Not a member? Sign up now
November 18, 2004
| PERSONAL ESSAYS |
|
|
|
I'm sitting in a Korean restaurant across from my unheterosexual Muslim love object. One of my oldest and dearest girlfriends (Jewish, platonic) sits to my right. It's a not-unusual configuration in multicultural Toronto. When the conversation veers dangerously into Israeli territory (or Occupied Palestine, depending on whom I'm siding with at the time), Muslim (a Muslim name, just as Christian is a Christian name) gets inordinately riled up. My girlfriend is slightly plucked. I can't say that I blame her. I've been involved with Muslim for three-and-a-half years, and I can count the number of times he's lost his temper on the hand of a Saudi amputee. But each time, the sheer force of his blow-up made me wonder what a nice agnostic infidel like myself, born into the United Church, the most wishy-washy Presbyterian Christian sect going, was doing in a relationship with a deeply devout Shia Muslim prone to religious ecstasies and charismatic visions.
For a white agnostic to be emotionally and sexually involved with a devout Muslim from the old world is not made that much more complicated by the fact that it is a homosexual relationship. ("Unheterosexual" is his term; he refuses to be saddled with the reductive "homosexual" epithet, and he rejects the term "boyfriend.") Homosexuality — which, after all, probably predates all monotheistic religions — is one of the few things we actually have in common. Yet Muslim and I are shockingly compatible in a number of ways, including our senses of humor, our dispositions, even our philosophies. It helps that he is one of the most kind, gentle, compassionate and loving people I've ever met. (When he says salaam, which means "peace" in Arabic, he really means it.) Through him, I've been able to address and dismiss many of the Western misconceptions about Islam, particularly with regard to sex.
Coming from the cradle of civilization, as it were, Muslim seems like the personification of ancient culture in mind, body and spirit. He has a compendium of primeval afflictions: color-blindness, left-handedness, asthma, eczema. He grew up speaking ancient languages like Urdu and Arabic (yet he still regularly beats me at Scrabble). He believes in genies and spirits. He was born into a traditional culture that still practices customs such as arranged marriages and exorcisms, both of which he has been subjected to. What I find most astonishing, however, is the nimbleness with which he juggles both old and new worlds.
Born into a wealthy family, he was schooled in England as a boy and has lived in Canada for the last thirteen years, but his spiritual and mystical beliefs have not been diluted by the Western materialism. More aligned and sympathetic to the beliefs of Native Americans, he sees spirits in cloud formations, harbingers in numerical configurations, ghosts in machines. He's also an accountant, which proves no contradiction: the Qur'an is predicated on a certain mathematical integrity, and arithmetic itself is largely derived from Islamic philosophy.
If all this seems a little heady, it is. To complicate matters, Muslim is also a Shia, a sect of Islam that can be considered even more traditionalist and mystical in their beliefs than the majority Sunni faction. Like some fundamentalist Christians, the Shia eschew all earthly and sensual pleasure: drinking alcohol, dancing, even listening to music are all considered taboo. The most austere of the group practice public self-flagellation, wear black, and spend the first two months of their new year in mourning (mostly for the martyrdom of their preferred
|
For Muslims, sex is arguably managed in less repressive ways than in the West.
|
prophet, Hussein, grandson of Mohammed). The Imam of Muslim's mosque recently suggested that everyone in his congregation go out and buy a shroud to remind themselves of their proximity to their Maker. Fortunately, Muslim is more of a Sufi at heart, a mystical sect of Islam that has a deep respect for the sensual gifts that God has bestowed upon us. Those include hashish and, I can only presume, sex.
One of the common misconceptions about the Muslim world is that its denizens are a sexually repressed lot who hate the West for its sexual freedom. In my experience with Muslim, nothing could be further from the truth. According to him, and based on anecdotal information I've gathered from other Muslims with whom I've had sexual encounters (we have an open relationship), sex is just as rampant in their realm as it is in ours, if not more. It's just a matter of how it's managed, according to custom and social convention.
Homosexuality, for example, is regarded as haraam (forbidden) in a technical sense. Its overt practice or organized manifestation is severely frowned upon. In countries such as Saudia Arabia, it is occasionally punishable by death. But in real terms, its practice is more widespread and normalized than in the West. Overt affection and physical contact between men is frequent. Buggery, to use a colonialist term, is common. Part of this can be attributed to the segregation of the sexes that is practiced in traditional Islamic culture. But I would speculate that there might be something more behind it, a kind of machismo that transcends heterosexual exclusivity and has more to do with aspects of aggression and dominance.
If you haven't figured it out yet, I am a devout bottom. In my relationship with Muslim, dominance and submission plays a significant role. I've often joked it might be a kind of sexual role-play involving the true believer versus the infidel, the tables being turned on the symbolic colonial master. But I'm not sure that such a notion can be so easily laughed off. Any sexual act between two people of different races or cultures takes on a whole spectrum of social and political significances — a kind of fetishistic microcosm of a broader historical reality, even if not overt or conscious. It's naïve to think that these differences can be completely banished from the bedroom.
For Muslims, sex is arguably managed in much less repressive ways than it is in the West. While the West makes quite a spectacular show of sexual openness in pop culture, in practice it's somewhat more problematic. Christianity has always tended toward the sexually conservative, and the general schizophrenia that is dividing America along partisan political lines certainly extends to attitudes toward sexual permissiveness. Islamic culture has never attempted to impose vows of celibacy or chastity — it would be considered contrary to the laws of nature.
Muslim always defends Sharia, the holy laws that derive specifically from the Qur'an and the Hadiths, which are often criticized in the West for their unfair treatment of women. He points out to me that the laws were actually intended to protect women's rights. Muta, the system of temporary marriages in Islam, allows the married man to have sexual relations with a woman other than his wife, but it provides the "temporary wife" with full rights and protection under the law. (If she gets pregnant, for example, the "husband" is responsible for the child.) As for polygamy, the man must get his spouse's permission before he takes another wife. Under Sharia, a woman can divorce her husband if he is not sexually satisfying her. Some of these rules may seem outmoded, even brutal, and they are certainly prone to abuse. But in practical terms, the Muslim attitude toward sex is arguably healthier and more realistic.
It's this same practicality that allows Muslim to accommodate his homosexual desires so fluidly. Although devout, he interprets the Qur'an in a way that allows him to have a sexual relationship with a man without compromising his religious principles. And although this necessarily entails being discreet (or closeted, as we might have it), our relationship has not been characterized by guilt or shame. It's always possible that he will go back to a heterosexual existence. But the last four years, at least, have been heavenly. n°
©2004 Bruce LaBruce and Nerve.com
Commentarium (17 Comments)
What a brilliant essay! This is precisely why Bush won the election --- Bruce here is the manifestation of all that conservatives loathe and fear about the left: a wishy-washy multi-culturalist whose main desire in life is to bend over and get reamed by fundamentalist Muslims out of their profound sense of white guilt. It is very rare that this is written of in a literal sense, and for this I commend laBruce.
However, his idea that Muslims have a more healthy attitude towards sex is somewhat marred by the widespread occurence of "honor killings" upon even a rumour of a female relative's unchastity in much of the Muslim world, their strict Sharia laws which state that a woman's testimony in court is worth less than a man's, and how Sharia requires more than one (male) witness' testimony in the case of rape in order to punish the perpetrator (if not enough witnesses can be found or will come forward, she will be punished for adultery). How about the part of the Koran that states it is legal to rape women who aren't Muslim? Perhaps laBruce, being a man, does not think of these things. I thought liberals were very concerned with the rights of women --- someone please correct this notion if it is untrue.
As a libertarian, I fully support everyone's right to have private kinky fun, even if I don't particularly adore it. Does this comment qualify as hate speech on Nerve? I shall be fascinated to find out.
Salaam,
Viktor Talanin.
Does the writer actually believe this drivel? Have they ever spent time in the "Muslim world"? Hint: it ain't Toronto. To equate the views and actions of a westernized Muslim living in Toronto with the "Muslim world's" views is ridiculous. And if I hear that crap about Muslim/Arab/primitive beliefs/practices towards women actually being to protect them one more time I am going to puke. Yeah to protect property, which is all women are in the Arab Muslim tradition.
I have to say that while I find LaBruce's justifications somewhat surprising, and his conclusion of "the last four years have been heavenly" rushed and forced, I was interested in this piece from beginning to end. This is a side of things we haven't heard before from the right or left, it's just one man's voice; I understand why it was published.
At the same time, this would never be a relationship I would choose for myself or a friend. It sounds as if LaBruce is weakly accepting whatever he hears from someone he loves instead of battling with the contradictions of it all. But there are people who feel that way, who go along with "Israel" or "Occupied Palestine" depending on their company; and just because someone plays bottom for a closeted fundamentalist doesn't mean I don't want to hear his justification for it, in fact, it makes me want to hear it.
fascinating. the feedback below is pretty interesting as well. one man's hypocrisy is another's unconflicted participation in a culture. i have always been amazed that christian americans can vote in a way that so directly contradicts the emphasis on empathy and empowering the meek in christianity; i guess if participants in a gentle religion (in word, not practice) like christianity can act with so little empathy, its not surprising the participants in a relatively severe religion, Islam, can be, in the end, more open minded. I don't know if this is true in practice, but neither do the posters below. interesting material, i hope nerve covers this further.
What a horrible load of drivel and foolish misinformation. I don't have the time or stomach to give more attention to ripping apart 90% of this guy's constant spew of crud, but I needed to say that any of you who are "seeing the light" and "never understood these intricate parts of the Muslim faith" are being duped. Please please please look into some real world accounts of sexuality in Islam before taking this rosy Canadian lie to heart. I don't know if the writer did it intentionally or is being fooled himself, but it is truly awful, and it churns my stomach to think of the damage this kind of thing can do to women
SJR -- don't you think the author is supportive of the women's movement in the middle east? this is a 90s style Politically Correct reaction -- you are basically saying that reading any shades of grey into Muslim sexuality and tradition is doing a disservice to women. that's not a reasonable position.
"And although this necessarily entails being discreet (or closeted, as we might have it), our relationship has not been characterized by guilt or shame."
Sounds like he's kidding himself to me. He might not be ashamed of his relationship, but his boyfriend is. What kind of strength do you have if you don't have the strength to declare and defend your love?
I think this is an interesting piece from a narrator who's part of some subcultures that nerve, in all of its attempted sexual openess, tends not to cover -- poly, kinky, male not-straightness. It does this in a respectful, complex way. As for somehow glorifying Islam and ignoring the widespread subjugation of women, I think the situation is more complicated, and its more about -- as a socially liberal person -- finding something in your religion, finding some tradition that jives with where you want to be. Finding this strain in Islam isn't denying the pain that women have suffered in the name of Islam. Idealistic and aspirational? Sure. But fairly understandable, too.
Brilliant - well written and illuminating. I spend a fair amount of time in the Middle East and am fascinated by the culture. I suppose this article articulates a feeling I had had for a while about Muslim culture but is quite at odds with received opinion.
Not sure whether this resonates with anyone else, but I have for long thought that the Burqua (arab girls' black beetle outfit) sexy - partly because of the aroma; the garments are often "smoked" over incense, and partly because of the fact that all you can see of the woman is a pair of big brown eyes ringed with black eyeliner. It is interesting to hear a little about what is going on behind those beguiling eyes.
Lots of good points in the feedback here. Meanwhile, the author forgot one more thing about the Shia denomination and sexuality: Iran is run by a Shia theocracy, supports a condom factory, and won't issue you a marriage license unless you take a birth control class:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1949068.stm
Play bottom is what they want The United States of America to do. Don't let him fool you. Stop being a spineless man. Take a stance.
Ted-You missed my point. In a nut shell, this author sees nothing of reality, and what is much worse, undermines the discovery and exposure of the truth of what really goes on behind the curtains. So typical of the "Anything that the mainstream American culture opposes must really be good" ideals so often driveled online. This is not a pretty little piece of self expansion; it is a horrible liberal attempt at mischaracterizing and minimizing a truly nauseating aspect of Muslim culture. This goes for sex in all its forms as well as many other human rights. I wonder what the reaction would be if someone tried writing such a glowing piece on CATHOLIC sexuality?
SJR, you have a Manichaen, black and white view of this stuff. cultures are complicated. both the author of this piece and one of the posters to feedback below have had first person experience with the culture, and they are commenting on that experience, nothing more. What set of experiences / research / data are you working with that gives you the authority to say that there experiences are incorrect or not worth expressing? you may want the world to be simple, but it does not make it so.
One of the comments below asks if the author has spent any time in the Muslim world, and I would like to ask a number of the authors of these comments the same question. I will not deny that there are some serious problems with the treatment of women in some parts of the muslim world, but having lived in one part of said world for a year of working daily with muslim women, I must point out that not all feel especially oppressed. They *do* have more rights in marriage and divorce than is standard in christian law, and education for women is also explicitly promoted. (I wish I knew the exact quote for you all . . . but maybe the others who have been refering knowledgably ot the Qu'ran could pull out their copies and find it for me). No, we should not idealise the various cultures that make up the muslim world, but nor should we be reactionary at each comment nor paint that whole "world" with the same brush.
This was an interesting piece. Most interesting was the author's need to justify his lover's approach to sexuality and "unheterosexuality." I wonder if the author would be bending over backwards to fit this scenario into a p.c. box if his lover was white like him. Sounds like an infatuated Orientalist!!
As for the following:
"And although this necessarily entails being discreet (or closeted, as we might have it), our relationship has not been characterized by guilt or shame." My goodness, are you kidding yourself? If you think Islamic culture is less sexually repressive, and in any way accepting of homosexual relationships, try living together as a couple in one of those societies. While you can't always get married in the West, you are free to have an uncloseted relationship.
Islamic culture as sexually open? Sharia'a protects women's rights? Please. While there is a law that grants women property rights through inheritance, which was novel at the time in Arab culture, Sharia'a generally does not promote women's rights. It protects women in a paternalistic way, via honor killings, etc. Try being a Middle Eastern woman, or talking to a few before you come to such astounding conclusions. I am one, and I assure you the culture I have grown up in was repressive and sexually unhealthy.
I enjoyed reading about your dealings with someone of the muslim religion. I found it odd that he was revealed to as the "muslim" but this is beside my point.
I also had romantic involvements with someone of the muslim faith. I am a woman, U.S. citizen born and bred (East coast and Ohioian), and he was a Syrian, but became a U.S. citizen while we were still together. He was the most intelligent, sane, humane and compelling man I have ever know. Unfortunately, we have since gone our seperate ways; he proposed to me but his family ultimately did not approve and at the time we planned to move back to Syria so I declined his proposal, but I feel I must speak out in defense of people of the Middle-East, which Americans know so little about, on an intimate and global perspective, this man was such a beautiful person that I have yet to meet again in the four years since we have parted ways, he is still someone to whom I cannot find the equivelent of, and believe me I have been looking far and wide.
Consequently, I really feel dishearteden by the views of our citizens. Globalization has opened up our world to so many new ways of thinking that I don't understand how so many people don't comprehend other's ways of seeing, other's cultures-- other ways of being. I know this is naive but I am thinking toward the future, and hope we can understand other cultures, eventually, because as an educated civilization it would only benefit us and allow us to grow and prosper as a nation.
All the best,
Now you say something