muslim man is allowed to have four wives at one time (Hedaya, p.31; Doi, p.147).
A law against polygamy is against the Qur'an. Not a single Hadith is against polygamy; modernists reject Qur'an and Sunnah. Satisfy more wives (Doi, p.152).
Husbands are not obliged to provide doctor's fees, medicines and cosmetics to wives; they must provide only food, cloths and housing; rebellious wife doesn't get anything (Hedaya, p.140; m11.4, p.544).
A Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife or wives (the Qur'an, 4:34 ; m10.12, p.541; o17.4, p.619).
Awww! How romantic!
I'm guessing these converts have a somewhat dewier and less-informed view of their adopted religion.
Whoopsy!
Luckily, it seems there's a small price to pay for polygamy -- since it's often Western taxpayers picking up the tab.
"Husbands are not obliged to provide... cosmetics to wives"
I was just about to put up my pic and description until I read that! How will I get the whole NARS collection? Guess I'll have to stay Atheist and not depend on a man. I understand now why I'm an infidel whore, not being forced into marriage for my livelihood is very slutty of me.
PurplePen at April 13, 2008 2:22 AM
I looked at the women's photo gallery at the muslima website (the link has expired and you have to go to the home page), and of the first 100 or so photos, only one was eye slits. The rest are full face, often without headscarf. Both of the two in the article are full face.
My guess is they have been selected for the gallery. Online dating in the UK shows a far higher proportion of women who don't post any photo at all. I ended up just ignoring them; it got too tedious explaining over and over the importance of making a good impression.
I don't disagree with the rest of the post, but these women must be converting for a reason that makes sense to them. Why not try to find out what that might be?
Norman at April 13, 2008 3:07 AM
Norman -
That reason would be because they are stupid, self-hating cows who have a deep-seated psychological need to be treated like shit.
Amy - that sound like a reasonable enough interpretation?
Because there's certainly no reason for a sane woman to convert to Islam.
brian at April 13, 2008 6:07 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/04/13/one_wife_to_a_c.html#comment-1539743">comment from NormanI looked at the women's photo gallery at the muslima website (the link has expired and you have to go to the home page), and of the first 100 or so photos, only one was eye slits
I searched for women in the USA from 18-60, I think, and found a bunch.
Amy Alkon at April 13, 2008 7:26 AM
Western women's horror of polygamy is interesting. Is it because polygamy doesn't deliver to individual women the same leverage that they would otherwise have over an "exclusive" husband? Do you think polygamy would still be flourishing in the world if women in those cultures didn't get something out of it? Perhaps a shared husband taking care of your support is better than no husband at all? And for all the ladies who complain about what a chore sex is, wouldn't this be a welcome way to spread the "burden" of satisfying the husband's needs?
Yes, very interesting, and revealing, indeed!
Jay R at April 13, 2008 8:30 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/04/13/one_wife_to_a_c.html#comment-1539769">comment from Jay RDo you think polygamy would still be flourishing in the world if women in those cultures didn't get something out of it?
I don't think Islamic laws are based on what's good for women.
Personally, I've always been for allowing whatever arrangements people want for their relationships, including gay marriage, of course, but I don't want to pay for these jerks to have five wives. Also, what tends to happen, per Satoshi Kanazawa's research, is that older men monopolize the women and younger men are left without sex, and angry, and then they blow shit up.
I, of course, will not marry, nor will I live with anybody.
Amy Alkon at April 13, 2008 8:51 AM
Just for the hell of it I did a search as a man seeking a man, I was suprised how many gay muslims were on the site.
Or do you suppose they were just to stupid to fill out the forms correctly?
lujlp at April 13, 2008 11:36 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/04/13/one_wife_to_a_c.html#comment-1539786">comment from lujlpI'm guessing they're not in Iran, where being gay is a death sentence (except for those who go through "sex reassignment," which is, most oddly, okey dokey with the Iranian fundamentalist Muslim authorities, to stay with their boyfriends). Of course, many of those who go through "sex reassignment" end up killing themselves anyway.
Amy Alkon at April 13, 2008 12:02 PM
I've always been for allowing whatever arrangements people want for their relationships So was I until I realized that practices like polygamy are not purely personal arrangements - there are social consequences, namely an excess of dispossessed, young, frustrated men.
Norman at April 13, 2008 1:37 PM
I don't know if any of you saw the "Lost Boys" thing on the tube, it was either yesterday or the night before. That compound of FLDS wacko's that they ended up taking some four hundred kids from in Texas was the subject. This was a Warren Jeff's club. Evidently, when the boys got to be around fifteen or sixteen, they would be banished from the compound, never to see their family again. No food, no money, just get the fuck outta here, us older guys don't want you diddling our stock of young girls. They were not allowed to return to or even to contact their families once they were banished. Many of them had banded together and they interviewed a few of them who lived together in one big house. Almost all of them turned to drugs probably because of suddenly being told you don't have a family anymore and they knew that after they left, their uncle would probably be marrying their sister once she started having her period. Man, thats just gotta screw your head up. They were strung out across Texas working odd jobs and just trying to make their way in a world they were never exposed to until they were thrown out. Oddly enough, one of the guys still idolized Warren Jeffs as an ideal person who he really respected.
No matter how many ways you cut it, I don't believe I've ever heard of a polygamy situation that didn't involve oppression and mistreatment of women and children even thought the participants might not feel that way.
Bikerken at April 13, 2008 2:00 PM
I tend to be on the side of people having whatever sort of relationship works for them. As long as they involve consenting adults, more power to you.
I have big problems with the idea of knocking the sexual/relationship practices of others, just because they may not be into a mainstream sort of kink. I've seen personals for people that are into really strange things. A definite contender for the truly bizarre was a gent who's into wearing rubber body suits and defecating in them. I may find the notion repulsive, but I'm not going to make a values judgment. Some people find my fetish for going sans pubes (both my partner and I) to be quite strange and at least somewhat repulsive. Just as I am sure they probably are into kink that might repulse someone else.
There is some mighty bizarre kink out there. But unless it involves the non-consenting adults or minors, it's really up to them.
DuWayne at April 13, 2008 2:08 PM
Also, about that FLDS sect in Texas. Most of the kids they took out were girls, because so many boys were gone already. Now, they are taking DNA samples from everybody to try to figure out who is actually what relation to whom. That family tree is going to look like a tiffany lamp. In-breeding is not a good thing for humans, just look at North Carolina.(tic)
Bikerken at April 13, 2008 2:18 PM
Norman,
Valid point about polygamy creating an underclass of dispossessed, frustrated young men.
I observe that, thanks to feminism's ongoing attempt to remove as many men ("negative male influence") from families as possible, we are seeing the creation of the same type of dispossessed, frustrated, angry underclass of young men who have been raised by single mothers right here in the good ol' USA. And they're starting to blow stuff up.
We've got bigger things to worry about than polygamy....
Jay R at April 13, 2008 3:54 PM
Norman,
Valid point about polygamy creating an underclass of dispossessed, frustrated young men.
Actually, I made that point.
As for this... "the creation of the same type of dispossessed, frustrated, angry underclass of young men who have been raised by single mothers right here in the good ol' USA. And they're starting to blow stuff up."
...let's not exaggerate, shall we?
And I'm no friend to feminism, but I think it's women playing the family court system, not feminism, that's separating good men from their families.
Amy Alkon at April 13, 2008 4:42 PM
Bikerken -
The boys in FLDS cults are regularly driven out as competitors for the girls. Once they get up to between twelve and sixteen, they are forced out without anything to support themselves.
FLDS cults (and other similar cults) are very prone to issues stemming from inbreeding. There are a lot of these little communities and they stretch back to before the mainstream LDS church renounced polygamy. We're talking about inbreeding that goes back as much as ten to twelve generations in less than two hundred years. Even though the starting point was pretty wide, it works out as a small gene pool over so many generations, with very little new blood mixing in.
That said, polygamy is not synonymous with this kind of activity. You don't generally hear about folks that do it, unless they are involved with this kind of crap and get caught. Polygamists are pretty keen on staying under the wire.
DuWayne at April 13, 2008 4:58 PM
>"young men who have been raised by single mothers right here in the good ol' USA. And they're starting to blow stuff up."
...let's not exaggerate, shall we?
===
What exaggeration? How would you characterize spraying bus stops with automatic weapons fire? Maybe I should have clarified that "stuff" includes people -- including little kids.
>And I'm no friend to feminism, but I think it's women playing the family court system, not feminism, that's separating good men from their families.
===
And where did the current female-friendly policies of that family court system originate? Who is it designed to protect, and why? Who came up with no-fault divorce? You don't seriously deny that feminism expressly seeks to drive men out of families, do you?
Love ya, Amy, but come on!
Jay R at April 13, 2008 11:02 PM
@Amy: Actually, I made that point. So you did. I have the attention span of a sperm.
Polygamy for some means agamy for others. A new word - you saw it here first. The effect is probably going to be similar to those societies - mostly India and China, I believe - which practice female infanticide or abortion. More testosterone. Just what the planet needs.
Norman at April 14, 2008 12:07 AM
Jay - Reagan was the one who signed no-fault into law nationally. And he wasn't exactly what you'd call a feminist.
"no-fault" divorce actually benefits men tremendously by making it possible for them to walk away from a woman simply because they wanna bang someone new.
What the new feminists did was manage to get the whole family court system created out of whole cloth as a way for them to get something for nothing and have the appearance of legality to it.
Men created the system. Feminist lawyers came up with new ways to game it.
Norman - in 50 years, China won't be a problem any more. They'll have lost 30% or so of their population to attrition. Those that are left will be too busy cleaning up to bother self-detonating.
brian at April 14, 2008 4:36 AM
Jay: While McVeigh was from divorced parents one of those nut jobs from Columbine were from two parent homes. The V-tech shooter had a two parent home as well. I agree that something is making people more crazy and prone to stupid violence I don't think single mother are the source.
vlad at April 14, 2008 6:35 AM
Eh, when it comes to the VA tech guy, well lets face it the guy was nuts, I don't think his home life would have made much of a difference. Mentally unstable people tend to be nuts no matter how good a home life they have.
Robert at April 14, 2008 10:32 PM
Not required to provide healthcare?
So in other words, they go on the public dole because paying for it themselves is against their religion?
As for the cosmetics... you bet your damned ass he's going to pay for makeup. And how!
callie at April 15, 2008 9:11 AM
*...a gent who's into wearing rubber body suits and defecating in them. I may find the notion repulsive, but I'm not going to make a values judgment.*
Okay, I'll do it for you.
Anyone who sexualizes fecal matter has a psychological screw loose and is a moral degenerate.
Anyone who runs an armed Christian rape compound and throws away their own sons while taking sexual and psychological advantage of the imprisoned young girls and women should be sewn into a canvas sack with a wild animal and thrown in the river for being a criminal pervert.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at April 18, 2008 8:57 AM
Leave a comment