Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: Women in Islamist Movements

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #12
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Monogamy and restricting women's extra/pre-marital sexual conduct is all about ensuring that females are able to successfully raise children who prosper, guaranteeing the security of females past child-rearing age, and and in order to wield authority. It also helps to have a committed mate who has an entirely different "skill-set" to provide the ability for a female/male combination to stay within their "comfort zone" and lengthens the lifespan of both male and female.
    What you are saying is that you think monogamy and restricting womens sexual contact is normal. What I am sayign is it varies by culture and if you look at the earliest socities (h-g's) it really wasnt an issue. What you are arguing for is a cultural universal. What I am saying is that these roles change over time.

    That doesn't deny that being sexually available isn't also a tactic for achieving the same goal, but being sexually available is a much more riskier proposition than monogamy/socially sanctioned sexual conduct. Sexual availability can be used to collect goods and support the raising of offspring, but when push comes to shove, committed mates and offspring get taken care of, and sexually available females are "dust in the wind."
    Unless you can get another man to raise you child.....
    Maybe mate with good genes and get the guys with bad genes to support you.
    I am not talking about 'risk'..... Clearly there are risks to any sexual practise.

    Your position (and I assume the sarcastic tone thereof) is very popular with the "social engineering" crowd, who depend upon a constant state of conflict between the sexes, which they try to worsen by such theories. They find it useful to create several "Straw Men" to attack, using such theories.
    What theory of mine is so wrong? I dont think I put forward any theories besides maybe a little marxist femminism.....

    If you dont think monogamy is linked to the neolithic revolution that is fine, you can think whatever you want.

    Yeah I just want conflict between the sexes......

    I am not in favour of cultural relativism but if you think gender and sex roles are universal and or natural than your just plain wrong.

    I am not saying that the earliest human gender and sex roles are more natural or correct than later ones, just that early ones were not about monogamy.

    Read origin of private property and the state.
    Read Nisa.
    Last edited by Jedburgh; 07-19-2007 at 03:35 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •