Reply With QuoteHoly hell ... I try to be accepting of other cultures but sometimes it's just too much. What the fuck?
The San Francisco Chronicle wrote an article about how a lot of Afghani men take young boys, between the ages of 9 and 15 years old, as sexual companions because their interpretation of Islam does not allow them to meet and talk to women not related to them.
"How can you fall in love if you can't see her face," 29-year-old Mohammed Daud told reporters. "We can see the boys, so we can tell which are beautiful."
Even after marriage, many men keep their boys, suggesting a loveless life at home. A favored Afghan expression goes: "Women are for children, boys are for pleasure." Fundamentalist imams, exaggerating a biblical passage on menstruation, teach that women are "unclean" and therefore distasteful. One married man even asked Cardinalli's team "how his wife could become pregnant," her report said. When that was explained, he "reacted with disgust" and asked, "How could one feel desire to be with a woman, who God has made unclean?"
Holy hell ... I try to be accepting of other cultures but sometimes it's just too much. What the fuck?
Frontline did an excellent special on this a while back. It's not as simple as "protecting Afghan pedophiles".
It's also precisely that simple.
I take it you guys aren't fans of Man Love Thursdays?
I find that article troubling. Mostly because it's very self assuredly judgmental of the practices of another culture when viewed through the the lens of our own cultural prejudices. There's an important difference between a culturally accepted practice of relationships between older and younger men, and serial boy rape that ruins lives. The article seems to jump to the conclusion that the latter is happening while only providing descriptions of the former.
What the hell is wrong with you?
I just find the entire thread title funny.
I don't think Afghan people invited NATO in to help them out.
That's what you find troubling about the article?Originally Posted by Kraaze
Last edited by frank austin; 09-09-2010 at 02:05 PM.
what the FUCK
I don't think that trying to contextualize the situation makes it any better. Set aside the psychological reasons why this is an objectively terrible practice (as would be the case were girls the object of these "traditions") and you still have the dire sociological consequences.
I'm not talking about the homophobic theory of the breakdown of society due to the failure of heterosexual relationships, but about the consequences stemming from the rampant objectification of any demographic.
Incidentally, the longer this goes on, the worse it gets and the harder it is to reverse it. This, by the way, is yet another reason why slavish adherence to ANY ideology is a terrible, terrible thing. This isn't just the result of an incredibly repressive theocracy; it's the result of a single, intractable belief system taking over the lives of an entire nation.
I'm just sensitive to rushing to judgement against other cultures.
I'm not saying I approve of man/boy sex, so let's all save ourselves a tiresome pile-on trying to denounce me for that. I would like to see a slightly less sensational take on the issue to really understand it.
Is there anything less sensational than hot man-boy sex, though? I mean, really.
There are factual assertions in the article that go a long way to illustrate the problem in a neutral light. Take away all the quotes (which can suffer of mistranslation, cherry-picking, misconstruement, etc.) and the description of the "Dancing Boys" practice alone is enough to illustrate a vicious societal problem.
A few observations:
1. This is one of the most backwards, poor countries on the face of the earth we're talking about.
2. The country has been in near-complete chaos for centuries.
3. There is a long history of this sort of thing going back to antiquity.
4. A few other countries have amazingly low marriage ages in the 12-14 range.
5. Selling off children is common in poor countries world wide; it's just the sex angle on this one.
Last edited by Jason McCullough; 09-09-2010 at 02:14 PM.
Your point being?
Is there any way to see a culture in which adult men take 9 year old boys as sexual objects in a non-judgmental way?
we should just nuke the place, save us money and time!!!
I was all like, wtf Afghanis, and they were all like, Chicks man, and I was all like, true, true
Maybe 9 year olds are the outliers? Maybe 14 and 15 years olds are the norm? Maybe's thats considered an adult age in those cultures and so these relationships are nothing more than consensual homosexual relationships? My recollection is that ancient greek cultures had arrangements like this between young men and older men that were not inherently abusive in nature, but it's been a few years since college so I'd have to do some digging if you wanted details and references.
I've done a little googling and it does appear that the consensual element is conspicuously missing in the Afghan situation, so the entire question is rather academic. It's basically sexually slavery and thus of course utterly reprehensible.
Well as long as they are 14... And the greeks did it...
Whew that's a relief, I was thinking there might be something hensible about it.I've done a little googling and it does appear that the consensual element is conspicuously missing in the Afghan situation, so the entire question is rather academic. It's basically sexually slavery and thus of course utterly reprehensible.
Bring back the Taliban!
Yeah, that's going to go well.
die or become a boy toy....
damn.. tough choice!!!
Like the man said, "Choose - Death or Mau Mau?"
Third Choice....Death by Mau Mau
Afghanistan really sucks, like all the other third-world countries on the planet, albeit worst than most. The proper response to "those Afghans we're protecting have an entire social structure built around sex with young boys" should be exactly the same as "those Afghan's we're protecting have an entire social structure built around murdering thousands of each other for petty crimes" and starving to death and land mines and christ almighty, NOW people are fucking upset? The child mortality there is TWENTY FIVE PERCENT. Meanwhile, I'm supposed to be outraged by a modern implementation of Greek sexual practices?
Additionally, "we're protecting them" is the same bullshit that got us into this mess. We are not "protecting" them. Our foreign policy is to quite happily support satan incarnate if it'll get our rich people some natural resources.
This is yet another incident of our completely embarassing ability to turn on and off our concern for foreigners like a light switch to cover our selfish bastard nature in a thin drizzle of hypocritical selective outrage.
I'm not going to search for it here at work, but in primitive cultures it's somewhat common. Look at the anthropology literature on this; it's quasi-slavery + sex + cycle of exploitation, like the old societies where slaves would buy freedom and then buy their own slaves.
For the sex angle, I point you to the history of the minimum consent age. Also here.
Obviously This Is Very Bad. But for Afghanistan's level of development and war-torn history, it's par for the course. None of this should be a surprise.Throughout most of the 19th century, the minimum age of consent for sexual intercourse in most American states was 10 years. In Delaware it was only 7 years.
As late as 1930, twelve states allowed boys as young as 14 and girls as young as 12 to marry (with parental consent).
Last edited by Jason McCullough; 09-09-2010 at 03:36 PM.
Send NAMBLA to Afghanistan
FUCKING WOMEN
HOW DOES IT WORK
Posting Permissions