Islamic Courting

February 15, 2008 12:14 PM

Back in May, an Egyptian professor found a loophole to allow an unmarried female to be alone in the presence of a man. All she has to do is breastfeed him 5 times. Radā is a technical term from Islamic jurisprudence meaning "the suckling which produces the legal impediment to marriage of foster-kinship". Now the good people over at Haase & Martin have come up with their own way to get under that burka.
posted by gman (55 comments total)

I'm going to be sick.
posted by DU at 12:21 PM on February 15, 2008

Rules lawyering is so much more entertaining in a religious context. Really brings the arbitrariness home.
posted by Skorgu at 12:22 PM on February 15, 2008 [6 favorites has favorites]

You're doing it wrong.
posted by phrontist at 12:24 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Nice!
posted by milarepa at 12:30 PM on February 15, 2008

This changes everything.
posted by psmealey at 12:33 PM on February 15, 2008

Here is the picture which I currently beam out to people to show them what is under my t-shirt. The laws of the Koran are not broken.
posted by The Loch Ness Monster at 12:34 PM on February 15, 2008

Your favorite misogynistic religion suckles.
posted by The Bellman at 12:35 PM on February 15, 2008 [16 favorites has favorites]

Symbolic breastfeedings? So the guy just has to suck on it even if there's no milk?
posted by crapmatic at 12:37 PM on February 15, 2008

A more in-depth look at the reasoning behind the fatwa here (linked from the Wikipedia entry).

It is interesting that Atiyya left open the possibility that the breastfeeding could be done indirectly via breast pump (pending further research, it seems).
posted by ssg at 12:41 PM on February 15, 2008

Any religion that needs a loophole in order for an unmarried female to be alone in the presence of a man is pathetic.
posted by sour cream at 12:47 PM on February 15, 2008 [8 favorites has favorites]

In other news, Professor Atiya is currently holding interviews for new TAs. Young women with generous endowments are encouraged to apply in person during office hours.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 12:48 PM on February 15, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

This seems like a non-solution, even from a rules lawyering point of view. I mean, if being alone with a strange man is a big deal, then letting a strange man suck on your breasts is gonna be disastrous.

(Interesting, too, that the Wikipedia article hints that some people don't think the rule applies to adults. That seems like the sensible reading to me, and I imagine it'll get a lot more popular in the course of this.)
posted by nebulawindphone at 12:54 PM on February 15, 2008

Actually that fatwa from that scholar was a subject of infinite jokes all over Islamic World. I'm from Morocco, and people were like "WTF???!!!"
posted by zouhair at 12:56 PM on February 15, 2008

I don't care what anyone says; burkas are freakin' hawt. This just takes it over the edge.
posted by roll truck roll at 12:59 PM on February 15, 2008

Free Iraq a rack!
posted by cerebus19 at 1:04 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Um, are you guys missing the Charming Burka (last link)? That's a pretty awesome idea.
posted by mrgrimm at 1:08 PM on February 15, 2008

nice post
posted by semmi at 1:15 PM on February 15, 2008

Um, are you guys missing the Charming Burka (last link)? That's a pretty awesome idea.

Until the first case of false advertisement.
posted by Atreides at 1:16 PM on February 15, 2008

So by going through this symbolic breastfeeding thing, you can be alone with an unmarried woman, but at the same time you become 'kin' and are thereafter barred from marrying her. Seems slightly paradoxical to me.
posted by UbuRoivas at 1:34 PM on February 15, 2008

Nikah Misyar is a pretty sweet way to get around the fact that fucking prostitutes is haram.
posted by gman at 1:37 PM on February 15, 2008

UbuRoivas: Actually, according to Atiyya (from the link I posted above):

"The logic behind [the concept] of breastfeeding an adult is to transform the bestial relationship between [two people] into a religious relationship based on [religious] duties... Since [this] breastfeeding takes place between [two] adults, the man is still permitted to marry the woman [who breastfed him], whereas [a woman] who nursed [a man] in his infancy is not permitted to marry him...

I don't really understand why it matters when the breastfeeding takes place, but then I don't really understand any of it.
posted by ssg at 1:47 PM on February 15, 2008

Any religion that needs a loophole in order for an unmarried female to be alone in the presence of a man is pathetic.


And here we go.

Please note, it's only the fundamentalists of that religion who actually adhere to this. So. Fundamentalism is pathetic, yes. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, shall we?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 1:48 PM on February 15, 2008

Man I hate babies.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 1:50 PM on February 15, 2008

I say keep the bathwater. We need the bathwater!
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:55 PM on February 15, 2008 [3 favorites has favorites]

A society in which the Charming Burkha makes sense seems like a harsh, repressive, strange, convoluted place.

Given that those places exist, Charming Burkha seems pretty awesome. I hope no one ever gets killed for using it.
posted by gurple at 2:01 PM on February 15, 2008

Charming Burkha seems pretty awesome.

all the obfuscation and deception of myspace, in real space/time.
posted by eustatic at 2:18 PM on February 15, 2008

the charming burka could help with fighting terrorism.
posted by gman at 2:20 PM on February 15, 2008

This thread is going remarkably well, considering its tinderbox combination of Islam, fundamentalism, cultural relativism, sexism and boobies.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:22 PM on February 15, 2008 [5 favorites has favorites]

If this loophole becomes accepted in Islamic law, it will eventually become a polite custom in Arab lands to air-kiss a woman's bosom upon meeting her, much as we in the West shake hands.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:28 PM on February 15, 2008

Um, are you guys missing the Charming Burka (last link)? That's a pretty awesome idea.

In my view, the Charming Burka is total fail unless the image of the woman wearing no clothes.

Also:

The CharmingBurka sends a self-defined picture of the wearing person to every mobile phone next to it. Laws of the Koran are not broken.

No laws of the Koran are broken if the woman simply walks around in normal clothes either.
posted by delmoi at 2:28 PM on February 15, 2008

No laws of the Koran are broken if the woman simply walks around in normal clothes either.

Amen.

That said, it's pretty dumb to think that someone who interprets the Qur'an in such a way that requires them to wear a burka will also interpret it in a way that would find this product acceptable.
posted by omarr at 2:35 PM on February 15, 2008

it will eventually become a polite custom in Arab lands to air-kiss a woman's bosom upon meeting her

Now there's a tradition we could all learn to love.
posted by twistedonion at 2:38 PM on February 15, 2008

So, how do you broach the subject:

"Hey, you seem like a pretty nice lady, and I'd like to hang out with you. Mind if I suck on your boob a couple of times?"

If you ask me it seems like a pretty tricky way to get to second base. Maybe these fundamentalists are more clever than I've given them credit for.
posted by quin at 2:47 PM on February 15, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free, amirite?
posted by designbot at 3:06 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Well this explains why the Archbishop of Canterbury that Sharia law are inevitable in Britain: the British love a little absurdity.
posted by three blind mice at 3:14 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Jesus. Er, Mohammed. Earlier today I said the kill-yourself-if-you-know-your-eye-color religion of the fictional islanders was goofy. I take it back, this actually makes it seem pretty reasonable. What kind of fucked up trickster God has loopholes in his ridiculously over-specific laws? I mean, would you really want to worship such a God? "Sorry, Aziz, it says right here in Paragraph 47 subparagraph 56a of the Tittysuckin' Accords that you must BURN IN THE LAKE OF FIRE!" If this is to be believed, they're basically worshipping a cosmic asshole lawyer.
posted by DecemberBoy at 3:15 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

What kind of fucked up trickster God has loopholes in his ridiculously over-specific laws?

The (more orthodox forms) Jewish G-d is one example.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 3:39 PM on February 15, 2008

Now there's a tradition we could all learn to love.

And by "we" you mean...?
posted by jessamyn at 3:42 PM on February 15, 2008 [3 favorites has favorites]

TheOnlyCoolTim: What kind of fucked up trickster God has loopholes in his ridiculously over-specific laws?

DecemberBoy: The (more orthodox forms) Jewish G-d is one example.

an eruv is but one example. we have one here in toronto.
posted by gman at 4:06 PM on February 15, 2008

If this is to be believed, they're basically worshipping a cosmic asshole lawyer.

or....
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:08 PM on February 15, 2008

i wonder if she's really THAT hot.
posted by gman at 4:29 PM on February 15, 2008

A society in which the Charming Burkha makes sense seems like a harsh, repressive, strange, convoluted place.

I don't know. Not to justify forcing people to wear burkas or anything, because to me that's obviously beyond the pale, but the artist's description specifically uses the term "self-determined identity." In a way you could consider the Charming Burka as a physical manifestation of the anonymous cloak the internet confers on people: the only way to see the person underneath the burka is to trust the virtual image that person's burka sends out. That doesn't simply mean "here's a picture of me in Western dress, look at how hot I am." You can define your outward appearance in ways you wouldn't be able to by wearing normal clothing.

A while back there was a minor uproar in Quebec about whether women wearing the full burka should be asked to unmask their face in order to vote. Aside from being a false dilemma (nearly every quote from women wearing full burkas, as well as Muslim organizations in Canada, said there was no problem with asking women to show their face for the purposes of voter identification), the issue brought out a number of people who wanted to dispel the notion that the burka had to be a tool of repression. Some of the women interviewed on the issue said their decision to wear the full covering was exactly that—their decision—and that the covering offered them a certain freedom from being judged on appearance, or to always be seen as a body first and a person second. In such a context, the Charming Burka makes sense.

Of course, if you want to argue that our society is a harsh, repressive, strange and convoluted place, I won't stop you.
posted by chrominance at 4:54 PM on February 15, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

Wait. I just realized that a third party will need to be around while the breast feeding is happening, since they can't be alone together until afterward. Is the loophole still valid?

I really don't even want to know the answer to this question, but now that I've thought of it, the only way I can deal with my simultaneous interest and revulsion is by sharing it with all of you. Also glad to highlight the absurdity.
posted by A dead Quaker at 6:04 PM on February 15, 2008

I want to be notified when the Charming Burka turns up on hackaday.
posted by localroger at 6:14 PM on February 15, 2008

That doesn't simply mean "here's a picture of me in Western dress, look at how hot I am." You can define your outward appearance in ways you wouldn't be able to by wearing normal clothing.

Muslim furries.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:20 PM on February 15, 2008

LOLISLAM
posted by foxy_hedgehog at 7:54 PM on February 15, 2008

chrominance, a body is a person. you can hate on the body all you want, but it is the person, and since we all love a good judge, there is no better place to start. why not simply require that men never break eye contact with a woman? then we can all wear normal cloths. least you think that the burka is not a tool for repression whatever trendsters in the free world smoke up next, i urge you to consider that the places that widely embrace the burka are those that are widely repressed. please don’t perpetuate the lie. i prefer not to drive, vote, or inherit property is right around the corner. when gawking men are the victims of honor killings and are forced to wear nothing but speedos in public then the burka will be a religious statement.
posted by ewkpates at 11:56 PM on February 15, 2008

Not every Muslim country has burqas as required wearing, people. You would hardly see a headdress in Bangladesh, and that's 90% Muslim.

as for the OP...*dies laughing*
posted by divabat at 2:52 AM on February 16, 2008

Let's not throw theRosemary's baby out with the bathwater, shall we?

Fixed that for me.
posted by Sparx at 3:20 AM on February 16, 2008

least you think that the burka is not a tool for repression whatever trendsters in the free world smoke up next, i urge you to consider that the places that widely embrace the burka are those that are widely repressed.

Just because the burka serves as a tool of repression under some regimes doesn't mean it is inherently a tool of repression, nor that people who wear the burka are automatically repressed. Choosing to hide or show whatever parts of your body you wish in public, or wear whatever clothing you like, should be a right everyone has; part of the reason the burka becomes a tool of repression is because certain societies dictate that women MUST wear it—which, as has already been pointed out numerous times, doesn't even map to the list of societies that follow Muslim customs.

The original comment I was responding to was that the Charming Burka only made sense in light of the burka's association with regimes that foster gross mistreatment of women. The burka is absolutely a powerful symbol of that kind of repression. All I'm saying is that the burka does not inherently symbolize repression, and that for those removed from that context—as in those who don't live in repressive societies but choose to wear the burka anyways—the burka may be a perfectly valid form of dress like any other.
posted by chrominance at 3:50 AM on February 16, 2008

um, where exactly is the burqa (as opposed to hejab in general) mandatory? just wondering.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:34 AM on February 16, 2008

Burqa is effectively mandatory in areas where you can be killed for not wearing it. Certain parts of Baluchistan, NWFP, and some of the women there will absolutely, hand-on-heart tell you it is their "choice" to wear it.
Hell, I'd wear it if I lived there.
posted by Wilder at 5:07 AM on February 16, 2008

so, pretty much nowhere in the world.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:16 AM on February 16, 2008

Please note, it's only the fundamentalists of that religion who actually adhere to this.

Perhaps, but when they represent the ruling power of more than one country - it's not just a few freaks meeting every Wednesday night...

I would suggest that a significantly larger portion of the Muslim/Islam faith are ready to kill or be killed for their beliefs than any other faith currently marketed. I am willing (hopeful even) to be wrong, but the media/news reports from the last 30 years seem to back me up.

I'd also be willing to be that most "moderates" flee to saner countries at the earliest opportune moment.
posted by jkaczor at 10:25 AM on February 16, 2008

jkaczor: Uh, no.
posted by omarr at 11:23 AM on February 17, 2008