When Islam Freed Woman from the First Sin
A verse that I perceive to be coral in human social development, it was related to the first sin of Adam, and how he played Goofy when asked by God, claiming "she" to be the reason. Saying; "The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate" Genesis 3:12
It was then when the man took the economic leadership on this planet, when he first started to claim the woman as the source of the first sin, and all the sins that came after. Judaism and Christian scriptures were only a part of a long story, always depicting women as the source of sins and evils, even in Islamic scriptures, Quran had never related the old sin of mankind to Eve as the Old Testament did. Nevertheless, some Hadieths that is a suspect of forgery related the sins and evils to women as well, and depicted them as the maidens of Satan.
Recently, reading comments on Kolo-Mashy blog of my friends Emy and Coca, specifically on a post about Fornication and the society different perceptions and attitudes toward men and women who fall into it. I read comments of the blogger Hossam Sunray, where he proposed some justifications for this discriminative social value. As I had something to say about almost every justification he wrote, I though to write this post answering his claims. He might forgive me if the translations of his claims became shorted by any mean. Hereunder the claims and its answers from my side.
"Since the ever, the nature granted this to man, as always the man held the right of polygamy while women used to have only one man who represents the security and shelter to his woman"
I am afraid here the basic foundation of the claim is inaccurate. It was in the 19th century when Bachofen, a brilliant archaeologist brought up the suggestion of matriarchal communities civilization witnessed once, needless to mention he was highly oppressed specially from the Catholic Church. By that time, they managed to limit his argument to academic cycles. Yet, it was re-vitalized over years. Today, the majority of archaeologists believe we had once matriarchal societies where women were equal or higher ranked to men. In some of these societies women were economically dominant, and a sort of polygamy (androgamy) existed, together with male prostitution. So, polygamy is a sign of economic dominance and does not belong to gender
"Sex is more Important to man, as women are not moved by desire as men do"
I will agree if the blogger meant men to be more public in their sexual tendency than women. But the reason is not sex is less important to women. Medicine and Sexology proved women to be as sexually interested as men. First legend stated men are more sexually aroused than women. Then a second legend said that women are more aroused like 10 times more than their peer men. Finally, Sexology states today that both are equal, all variations are individual variations. So, women do crave men as much as men crave them, then why it looks different? because females usually are less talkative about it. Even among their closed feminine circuits, they do not talk about their desires as much as men do. That is all.
"A woman can seduce a man if he is not welling to make love to her. On the contrary a man can only force a woman if she is not welling, he can never seduce her"
Seductive ability is a matter of personal variation. Some men can seduce women and vice versa, others can not. By the end of the day if the man want to control he can, same applies to woman. The man who need to force a woman to make love while they are in privacy is whether blocked by negative emotions from her side or a very bad seducer in general.
"A girl will tolerate well knowing her father is a playboy. Yet, she will undergoes moral breakdown knowing her mother is playing around"
It depends on the society dear. Some other places in the world will be equally destructive to know one of the parents is faithless to the other. Here due to traditions male fornication is taken lightly even from his own sons and daughters.
The Misleading Logic:
I think the drift of logic here, was the blogger's perception of the symptoms as causes. i.e. when a man has a fever and shivering due to it, we can not say that he shivved because he has fever and that is it. We should follow the cause of the fever as it is a symptom not a causative factor.
If I will explain the blogger's justifications in my own language as I see it as symptoms, I shall say;
- Polygamy is highly practiced in the east as the society does not disregard it. So it became easier to imagine and to practise.
- Males enjoys more sexual freedom than females, so it appears from outside as if females are not interested in sex
- Family in case of female fornication suffers more as it is much worse perceived compared to mail fornication.
All what he says actually is signs of the disease not its causative agents. What do you think?