Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Two prominent news stories in Canada recently revolve around the concept that female virginity is so crucial to the honour of a family that even murder of those young women suspected of having lost their virginity is “allowed” or at least tolerated. In Ontario a muslim man and his son are accused of killing his three teenage daughters because they would not comply with the islamic rules about the subordinate conduct of women (especially regarding their virginity). Also in the news is the report that India is trying to extradite a woman from Canada who 9 years ago killed her own daughter in India because she chose to marry a man of whom the family did not approve.
This obsession with the viginity of females has always fascinated me, but when it goes to the extreme as it does so often in islamic or Arabic culture, one has to be shocked and perplexed. It stands to reason (well in a convoluted way) that men, in a patriarchal society, whose only legitimate claim to power is through strength and physical domination, would want to gain ultimate control over female sexuality because obviously the thought of the sex of women would have a natural dominating influence over the minds of men. Out of fear, out of a sense of inadequacy men might want to control the sexuality of women and especially to have complete control over the sexual lives of their wives. There is a sense of institutionalized male supremacy at work when the woman he’s choosen to marry has never known another man and is owned by him until death.
I was looking to find out what kind of status female virginity held in matriarchal societies, but have found little in my bit of research. What I have discovered is that in matriarchal systems, the female is more valued for her sexual prowess rather than for pure ignorance. Perhaps others here are more familiar with how virginity is valued or not in matriarchal societies. The book “First Sex” by Elizabeth Gould-Davis from 1971 gives some account of why virginity became the ultimate status symbol of male dominance over the female, but most of her findings have been thrown into doubt by more recent publications.
I did however find a shocking account of the obsession a patriarchal society can have about female virginity by reading exerpts from a 1980 book by Nawal El Saadawi called “The Hidden Face of Eve” in which she gives both personal accounts and later from her medical practice about the horrific treatment of women in Arabic culture. She does not seem to blame islam specifically as the source of this misogyny, but she does indicate that the patriarchal religious doctrine of the Judaist lineage can be held responsible.
I’d warn those who go to the site that it is textually graphic in its details, but that is the nature of that beast.
My question about this obsession with female virginity in traditional christian doctrine and still woefully present in islamic cultures, is it more about a whole patriarchal system where men want to specifically control those things (female sexuality) that threaten their authority, or is it more about each individual man (needing to marry a virgin) in order to feel empowered and virile in the context of her ignorance? Perhaps both equally? And further, if this is a natural propensity of men in general, then how come we in the West have overcome the lure of this madness?
Because the family who resorts to such a vile crime as murdering one of it’s children is dishonored more by the murder than by the child’s perceived offense. It is a shame killing.
Reducing the social acceptability of such crime in it’s labeling also reduces it’s acceptance, and is a step towards changing the societies that demand such human sacrifices as unacceptable.
My question about this obsession with female virginity in traditional christian doctrine and still woefully present in islamic cultures, is it more about a whole patriarchal system where men want to specifically control those things (female sexuality) that threaten their authority, or is it more about each individual man (needing to marry a virgin) in order to feel empowered and virile in the context of her ignorance? Perhaps both equally? And further, if this is a natural propensity of men in general, then how come we in the West have overcome the lure of this madness?
Simply ... it’s something gone horribly wrong with the human mind.
Given the incredible prevalence of such notions of virginity throghout human history, I’d say that the recent cultural shift away from it actually means that something is going right with the human mind. Well… the more civilized human mind, that is.
Simply ... it’s something gone horribly wrong with the human mind.
That’s true Answerer, because as a gay person I wrote these questions wondering why there was this historical/traditional obsession with virginity in the hetersexual community. But when you said “something gone horribly wrong with the human mind” I realized that of course this isn’t a symptom of heterosexual madness alone because all of this priestly raping of innocent young boys is just another version of the same behavioural malady.
Another thought, maybe there is a “godly” component to all of this as well and that’s why virginity is so highly valued by the church authorities? In the same sense that god shows his love for humanity by ultimately setting out to control their behaviour and making them fearful of him, the purpetrators of these crimes against virgins (whether through marriage, rape, incest, or gay/straight child abuse) also want to control their victims and to cast them into a well of fear. THis is how tyrants operate and how they have always operated, including Jehovah, the greatest tyrant of them all. Always remember kids that “god loves you.”
In response to Matthew’s comments, perhaps it’s the secularization of society that leads us out of the madness? When you can respect children (virgins) as persons on a morally equal plane with yourself, then you will begin to treat them differently from the traditional model where control was the driving force in a “master/slave” mentality.
Stephen Pinker makes a similar argument in his new book The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence has Declined. He connects the rise of cultures that embrace Secular Humanism and democracy with very significant reductions in all kinds of violence (all the way from world wars down to smaller scale violence like honor killings and rape). One of the components of Secular Humanism and democracy that inevitably leads to this, according to Pinker, is the rise of an individualistic mentality. Such a mentality inevitably reduces the prevalence of master/slave relationships in a society, and with it the frequency of violence on the basis of sexual status.
Edited to add “democracy” to the second and third sentences, as Pinker notes it as being individually significant as well.
Because the family who resorts to such a vile crime as murdering one of it’s children is dishonored more by the murder than by the child’s perceived offense. It is a shame killing.
Reducing the social acceptability of such crime in it’s labeling also reduces it’s acceptance, and is a step towards changing the societies that demand such human sacrifices as unacceptable.
That’s interesting John, because the Prosecution in the Ontario case is calling the crime a case of “honour killing.” And I can just see that other fundamentalist muslims who hear this in a news report or as part of the Justice system rhetoric will gladly agree with such a formal identification of the issue. By calling it an “honour killing” we somehow lend credence to the idea that there’s a context in which killing your 3 innocent daughters makes sense . . . I mean, this is a totally inhumane and corruptable way to speak about cold-blooded murder of your own children!
I think you about covered it there, zen. It’s all those things ... and more. It generally falls under the category of ignorance, as far as I can tell. It’s weird shit that people don’t give a second thought to. It’s the muddled mush of a Mario mind.
As speculated, I wonder if “honor killings"are more about control of the female by the male than an issue of sexual behavior. As I gather, if the father gives consent, then there’s no issue of honor killing.
I wonder, is it killing for virginity as such or to maintain the idea that the male who takes same owns the female?
Maybe the “killing for virginity” is just my way of throwing this back to the ancient days when virgins were sacrificed as offerings to the gods, but there’s still something about that going on in the present day. As far as maintaining the idea that the male who takes [the virginity] owns the female, Dennis, you’d think the remedy would be to force the man who took the virginity to take control of the female, rather than to murder her? Killing the girls who lose their virginity is done exclusively by family members, you’d think if the virginity was important, then the family would want to go out and kill the man who took it, but no, strangely enough they kill their own daughters!
Put another way then, if the family went out and killed the man who took their daughter’s virginity, then that would be a case of “killing for virginity” - but that rarely, if ever, happens. These are murders done “in respect/honour of the family” so in that sense, they are killing in order to restore their family reputation by eliminating within their own clan the one who has put a stain on their name. It’s really a “killing for reputation” more than anything else, including male ownership of the female whom he deflowers although this remains a strong cultural dogma just adding to the insanity.
Yes, Dennis. Control freaks with low self-esteem and low intellect who can’t see that they are under another’s control.
Wish that were true, but many, most, of these control freaks have high self-esteem and aren’t stupid at all. Just because we abhor some behavior does not mean it is expressed by stupid or weak people.
Yes, Dennis. Control freaks with low self-esteem and low intellect who can’t see that they are under another’s control.
Wish that were true, but many, most, of these control freaks have high self-esteem and aren’t stupid at all. Just because we abhor some behavior does not mean it is expressed by stupid or weak people.
/agreed
I think Answerer is certainly spot on about some of these folks, but the fact that this sort of mentality has persisted for a good portion of recorded human history through all levels of society seems to suggest that it is more a function of culture than of individual personality.
Yes, Dennis. Control freaks with low self-esteem and low intellect who can’t see that they are under another’s control.
Wish that were true, but many, most, of these control freaks have high self-esteem and aren’t stupid at all. Just because we abhor some behavior does not mean it is expressed by stupid or weak people.
/agreed
I think Answerer is certainly spot on about some of these folks, but the fact that this sort of mentality has persisted for a good portion of recorded human history through all levels of society seems to suggest that it is more a function of culture than of individual personality.
Culture may be the impetus for whatever personality traits are responsible, much like Nazi Germany, and the more advanced we become, the more the “ignorance” of considering it an honor to murder your children is evident.
