A little thing called projection.
Projection, in the parlance of psychology, is when you attribute your own sub-conscious motivations and thoughts upon another person. An example: Anti-gun people thinking people who believe Concealed Carry permits are a civilizing force on society are actually bloodthirsty killers just looking for an excuse to kill someone who cut them off in traffic or who got in the "10 items or less" line in front of them with 25 items. They believe that because they deep down are afraid of what they themselves would do if they had such a weapon in easy access.
Doctoral Candidate Tal Nitzan and Doctoral Adviser, Dr. Zali Gurevitch need to go back and review that little bit of psychology. Nitzan contends that the reason that IDF soldiers do not rape Palestinian women is because they are racist and don't want to have a bastard Palestinian kid. Of course it could not POSSIBLY be because IDF soldiers come from a society where rape is condemned as a hateful shameful act.
You see, in the Muslim world, raping the women of a conquered society is perfectly acceptable, and is in fact encouraged as a means to break the will of the conquered people. Just look at Darfur as a perfect example. The Arab Muslim militias kill all the men in a village, even the children, and rape every single female, regardless of age, toddlers included, with the hope that some will be impregnated with Arab children. The rest will have their spirits broken, believing themselves to be "damaged" and unwanted by another man. It is even spoken of in the Koran. And of course there are the cases of UN "Peacekeepers" that have been known to have sex with women and children. Nitzan makes the assumption that since the IDF does not practice rape as a tool of warfare, then they must be so racist as to be incapable of the act. It apparently does not occur to her at all that those who DO partake of the act are the despicable ones.
In this paper, Nitzan claims that the IDF are so racist that they have de-humanized Palestinian women to the point that they no longer feel attracted to them at all. But rape is rarely about attraction so much as the exercise of control over the woman. Therefore de-humanization and objectification of the victim is necessary to the act. So her justification is proof of the falsehood of the thesis. But de-humanization and objectification of women is part and parcel of Islamic sexual relations. In Islam, females are nothing more than sexual objects for men. Even marriage to children and sex with infants is perfectly acceptable. So it would appear that Nitzan, who I presume to be Palestinian, or at least Muslim, sees sexual relations between men and women in those terms and cannot conceive of any other way of a man relating to a woman except as a sexual object. Therefore, when seen in that light, it is perfectly understandable why she arrived at the conclusion she did. In that light, Occam's Razor cuts the other way.
Update: I have since learned that Nitzan is a she, not a he. I have corrected the gender references above.
Doctoral Candidate Tal Nitzan and Doctoral Adviser, Dr. Zali Gurevitch need to go back and review that little bit of psychology. Nitzan contends that the reason that IDF soldiers do not rape Palestinian women is because they are racist and don't want to have a bastard Palestinian kid. Of course it could not POSSIBLY be because IDF soldiers come from a society where rape is condemned as a hateful shameful act.
You see, in the Muslim world, raping the women of a conquered society is perfectly acceptable, and is in fact encouraged as a means to break the will of the conquered people. Just look at Darfur as a perfect example. The Arab Muslim militias kill all the men in a village, even the children, and rape every single female, regardless of age, toddlers included, with the hope that some will be impregnated with Arab children. The rest will have their spirits broken, believing themselves to be "damaged" and unwanted by another man. It is even spoken of in the Koran. And of course there are the cases of UN "Peacekeepers" that have been known to have sex with women and children. Nitzan makes the assumption that since the IDF does not practice rape as a tool of warfare, then they must be so racist as to be incapable of the act. It apparently does not occur to her at all that those who DO partake of the act are the despicable ones.
In this paper, Nitzan claims that the IDF are so racist that they have de-humanized Palestinian women to the point that they no longer feel attracted to them at all. But rape is rarely about attraction so much as the exercise of control over the woman. Therefore de-humanization and objectification of the victim is necessary to the act. So her justification is proof of the falsehood of the thesis. But de-humanization and objectification of women is part and parcel of Islamic sexual relations. In Islam, females are nothing more than sexual objects for men. Even marriage to children and sex with infants is perfectly acceptable. So it would appear that Nitzan, who I presume to be Palestinian, or at least Muslim, sees sexual relations between men and women in those terms and cannot conceive of any other way of a man relating to a woman except as a sexual object. Therefore, when seen in that light, it is perfectly understandable why she arrived at the conclusion she did. In that light, Occam's Razor cuts the other way.
Update: I have since learned that Nitzan is a she, not a he. I have corrected the gender references above.
posted by Rorschach at
12/28/2007 08:18:00 PM
3 Comments:
Being female, this is a tough one. I always go back to Muhammed and wonder what kind of psychotic, hating, man he must have been. The religion of peace? Hardly. How someone so extreme could get nations to believe is beyond me. Raping women and toddlers is beyond sick.
Understanding the attractiveness of such a belief system is pretty easy to understand when you consider that in the seventh century, the world was very much a man's place. Many men, given the official seal of approval from God to have sex with every conquered woman he comes in contact with, as well as being able to have as many wives as he likes of any age, who must be submissive at all times and willing and available to their husband's sexual needs at the drop of a hat, would find that very attractive. Since the women didn't have any say in the matter, of course their opinions didn't count.
Years back I read a poem (can't recall the poet) who proclaimed the entire human race is a result of rape. Meaning, I suppose, that it has always been in man's nature to "recreate" himself and his culture through "ethnic" cleansing. It's not as far-fetched an idea as one might think.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home