Inspired by a conversation I had with a Pakistani muslim guy just this afternoon (22/7/2015).
This guy has known me for a little while now, and most times he meets me he wants to “guide me back to the right path”. In other words, revert to slavery to Allah. After discussing the topic of Allah, the existence of Satan, the Qur’an, etc. we came to Muhammad. He described Muhammad as the perfect man, to which I said, “A man who had sex with a 9 year old girl is the perfect man?”
He replied, rather emphatically, “Yes!”
That was it. I refused to continue the talk, as he had openly said paedophilia was good because Muhammad had done it. Because I was walking away, he tried to frame it as if I was cowering away from the truth in haughty arrogance. I replied that I was walking because I find people who condone child rape disgusting.
In case anyone doesn’t know that story, the ahadiyth mention that Muhammad’s 3rd wife A’ishah was 6 years old at the time of the betrothal and 9 when he consummated it. He was about 53. However, one scholarly opinion reckons she was 10 not 6. She’s often lauded as a fantastic narrator of Muhammad’s life and a “Mother of the Believers”, as if being married at 6 was only a detail for historical interest but ultimately of no importance.
Nowadays muslimiyn excuse it by claiming shit like:
Girls mature faster than boys so she was physiologically an adult (EVEN IF that were true, he was in his fifties),
People reach puberty faster in hot climates so she was physiologically an adult (bollocks. Climate doesn’t affect onset of puberty – in fact, puberty before the age of 10 is nowadays considered a health risk),
We can’t judge actions done in the past by the standards of the present. That’s anachronism (but wait. Islam is meant to be the standard for all humanity to follow in all times & all places),
This was the prophet of Allah, the perfect example for all of humanity to follow, so everything he did was right. He never committed sins, he never did anything against the commands of Allah, so how dare you criticise him?
That reminded me: my mum had done exactly the same thing. Last year when I was debating with her about Islam, she said she doesn’t care that Muhammad had sex with A’ishah.
Yes, my mother said that.
This goes to show something really profound: people are willing to defend anything if it’s associated with what they believe in. As I had said before, Islam stands for anything muslims want – misogyny & sexual equality, racism & anti-racism, war & peace, slavery & emancipation, etc. Add child rape to the list.
I know this is not a rare opinion. The vast majority of muslims believe this, even if they don’t like it. However, when pressed on the issue (like I did to my mum) they have this thought process:
I know this is true. That would make him (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) a paedophile,
But he’s the sinless one and Allah’s last prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). I cannot badmouth him otherwise I’ll no longer be muslim and I’ll go to hell,
Therefore my opinion on paedophilia doesn’t matter. I must defend the prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) at all costs!
Then there are others who honestly see child marriage as good. Usually because they’re paedophiles who either have their own child brides or would if they could.
I know not all muslimiyn are comfortable with this. Some argue that those ahadiyth are wrong and A’ishah was either midway through or finished puberty when she married Muhammad. As much as I used to want to believe them, they rely on raising doubts about ahadiyth (not that they’re ever completely trustworthy) and linking snippets of indirect facts that don’t give a definitive number. So I’m sorry, but the evidence points massively in favour of the conclusion:
“Prophet” Muhammad was a child rapist.
And many/ most muslims are willing to condone that to defend his religion.
Yes you read that title right! This is totally new to me so this post will probably be very short. I only became aware of it after reading chapter 6 of Shereen El Feki’s Sex and the Citadel (ISBN 9780099526384).
I’m surprised, not so much by the fact that such people exist (because modern orthodox muslims just explain them away as sinners/ improper muslims) but by the fact they existed!
In other words, this post will NOT be about transsexual/ transvestite/ transgender muslims in modern times, but ones in olden times – even back to Muhammad’s days!
Plural of mukhannath. Literally means effeminate, ie. men whose behaviour and/ or dress was like women’s. The ahadiyth talk about them, and interestingly they weren’t as persecuted as modern muslims would (like to) think. Despite the hadiyth in which Muhammad curses effeminate men (and masculine women, to be sure), debate still goes on over whether he meant all such people or particular ones around him. In another hadiyth a man applying henna was dragged in front of him and he had him banished – but not killed because that man prayed. It should be noted, however, that this term also encompassed eunuchs, so early muslims didn’t really distinguish between men who were “feminised” by force and those “feminised” by choice. This is in common with much of the world’s thinking back then, the thought that castration “emasculates” you, permanently puts you outside the fold of maleness. However, muslim scholars in the past did distinguish between 2 types of mukhannath – innocent ones who are innately feminine and don’t try to profit from their “womanliness”, and those who sin by prostituting themselves.
Also, male homosexuals were NOT covered by this term because mukhannathuwn were assumed to be asexual, or “free of physical needs” and therefore guys women were safe around. Usually. Modern Arabs and Arabised peoples, according to El Feki, wrongly disregard that and assume they’re raging homosexuals. There was no exact Arabic equivalent of homosexuals; the closest was luwtiy, a 13th century word based on the story of Luwt (Lot), the guy sent to Sodom & Gomorrah to convince the men there to stop having sex with each other. However, modern attempts at equivalents do exist.
Unlike in early Christian history, there’s nothing to show early muslims became eunuchs by choice. As far as I know…
Plural of gulāmiyyah. This word is a feminine form of gulām (young man or boy) and referred to women who dressed and behaved like men. Ironically, though some even went to lengths such as painting moustaches on their faces, hanging out in male-only events and taking on male names, they were decidedly heterosexual and made no attempt to hide their female shapes! They even painted their male lovers’ names on their faces! In fact, back in the Abbasid dynasty of 9th century Baghdad they were seen as hot. Al-Rashid, its most famous sultān, reportedly had up to 4000 gulāmiyyāt in his court. His son Al-Amin was known for liking boys, and his mother (worried about him not producing an heir) gave him gulāmiyyāt slaves – which he really took to. His favourite was a girl called ‘Arib. Also unlike modern days, they were NOT confused with lesbians as again there was no exact equivalent word for them – but there are many now.
Nowadays in the Arab region they’re called boyat and treated as Western-imported deviants trying to obliterate the God-sanctioned feminine norm, especially in Qatar. See what a conference in the Emirates had to say of them.
Update: Indonesia has the warias, men who dress & see themselves as women. This custom predated Indonesian Islam by ages but still persists. Since Indonesia has the highest number of muslims in the world, most warias are muslim.
Randomly rhyming words, a few random thoughts, and an empath's emotional rollercoaster. In other words; Ramblings, Poetry, Soul-Food, Haiku, Narrative, Poems, Life, Transcend, Snow-leopard, Spoken word