The “D” Word

Hamidm #216: ``romair,

.......... you have a lot to learn about gays and lesbians - you might be surprised one of these days ......... ``

Actually, I know quite a bit about them. And yes, I might be surprised on these days, if my kid tells me he/she is gay. I am not sure what I would do. And I am stating, in a straight-forward manner that I oppose gay marriage. Which is why I cannot declare myself to be a secularist.

What I do criticize are the hypocrite secularists, who are unwilling to accept gay marriage, yet keep trying to push separation of church and state onto everyone. When it comes to gays, they immediately become religious. And say that separation of Church and State does not apply to them. They only want the Church separated from State, as much as they desire.

What is even worse is that the gay rights groups, themselves, do the same thing. I have followed their debates on this issue. They obviously support gay marriage and specifically use the separation of Church and State, i.e. secularism as their basic argument. Which is fine and correct, under the definition of secularism. However, when they are asked if they support consentual polygamy, polyandry and incest, under the same argument of secularism, they say, No. They also only separate Church and State as far as their beliefs allow them.

The current concept of marriage is a religious concept. If we want to separate it from the State, to enforce secularism, then one cannot stop halfway. However, if everyone is going to stop halfway (including gays, themselves) then what is wrong with stopping where it currently stands, i.e. marriage between man and woman.............

I am not sure where one draws the line. What if, tomorrow, a girl came out of the closet and said she is in love with her brother. What should the father do? Encourage it or discourage it? Would he be a bigot if he discouraged it? If not, then why is he a bigot if he discourages gay-ness? Do keep in mind that it is taboo in the USA to marry cousins, yet it is common in Pakistan.......The same guy is a bigot in USA for discouraging it and an matchmaker in Pakistan for encouraging it......

As long as one applies one standard principle, I am fine with it. Either encourage everything or let people draw boundaries of discouragement as and where they see fit. This, of course, does not mean that one should be bigoted against anyone who is gay. But then, one should not be a bigot against anyone whose name is Abdul and has a long beard, either......

# 207: ditto. Excellent Point!

Sorry to disappoint those who heaved a sigh of relief and mumbled ``good riddance`` after skimming through the # 195 on Romance 101. I am sure some got jealous by the nice guy in the picture. That must be a natural wolf-ish reaction. I am positive that the rabbits would have taken it in a different stride.

With due respect to the readers, I have to revisit my previous post and update it. My conscience would NOT have spared me otherwise ...

[My wife told me that if I ever spoke to her in a harsh tone or loud manner or yelled at her then that would be the last day of our marriage.]

In addition to the above, my colleague`s wife had also put some boundary conditions around ``raising his voice on his wife``. It was unacceptable to the woman. I liked the fact that she had put her conditions and agendas on the table. If the other person was compliant or promised to stay compliant then that was well and good. Otherwise, he could go to hell and she`d have cared less.

That is so damn sweet!

I respected her forthright attitude. And they say, ``As you sow, so shall you reap``. By the way, I had to quote her verbatim for my own piece of mind. I like and respect those amongst my gender who put their foot down and dictate their own terms in life.

``If you cannot bring up and follow your own terms (that are imp to you ) in life, then you do not have the right to expect anything from anyone.`` Zahra`s P-O-W

I am sure the wolves, fascists, and zealots would love to dissect my cute pearl of wisdom.

Be my guest!

Who cares?

romair,

.......... you have a lot to learn about gays and lesbians - you might be surprised one of these days ......... in the last two years three kids i have know since they were in sixth grade came out of the closet during their last years of high school and many adults, including the headmaster and their parents, just didn`t know how to handle it ........... it was not pretty and certainly not funny ......... my heart goes out to the kids and i think their parents, specially the fathers, acted like a bunch of bigoted morons .........

malik99 #182: ``romair sahib, that is bound to happen when one meets a person who has the PERFECT understanding of a religion. so yeah, pleased to meet you.

but unfortunately, the way you floated about and separated ``interpretations`` of Quran and life and teachings of Prophet (saw), it almost comes out that Islam is whatever you want it to be - depending on how one interprets. You pick what you like from ``Islam``. You leave what you dislike. Context does not matter.``

I am never suprised how quickly the same mullahs run away from the Quran, when one argues based on it.

Let me ask you a simple question: Do you think, the Quran, as a book is complete, and that Islam is complete with it? Or would Islam not be complete until Bukhari came around and wrote his book? Had Bukhari not authored his book, would Islam have been incomplete? Was it incomplete in the 200 years in between the death of Muhammad and the publishing of Bukhari`s book?

You are trying to pull at straws. Instead of disproving my point, you have started accusing me of things. As I mentioned at the start of this discussion, this is what invariably happens. The final step always involves Qadianis, for some reason. And then eventually being declared non-Muslim.

I have neither re-interpreted anything, nor have I provided any information on any pillars. I never said one should separate anything. The Quran descibes exactly as much as was required by God, and is a book form of the Sunnah. I am thus not the one doing the separation. You are. You are separating it into a book of Hadith (written by a human being).

All I said was one should not start accepting ideas, about what Muhammad did or said, from people who wrote a book 200 years later, based solely on oral traditions, which they, themselves, cannot proved to be valid. One should not give Bukhari the status of a Prophet.

The Quran declares Islam to be complete with the Quran. After that, one can interpret the Quran as much as one wants. But you cannot allow people to start adding to it, through books that have no basis nor proof.

You have not been able to challenge this argument. Nor have you been able to prove to me how the hadith in Bukhari`s books are valid. How anything orally passed over 200 years can be considered valid?

So if you want to prove my argument wrong, you have to provide some logic in disproving it. I am arguing within the boundaries of the Quran, itself. If you cannot disprove my argument, then you have to accept it. Or remain in a state of denial, knowing fully well that what I am saying makes sense, yet you are still unwilling to let go of your illogical stance, because that is what you were taught since childhood to believe. And you never bothered to search it furthur. You were told Bukhari is the law, without even knowing how he wrote his book.

Do one or the other. Either accept what I stated or prove me wrong. Accusing me of things is worthless...........

Regarding #195 … more I think about it … more I want to comment …

The jewish man with 36 years of marriage is probably an alright fella … but I don’t believe he never spoke harshly to his wife. Probability of this is about the same as finding one of the ten soul mates … out of 3 billion … in Sunday classifieds. The dude is certainly exaggerating or may be he has not seen with his wife in 36 years.

But I see deeper issues here. If a spouse sets conditions, whereby one episode of yelling means an end to marriage … holy mother of christ … red flags should go up in a person’s mind. Such an ultimatum is degrading in itself, as it no longer allows one to err without punishing him too harshly. It trivializes marriage, as well as a divorce. I think the woman actually needed therapy.

Consequently, I don’t see how a self-respecting man would agree to such a principle. That is not to say that he should yell at his wife … but that spouses should be allowed to yell at each other … without fearing that it would end their marriage. At times people get carried away and get nasty … but they should be allowed to learn from their mistakes. Spouses need to make allowances for each other … after all, they are each other’s friends and confidants. Sticking to such rigid, harsh criterion can only damage a marriage, and not do it any good.

Saminashah #204: ``Romair......gay marriages for women?

I have a feeling you were being facetious-but I am not. If a woman is gay and both she and her partner want to be married, why not indeed?``

I may have just come up with the solution that solves all the problem. Infact I have come up with an even better one. Arranged gay marriages.

I think if this idea caught in Pakistan and was socially acceptable, it would become very popular; specifically amongst girls. Killing two or three birds with one stone. You got the desrie of marriage fulfilled. You get the parents say in it, so they are happy. You get not one, but two, wedding dresses. And your spouse doesn`t have much of a chance to hit you. Because you can hit her back. And you get the lifetime companionship..........

As I said, I support gay marriage, as long as my own close relatives aren`t involved. You seem to support it outright. I find that a bit hard to belive. Suppose tomorrow your daughter comes in and tells you she is not going to the prom with Rashid. She has decided to go with Rashida, instead. Would you fully encourage her to explore her newly found desires and encourage her into a long term relationship with Rashida. Or would you try to nudge her back to Rashid........

Re: # 189 sajal [``...To hope!!! may we all learn how to treat our women with respect and dignity...``]

Hope always triumphs over experience.

Our hopes are like dreams. And you know what they say about dreams...

One must hold on fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is like a broken winged bird that cannot fly.

Your personal narrative is powerful. Eight years of hell... !! For what? But its over, even if it is not going to be easy. To hell with those who shun you. They see you as a threat because you stood up for yourself and refused to follow the script.

It is hard to be a black sheep. I know, for I`ve been one. If I were a women, my path would have been much steeper. It was steep enough as it was. Society shuns those who attempt to veer away from the beaten path. It always has, and always will. We are each expected to go through the motions and act our part on the stage of life, reading from the script and following the director`s cue. Diviate from the script and you risk being out casted.

``Nails that stick out, get hammered back in.`` This is a Japanese saying, but applicable in South Asian societies just the same. The focus here is mostly on the plight of women in marriage and divorce. But I can tell you, the grass isn`t much greener on the other side either. There was a firestorm when I got divorced the first time. She was the model wife and I the wayward husband, or so the outside world saw it. (It just so happens that she too slapped me in front of our three year old daughter -- for crimes mostly not committed.) That was a desi marriage and one ostensibly of my own chosing.

With the benefit of twenty years in hindsight now, I can say without reservation that had I not walked out then, I`d be miserable, if not dead and gone today. Ironically, however, at long last, she and I are better friends today than we could possibly have been otherwise.

...SR

Re: # 155 F.V. [``...but I fear that I am beginning to enjoy my aloneness a bit too much... ``]

Enjoy your ``un-attached`` status. Revel in it, cherish every moment.

Loneliness is a curse, indeed, but solitude is an absolute blessing.

Your friend was right about being ``lonely`` in a dysfunctional relationship. Loneliness is an inner state of feeling disconnected. One can be lonely in a crowd.

...SR

Re: # 209

Hmm... and to think that Iran was once the poster child of modernity in its region. Thanks for the article.

We have something like that in India - a kind of downgraded version, which actually is legalized prostitution. The devdasi system. Then of course there are all those parents who marry their daughters off to Arabs and then the girl sits abandoned at home once the `husband` goes back to his country and never shows up again. What is really disturbing about both these systems is that the girl has very little to say about it and is usually denied further education because she has ostensibly found her station in life. At least Maryam made her choice...

...and isnt that pitiful? To be grateful for something like that!

Re: # 208

Amrita,

This was written about in essays authored by Iranian women scholars about 15 years ago. Here`s a more contemporary explaination.

Warning: this is a copy and paste


October 4, 2000
Love Finds a Way in Iran: `Temporary Marriage`
By ELAINE SCIOLINO

---

A dossier with the records of temporary marriages. The photo was taken from the records of a marriage registrar office in Tehran. The two big X`s show that the time of marriage has expired.

---

TEHRAN, Iran — For five years, Maryam, the hairdresser, and Karim, the home appliance salesman, carried on a love affair, meeting secretly at the house where Karim lived with his parents. The young couple`s relationship was officially sanctioned by Iran`s Islamic Republic, even though unmarried couples who have sex or even date and hold hands can be arrested, fined, even flogged. That is because Maryam and Karim were married.

Sort of.

They had a valid contract of temporary marriage.

Iran is a country where rules are fluid, where people of all classes and degrees of religiosity pride themselves on finding loopholes in the Islamic system. Temporary marriage, or sigheh, is one of the oddest and biggest.

The practice of temporary marriage is said to have existed during the lifetime of Muhammad, who is believed to have recommended it to his companions and soldiers. The majority Sunni sect in Islam banned it; the minority Shiite sect did not. Historically, the practice was used most frequently in Iran by pilgrims in Shiite shrine cities like Meshed and Qum. Pilgrims who traveled had sexual needs, the argument went. Temporary marriage was a legal way to satisfy them.

Maryam and Karim chose temporary marriage for a practical reason. ``We went out a lot together, and I didn`t want to get into trouble,`` Maryam, 31, said. ``We wanted to have documents so that if we were stopped on the street we could prove we weren`t doing anything illegal.``

Their ``marriage`` ritual was simple. Even though they could have sealed the contract privately, they went to a cleric in a marriage registry office in Tehran with their photographs and identity papers. Maryam had been forced into a loveless marriage at 15 to an opium-smoking, womanizing factory owner nearly two decades her senior who divorced her nine years later; so she brought along her divorce decree. If she had been a virgin, she would have needed her father`s permission to marry.

The couple could have gotten married for as short a time as a few minutes or as long as 99 years. They could have specified whether and how much money Maryam would be paid as a kind of dowry, or how much time they would spend together. Instead, they decided on a straightforward contract of six months, which they renewed again and again.

What was unusual about Maryam`s situation was her willingness to talk about it. Despite its religious imprimatur, temporary marriage has never been very popular in Iran. Tradition dictates that women be virgins when they marry; even when they`re not, they should pretend to be. Many Iranians regard sigheh as little more than legalized prostitution, especially since it is an advertisement that a woman is not a virgin. In some circles, even illicit sex is considered better — as long as it can be kept secret.

But now an odd mix of feminists, clerics and officials have begun to discuss sigheh as a possible solution to the problems of Iran`s youth. An extraordinarily large number of young people (about 65 percent of the population is under 25), combined with high unemployment, means that more couples are putting off marriage because they cannot afford it. Sigheh legally wraps premarital sex in an Islamic cloak.

``First, relations between young men and women will become a little bit freer,`` said Shahla Sherkat, editor of Zanan, a feminist monthly.``Second, they can satisfy their sexual needs. Third, sex will become depoliticized. Fourth, they will use up some of the energy they are putting into street demonstrations. Finally, our society`s obsession with virginity will disappear.``

Even conservatives like Muhammad Javad Larijani, a Berkeley-educated former legislator, favor temporary marriage. As Mr. Larijani put it: ``What`s wrong with temporary marriage? You`ve got a variation of it in California. It`s called a partnership. Better to have it legal than have it done clandestinely in the streets.``

Though most of Iran`s reformist publications have closed in recent months, newspapers and magazines that remain have begun to discuss the issue. A recent front-page article in a weekly tabloid, ``World of Medicine,`` about a chador-wearing, AIDS-infected prostitute who took pleasure in infecting her clients included a recommendation on avoiding infection: take a temporary wife.

Advocates of temporary marriage also point out that children of such unions are legitimate and entitled to a share of the father`s inheritance.

More rarely, unrelated couples have used nonsexual ``temporary marriage`` in order to live or work in close quarters.

But the popular response to such a sweeping societal solution has not been favorable. After ``The Hope of Youth,`` a weekly, ran an article in favor of sigheh, readers called and wrote in with scathing attacks.

``I am 23 years old,`` one unnamed young man told the paper. ``If I temporarily marry a young woman for three years and then divorce her, would anyone be willing to marry her? It would be impossible that any man would want to have a family with this woman.``

Another unidentified caller was quoted as saying: ``Those who want to promote temporary marriage don`t understand that they would be promoting prostitution. Who would be there to be a father for the children from temporary marriage?``

The paper wrote back: ``The reality is that young men and women do have sexual relationships. If these relationships are defined within an Islamic framework, we will not have the danger of prostitution.``

As for what to do about children of temporary marriages, the editor added, ``It is not so complicated to use birth control anymore.``

This is not the first time that people in the Islamic Republic have tried to promote sigheh. The first person to discuss it openly was none other than Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani when he was president. In a sermon in 1990, he called sexual desire a God-given trait. Don`t be ``promiscuous like the Westerners,`` he advocated, but use the God-given solution of temporary marriage.

That sermon brought thousands of protesters to Parliament, in part because a married man can have as many temporary wives as he wants, and up to four permanent ones, and can break the contract anytime he wants, whereas women cannot. Many secular Iranians are irked by what they perceive to be the hypocrisy of clerics, who have made ample use of temporary marriage over the years but are adamantly opposed to premarital or extramarital sex.

Clerics seldom talk about their experiences. But in the book ``Law of Desire,`` Shahla Haeri, a Boston University cultural anthropologist and granddaughter of an ayatollah, cited interviews with clerics.

One proclaimed that because God banned alcohol, he allowed temporary marriage.

Ms. Haeri, who lectured on the subject in Iran, said that neither the clerics nor leading thinkers had begun to analyze its implications in a coherent way. ``If they are really serious,`` she said, ``they should study the matter in the context of sexuality, birth control, sexually transmitted diseases, morality, religion and gender relations.``

But what of Maryam and Karim?

He gave her clothes and a little money from time to time during their ``marriage,`` but not the gold coin he had promised her with each renewal of their contract. He told her she was beautiful, something her husband had never done. She cleaned his house occasionally and even met his brothers. He met her mother — who, twice divorced, had married (permanently) for the third time. They kept their temporary marriage a secret, even from her.

``She knew that I was with a man,`` Maryam said, ``but would have preferred I was with him illegally than his sigheh.``

In fact, Maryam and Karim are not the couple`s real names. Maryam remains so ambivalent about what she did that she asked that not even their first names be used.

In the fifth year of their relationship, Karim began to call less frequently. Maryam went to a fortuneteller, who told her that Karim was to be married. When she confronted him, he said that it was over. After their contract ran out, he married a virgin chosen by his parents.

Because of her divorce, she said, ``he told me right from the start that he couldn`t marry me permanently. But he treated me so nicely that I thought things would change.``

Maryam was so much in love that she even offered — half jokingly — to become Karim`s temporary wife again after he was permanently married. He refused.

``I think sigheh is good, very good,`` she said, but added that she would not do it again. ``I want to get married permanently now, as soon as possible.``

Saminasha - intrigued by the temp. marriage in iran comment. tell me more, i havent heard that before.

amrita.

ps -
zahra, sajal, farzana and aisha - you`re all far braver than I. Kudos.

What Ive heard & what seems 2 b true empirically is in successful relationships theres less codependency. Each person has a ``fulfilled`` life outside of marriage & marriage is the icing on the cake as it were. The partners trust each other & r self-confident. They r together coz they want 2 b. I also see other couples who r together but r miserable in each other`s company but stay together coz theyr afraid of not. Sounds cliched but its true.

#195 ZahraJ
//...my wife told me that if I ever spoke to her in a harsh tone or loud manner or yelled at her then that would be the last day of our marriage....//

Come on - let`s not go overboard here. A yell and a harsh tone might be necessary when the other party is going cuckoo. We all go cuckoo every once a while. Sometimes a harsh tone is what it takes to prevent one from making a mistake - like, spending $4000/-on plasma TV [man - that was a gorgeous TV] or $600/- on a decorative banana tree.

And the best part is what comes after the yelling match - makeup sex.[ Sometimes that`s the only kind of sex you ever get ]. So let the ``yelling`` be there in marriage. It ain`t that bad.

Re: # 194

Romair:

gay marriages for women?

I have a feeling you were being facetious-but I am not. If a woman is gay and both she and her partner want to be married, why not indeed?

On the other hand, why cant more Pakistani men acknowlege and change their patriarchical roles within their marriages? There are many wonderful men of my grandfather`s, father`s, brother in law`s and brother`s generation who are the equals of their wives-so its not impossible, is it? When a male family member acts inappropriately towards his wife, to what extent do the menfolk support the wife and intervene? Reason and change the husband?

I know this is difficult in cases of emotional and physical abuse because the couple tends to isolate themselves, but the issues being brought up here arent the problem of just women. These are the problems of a community.

Finally, why not a temporary marriage as was/is custom in Iran?

Re: # 187

Sajal and Farzana,

I agree with Zahra; thank you for participating in this discussion in the way you have. These are some ways that other women can see that the issues in marriage and divorce are not unique to individuals.

Zahra,

Yes. I could add some stories, but I dont feel comfortable doing so. Lets just say psychological issues and abuse are involved...and the abusive spouse sees/saw no problem whatsoever with his behavior.