VIDEO: Waleed Aly: victimhood gone mad


  1. trueatheist says:

    It is odd but I guess common now that this whole public debate re the burqa, has skirted around what seems to me the central issue, which is why Muslim women are required to cover up. Isn’t anyone curious to know more about this strange custom? Or once again it is just a matter of “faith” and off limits to any rational discussion? Naturally it is prescribed in the Muslim holy book, the Quran but a quick look at some Islamic websites purporting to rationalise this behaviour will reveal some startling gems of modern psychology and neuroscience, such as the following. “1- For men, the eye is what increases their sexual desires… 2- For women, the feeling of a touch is what increases their sexual desires… For these reasons, Allah Almighty ordered women to cover up so that they don’t look sexually intimidating,… Men and women in Islam are not also allowed to talk too openly in public together, so no wickedness can take place among them. Women are encouraged to talk in a low voice and to not hit the ground with their heels too loud when they walk.” etc etc. And finally this gem, “These types of teachings keep the society in a healthy mental state.” Suicide bombings (followed by sex with seventy two virgins), honour killings, and female genital mutilation surely do not qualify as evidence of “a healthy mental state”. More like unhealthy sexual repression of the highest order. And this religious clothing (Note: only worn by women) is a potent symbol of all that. So yes there are security concerns but we should be much more concerned about what this clothing represents.


  2. Ever stop to think that the same folks that scream about female genital mutilation by ethnic minorities, those same folks, on the subject of male genital mutilation aka circumcision, by the ethnic majority, there is a resounding absence of outrage. In fact, we just don’t wanna talk about male circumcision full stop. It’s…well…kinda different. And it’s so much easier to aim our pointy finger and shake our heads at those Moozies isn’t it?

    I reckon that male circumcision is a relic of the early matriarchal societies of southern Europe, as alluded to in the post-matriarchal kingdoms of J.G.Frazer’s The Golden Bough, those kingdoms where, the aspiring male would marry into the dominant female royal family, then a few years later the short-lived king be bumped off under the mistletoe to make way for the next young stud. In the same way Spartan women’s unique status and privilege descended from the matriarchal dominance of the Minoans. Boys circumcised to demonstrate fealty to the dominant matriarchy. And here we are three thousand years later still doing it to our sons. And the Western system of serial monogamy with ritual legal and financial disembowelment of the rejected male mate (in a divorce court) is disturbingly reminiscent of Frazer’s sacrificed king. Tsk,tsk, tsk.

    Yeah, let’s focus on those feudal Muslims instead.


%d bloggers like this: