Robert Shaw
anonymous
October 21 2004, 08:50:39 UTC
There are such divergent views of sexuality over the course of history, with some men and women during the 17th century Ottoman empire using their inherent homosexuality as a means of strengthening political ties and securing power among a few ruling elite. In fact some women in Ottoman-controlled Egypt prefered their husbands to have male interests, as this would most likely prevent the husband from amassing concubines or other wives with whom she would most likely have to compete for resources. (Under Islamic law, a man can take four wives as long as he can provide for all of them equally. Whether or not the prophet Mohammed meant this as a paradox is still contested to this day). Anyhow, it's just outrageous that someone should take such a Manichean view of sexuality. It sounds like a Bush-ism to divide the world into such simple constructs of good-evil, black-white, male-female when no one and no thing is that simple. No body of government, no body of people can be encompassed by such a general definition as "Masculinity". Where is the threshhold? What is the standard? Who planted the engraved stone tablet on this earth that says "You must conform to this exact definition of what we think you should be like, even though God or Nature or Chaos or Allah or Yaweh made you different than that?" And for the record, what is a "womanly" act? I am a woman, and I've flipped burgers. Hell, I've even played flag football in my day, or what we half Colombians would call futbol as well. What's his bloodyfreaking point? --JESyKaH
Reply
Leave a comment