Isn't this the kind of thing the War on Terror is supposed to be fighting? Didn't they learn anything from the Who Wants to Marry a Whore fiasco? Reaching deeper into the pits of despair, and back in time to the feudal era, Fox has come up with a new reality show that will explore the atavistic joys of arranged marriage:Take "American Idol," add a bit of "The Bachelor" and sprinkle in the arranged marriage element of "Monsoon Wedding" — and you've got the idea behind Fox's next big reality franchise.…
Article comments
26 - brette
Just one last follow-up, as I don't want to clog the blog with my ramblings.
First, I applaud Eric's observation that American leftists who defend the hellish nightmare that exists in certain foreign countries need to get a clue and develop some self-respect. While I would consider myself to be fairly liberable, I strongly believe that anyone who deludes themself into thinking that being appropriately understanding of other cultures necessitates acceptance of the types of atrocities that have been referred to in the posts is an idiot. Refusal to accept such vile practices is not ethnocentrism, it is a moral obligation of every decent and rational human being.
As to the further observations in some of the posts that our own cultures "problems"(body piercing, infidelity, rape & domestic violence, etc.) somehow either justify the atrocities occurring in other cultures, or at least should prohibit our commentary, well, all I can say is get a life. An individual's decision to modify their body in some way (be it a tummy tuck or otherwise)is not equivalent to holding a 12 year old girl down while you slice off her clitoris. Period. Nor is there much "honor" to be had in putting a bullet in your sister's head because she experienced the horror and humiliation of being raped.
The point of the article was that the concept of an arranged marriage (especially one done for no other reason than mediocre television fare) is stupid (as well as being in incredibly bad taste). This is not because we lack suitable appreciation of other cultures, it is because the concept violates one of the most precious principles of our own culture which is freedom of choice.
Am I being ethnocentric and callous towards those cultures that put less stock in personal freedom? Perhaps. I suppose I'll just have to live with that particular shame, and be thankfull every day of my life that I was fortunate enough to be born in a culture where I'm free to think what I want, do as I please, and marry someone because I love them.
27 - Eric Olsen
Brette, that was sweet.
28 - Dawn
Now this is funny.
Wow and I thought the Democrats were a bunch of delusional crybabies.
People, read it again. If you don't get it the second or third time. Remove your head from your sphincter.
Eric is the last person to slam the Islamic faith, just the Islamofacists.
29 - Axel
I'm surprised that there are Muslims who are not familiar with the term know "Islamist". Perhaps they are pretending...
Good fun article Eric... keep it up... and by the way I'm a brown person from Asia who probably will have to go through the arranged marriage route himself...
But I see your point and appreciate your tongue in cheek way of presenting it...
Don't get intimidated by the dolt Islamists (ha!).
30 - Suman Palit
I'm not sure how the leap of logic from Islamists to Fox came about. Fox, (no surprise here) has gotten the cultural context of arranged marriages twisted in a remarkably dense knot.
Arranged marriages in an Asian context (or at least in the South Asian context I am familiar with), is no more a calamitous arrangement than the dating hodge-podge that passes for matrimonial selection criteria in much of the Western world. There are significant numbers of Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Jews and Catholics all over the world who practice arranged mariages as either a primary, or as an acceptable method from a pool of many choices.
There is a huge difference between a social contract between two families done in the privacy of their lives and community, and a made-for-tv special where complete strangers intrude into what should be an intensely private decision.
We can possibly argue about the limits of privacy, what is acceptable "freedom" to someone who lives in a society which practices arranged marriages. For many South Asians I know who are in arranged marriages are relatively well-adjusted, have kids, an affectionate household, are actually happy with their lives whether you choose to believe it or not, and they really, really do not understand what all the fuss is about.
Sorry Eric, I think you picked up a limp cudgel to beat "Islamists" over the head with. There is a very diverse spectrum of "arranged marriages", ranging from "arranged dating" among urban Indians, to "bonded child marriages" in the backwaters of Africa or Asia. From what i've read about the description of the show, it does not remotely qualify as being "normative" for the practice.
For you or anyone to use the FOX interpretation of "arranged marriages" to tar an entire practice is more than a little unfair.
31 - lidia
brette:
now i think it's time for you to take a re-read of the posts...
"I strongly believe that anyone who deludes themself into thinking that being appropriately understanding of other cultures necessitates acceptance of the types of atrocities that have been referred to in the posts is an idiot. Refusal to accept such vile practices is not ethnocentrism, it is a moral obligation of every decent and rational human being".
who said anything about accepting atrocities? to reiterate, THESE ARE NOT PRACTICES NOR PRINCIPLES OF ISLAM. what we are commenting on is Eric's lack of this knowledge and his blatant disregard for people of this faith. Please, you must realize that what you publish has an effect on readers who have no knowledge of the religion. We (Muslims)do not justify these atrocities or condone them. The fact that you assume that these are accepted practises by muslims infuriates me. There are events in history which have distorted the image of some world religions and countries, but we don't automatically assume that this is the reality do we? (i.e. would it be fair for me to assume that all Germans are Nazi's?) There is a strong distinction between being muslim and insanely distorting the religion to suit your goals or needs (whatever they may be...i.e Osama Bin Laden)
Please people, my whole point was to go and get yourself educated before you speak about a topic. Some of the posts in here have been dramatic to say the least.
I think that eric in the very least should recognize that at a time when emotions are strong and tensions are high, the last thing he needs to be doing is making comparisons between the american way of life and the religions of the people who live in it.
PLUS: You all seem to be forgetting that there are plenty of Muslim westerners who partake in the same freedom and choices that you have, we just have a different way of going about it.
That does not make us bad people.
furthermore, Brette...get over yourself, Eric is talking about arranged marriages, there is no atrocity in that.
32 - lidia
thanks surnan:
As eric previously stated:
Now that was Sweet!
33 - JakeA
To take Suman's comments a step further:
Fox's show is no more an "arranged marriage" than the earth is flat. No one will be forced to do anything they don't want to do. This is a ratings grabber for Fox and a publicity stunt for the contestants.
34 - Harry
Eric, perhaps you should have headed it "The Islamists and Moonies Should Like This."
At least the Mohammedans arrange marriages one boy and one girl at a time and not en masse like the Moonies. That's the only positive thing I know about them.
35 - Liz
"loosey goosey" Eric? Amusing, but the truth is that an Islamic "arranged marriage" is just as I described it when Islam is practiced as it was meant. Harry, may I correct your term of "Mohammedan" - it is "Muslim". Mohammedan implies that Mohammed is worshipped like Christ is worshipped by Christians and Mohammed is viewed as a prophet, not a relation of God and a Muslim only worships God. Granted, as noted before here, there are many atrocities committed in the world in the name of different religions but please let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I see your point in differentiating between Islamists and Islam but it is a fine point not always realized by the general public and I wish you had not used the term at all in your article. I agree that the premise of a real life marriage in a game show is preposterous but before you make your point at the expense of another group of people, maybe you could think of something a little less volatile for your headline.
36 - Gerard Van der Leun
Amusing to see all the apologists and true believers rushing in to again draw the distinction between Islam and Islamofascists.
Don't really hear that much sounded forth from the imans and the leaders of the faith of the Muslim world.
Not by their words, but by their actions shall ye know them.
If the truth stings, than perhaps that is God's way of letting the faithful know they had best sweep the dung out of their faith in a manner that all can see.
Those who do not clean up after their dogs must face heavy fines in the civilized world.
37 - snopes
How anyone can defend FGM is completely beyond me. Please read this description and see if you would like this done to yourself or your daughter.
http://forum.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?t=491
For males, circumcision is a messy but comparatively trivial operation, whereas for females, clitoridectomy is not only painful beyond belief, but is the equivalent of total castration. All of the women whom I know personally, who have undergone pharaonic circumcision and have been infibulated, say they have never recovered from it - physically or mentally - and of course, they are absolutely incapable of experiencing any sexual pleasure. On the contrary, sex is very painful for them.
No doubt, Eastern men have always nourished , and still nourish, a deep visceral fear and distrust of all infant females - some of the bright ones might grow into brainy women who would go after them with meat cleavers, join "Women's Lib", demand equal rights, etc. So, aeons ago, the ancestors of Semitic 'machos' reached the conclusion that the only way to beat the deadly females of their species was to circumcise them first, then lock them up in harems or zenanas.
Pharaonic circumcision and infibulation is regarded as the only one hundred percent effective way to safeguard a girl's virginity. Indeed, it is so effective that, for intercourse to take place after marriage, the husband or matron has to defibulate the bride with a knife to pry her open.
The ghastly screams and shrieks which have terrified so many foreign tourists at night in the vicinity of "Honeymoon" hotels in Port Sudan are emitted by brides being defibulated. A Sudanese journalist commented, "For us they seem perfectly normal, we all know that the first nights of marriage are agony."
But just what is pharaonic circumcision? I have seen it being done when I was staying as a guest in the home of wealthy Arab friends. A great feast had been prepared to which all female relatives and friends had been invited, and since I was regarded as a guest of honor, I not only had to attend, but was given a ringside seat. The miserable little victim - a beautiful child, incidentally - was grabbed by four women, who threw her upon a sort of pallet on the ground and pinioned her arms and legs. Then the gedda, or specialist, or matron, or whatever you want to call her, kneeled between the little girl's thighs and began the operation by slicing off the clitoris. All of the women present began making the most prodigious din (by ullulations), which they kept up during the whole operation in a futile effort to drown the howls and shrieks of agony of the patient. As soon as the clitoris had been excised, the matron scooped (roughly speaking) it out, then began to pull and tug to extract its roots. Blood gushed left, right and center. This was only an hors d'oeuvre - the next step consisted in shearing off the edges of the inner lips, then carving off the rim of the outer lips, from which the gedda removed a gory ribbon of flesh about 2 centimeters in width. Where the clitoris had once been was a gaping hole from which blood poured. I will spare you a few other details which I would rather not enlarge upon. Finally, the matron stitched up the raw and bleeding flesh, after which she carefully inserted a tiny hollow tube into the lower portion of the vagina, to allow for the passage of urine and menstrual blood. This, so I was subsequently informed, was to remain in place until the scar had formed. The 'operation' had lasted all of twenty minutes. Finally, the patient was bound up with cords from the hips to the knees to prevent her from making any movements which might cause the stitches to burst. For fifteen days, all girls who have been infibulated have to remain motionless, supine, and trussed up like fowls.
According to Dr, El Sayed Mirghani El Sayed, the very first African doctor to write a thesis on female circumcision, in Africa alone "fifty million or more female children are circumcised every year". In Somalia, all girls between the ages of seven and ten are forced to submit to this barbarous operation, for religious and social reasons. Most Egyptian girls, including those who attend universities, have been infibulated.
Unfortunately, no one knows how many of the little victims who have been circumcised, die - either immediately due to shock, or a little later due to the infections resulting from this prehistoric butchery. Sometimes, the patients bleed to death; hemorrages which often last for forty-eight hours are frequent occurrences, but generally they succumb to tetanus or gangrene. Whenever a death resulting from circumcision occurs, as Dr. J.G. Taoko reported, it is bruited about that the 'evil eye' was to blame, or else it is rumored that the victim herself was to blame because she had had sexual relations before the ceremony and was 'punished' for her 'crime'.
It is hardly necessary to describe what happens to all women who have been infibulated when they are on the point of giving birth. The vagina, a mass of scar tissue, is far too narrow to permit the baby to emerge. So what happens? They simply slash her open. Then, of course, later she has to be infibulated all over again. Any husband can force his wife to undergo infibulation ad nauseum. One of my unfortunate friends has been infibulated five times.
Mahomet cannot be blamed for introducing either male or female circumcision, which had been practised thousands of years before his birth, but it is relevant to note that he never made the slightest effort to ban, suppress, or even discourage female circumcision. On the contrary!
According to the Omatiya version of the hadiths (sacred words of the Prophet), when Mahomet saw a woman in the Medina busily carving up the genitalia of a small girl, he said: "Do not cut too deeply." According to the second version (Razeen) he allegedly said "Do not cut too deeply. It clears the complexion of the woman and is more agreeable for her husband."
38 - Eric Olsen
As grim as that was, I deeply appreciate the input from the renowned Snopesarian.
I have avoided investigating that topic much due to my squeamishness - thanks for the education.
39 - Rachel
Islamist:
Is·lam·ism Pronunciation Key (s-lämzm, z-, sl-, z-)
n.
1. An Islamic revivalist movement, often characterized by moral conservatism, literalism, and the attempt to implement Islamic values in all spheres of life.
2. The religious faith, principles, or cause of Islam.
40 - Amy
I know i'm alittle late on this, but i was reading this website and i want to say that i found some of the things said here to be extreemly offencive. i happen to live in Egypt, as a Christian and half the things stated above are so far from wrong it's not funny. Just a pointer, if you want to talk about other cultures, at least do your homework from a reliable source.