France gets tough but NOT on the economy

[Clark Kent II]

[quote user="idun"]
Making love is one of life's great pleasures,we never say it on here, but it is. To have sex in the warm embrace of someone one deeply cares for, is wonderful. As is, just plain old intimacy of the simple kind, those little affectionate things like a hand hold, a cuddle, a snuggle, a hug, a little kiss........ 

I do wonder if in these male dominated societies where jealousy must be like a festering infection, that they ever know such joys?

[/quote]

... And in some of these cultures a man may have more than one wife. I wonder if that signifies that intimacy is not an important part of the relationship between men and women?

It's possible that jealousy may not be a festering infection, but that attitude is determined by property rights.

[mint]

[quote user="Clark Kent II"]

... And in some of these cultures a man may have more than one wife. I wonder if that signifies that intimacy is not an important part of the relationship between men and women?

It's possible that jealousy may not be a festering infection, but that attitude is determined by property rights.

[/quote]

Well observed, CK.

We know all about that in the UK; as we seem to treat fraud more seriously than injury against a person!

[Gluestick]

[quote user="idun"]Yes, I agree, these cultures IMO are saying that if men cannot control their urges, then it is always the woman's fault, and if she is not fully clothed all the time, then she deserves what she gets..............

................ and I have heard it said......... as do the drunken girls who are half clothed and end up getting raped.

Making love is one of life's great pleasures,we never say it on here, but it is. To have sex in the warm embrace of someone one deeply cares for, is wonderful. As is, just plain old intimacy of the simple kind, those little affectionate things like a hand hold, a cuddle, a snuggle, a hug, a little kiss........

I do wonder if in these male dominated societies where jealousy must be like a festering infection, that they ever know such joys?

[/quote]

Idun: you lovely old fashioned wonderfully warm, real balanced feeling person, you!

Sadly, today, we live in a World gone mad. Easy gratuitous sex, thanks to the pill and the increasing influence of the Liberal-Left has been transmuted into a "right".

Commencing, years back, with social destroyers such as Dr Germaine Greer. And, of course, endless magazines such as Cosmopolitan:  "Have you found your G Spot, yet? How many orgasms can you achieve?"

And, what have we actually achieved?

Well, numerous poor kids subjected to two or more, separated Mums and Dads and no stable base to cling onto in their formative years.

Some damned "achievement"!

A personal relationship for myself and Mrs Gluey has been based now, for in excess of 50 years (OK; so I am an old dinosaur!) on close mutual respect and placing the other first. We were and are still, I am content to say, best friends.

The physical act of sex comes far down the pecking order of fulfilment: rather than assuaging some atavistic lust-driven battle between hormones and chromosomes, it is, for us, simply an expression of adoration and real love.

Unfortunately, this morning, having a late repast, I rather foolishly switched on the radio in the kitchen, which was pre-tuned to BBC Radio 4 and, since it was unusually late, Woman's Hour.

The diatribe (I can describe it as no other), concerned a young married woman whose spouse, was, apparently, addicted to porn. Not over-nice  with my rather lovely home made mixed grain bread toast!

This man, as soon as his wife is absent, cannot resist pornography.

Well, since, in any case, I have decided, long ago, anyone much below the age of 40 (In the UK and USA) is a simple case of arrested development, to myself, the diagnosis is rather easy.

Young men (and so sadly, increasing numbers of young women) mature physically, with a raft of erroneous preconceptions: matter of sex are high on the agenda; since from an early age, thanks to an out-of-control media and venal marketeers, flogging wide ranges of tacky goods from clothes, music (allegedly!), motor cars, et al, over-rely on bulging synthetic boobs, impossible bodies and unreal hair and facial skin.

And, the immature actually believe it!

How bloody sad. They have, sort of, "Matured", believing in a fantasy. And when their spouse, in reality, does not look, behave and act as a sort of real-life Barbie, then they are mentally, emotionally and physically destroyed: absolutely.

Now, insofar as the current raging argument concerning the Burqa are concerned, I can find no textual reference in Quran or any Hadith which insists women wander around like a black bell tent.

One is therefore, compelled to conclude, compulsory wearing of such garment is a cultural matter and has absolutely zero religious significance: indeed, it has much greater roots in the Middle Eastern man's dominance and objectivization of women as a possession, for their sole delight and sexual gratification. More significantly, it seems to enjoy its roots, way back in the seraglio, or if you prefer, the Hareem, where men "Owned" numerous wives and concubines and having purchased them for large amounts of gold, demanded they were only for that man's sole gratification, service and pleasure.

Personally, I do believe, thanks to such as William Wilberforce and Abraham Lincoln and the Navy Acts, slavery had been all but abolished by the late 1700s.........

However, once again, the Liberal Left Bleeding Hearts Do Gooders, seem hell bent on promoting and supporting apparent "Rights" which in themselves, militate directly against other human rights they vociferously claim to defend! Namely, the rights of women!

A paradox and dichotomy indeed..............

Or perhaps, more appositely, pure erroneous syllogism.

[Jonzjob]

GS, is that your major premise or your minor premise that leads to your  conclusion [8-)]

I'll go an get me dictionary [blink]

Theirs is a fuedal system and to them women a only chattels to be traded. It goes back to the Roman meaning of the word 'wife' which meant 'baggage'. Something to be carried around, used and traded as the bloke wished.

There is nothing that can be done to change that mind set quickly and as long as they exist they will carry on as they do now.

It's the same situation in Africa and the more you see the word democratic the more fuedal and tribal you will find. It's been that way since time started and we ain't going to change it or even bring them into the 20th, never mind the 21st, centurary.

[YCCMB]

I think, no, I know, because it has been borne out by subsequent comments, that my previous comment may have been misunderstood.

I mentioned women being judged for, and by what they wear. I know for a fact that there are many women who have chosen to cover their hair or their entire bodies. Of their own will, not because they have been forced to do so.

Of course, there will be those who believe that it's still wrong, and I do disagree with the bloodymindedness of women who can't see that it's not always completely appropriate in Europe to dress in that way. However, I think it's equally misguided to jump to the conclusion that ALL of them are being manipulated, any more than western women are manipulated by Paris fashion week.

To some extent, the burka is a fashion statement. It's become trendy. Perhaps there are sinister reasons behind the trend, but it's not all about manipulation.

And to be honest, I don't think the UK is necessarily any more of an example of quality democracy, or any less of an example of feudalism and tribalism than anywhere in Africa or the Middle East. Ask a Scot, or a Welshman, after the events of September...

No, we don't have the moral or intellectual high ground. We may be more outward looking, even more liberal. We're not necessarily"better", though.

[Gluestick]

[quote user="You can call me Betty"]I think, no, I know, because it has been borne out by subsequent comments, that my previous comment may have been misunderstood.

I mentioned women being judged for, and by what they wear. I know for a fact that there are many women who have chosen to cover their hair or their entire bodies. Of their own will, not because they have been forced to do so.

Of course, there will be those who believe that it's still wrong, and I do disagree with the bloodymindedness of women who can't see that it's not always completely appropriate in Europe to dress in that way. However, I think it's equally misguided to jump to the conclusion that ALL of them are being manipulated, any more than western women are manipulated by Paris fashion week.

To some extent, the burka is a fashion statement. It's become trendy. Perhaps there are sinister reasons behind the trend, but it's not all about manipulation.

And to be honest, I don't think the UK is necessarily any more of an example of quality democracy, or any less of an example of feudalism and tribalism than anywhere in Africa or the Middle East. Ask a Scot, or a Welshman, after the events of September...

No, we don't have the moral or intellectual high ground. We may be more outward looking, even more liberal. We're not necessarily"better", though.[/quote]

I can think of many people (of both sexes) who would do the World a big favour by wearing a black bell-tent!

[:D]

[idun]

I find it very

unsettling that any woman finds it acceptable to 'cover' other than

for practical reasons. Of those practical reasons, I can think of so many, to keep out

of the sun, out of a sandstorm, or snow storm or even rain. I have

known too many women with cancers who have lost their hair and worn a

head covering or wig during their treatment and as they lost their hair or it re-grew.

And at work, I wouldn't want an uncovered surgeon for example.

So

why would any woman cover up. I truly find that this covering up very

very slowly erodes women's rights and it would seem that I cannot be

converted to another view point. As I believe the historical

imperative for it was to keep women in their place..... so I do not

get how that elementary reason has changed. What exactly is the precise  'modern'

value for something that was started to subjugate half the population in the first place.

And so, 'I chose to', seems to me a subversive way to propagate

values that have no place in a world where too many women are still trying to be treat as valued individuals in their own right.

In a local city

centre, I see girls wearing the hijab. They wear more make up than I

have ever worn in my life, so it is...... hair covered.........

yup!.......... modest.......nope!

I have not got a

clue as to how religions affect the brain. Some people, it has been

suggested, are hard wired/genetically disposed to believe in some

sort of diety. I am not, hence my lack of comprehension. Is it

usually religion that dictates covering up, or just factions?

I used the word

jealousy, and I wish I could think of another for that feeling a man

would have, when a woman who does not conform to a certain view of

modesty. When one is brought up to believe such things, I suggest

with some men at least, this idea must fester and invade the psyche, with thoughts of other men seeing 'his' woman looking wanton and promiscuous . Sadly we have seen to many cases where that

wonderful word, 'honour' has been mis-used when women and girls have

been murdered and brutally attacked or raped because they do not

conform to this 'ideal'. Young women and girls in some of the cités

in France have been attacked and raped because they are not covered

properly. So why are young women who live in these places starting to

take on 'traditional dress'....... because they chose to, or because

they are afraid?

If there is a

balance in any relationship, how can it be a good balance when one in

the couple feels the need to act in a subservient manner and obey?

And yet I know that we humans are so adaptable, the Stockholm

Syndrome shows just how adaptable we can be. And I assume most of us are capable of making the

best of bad things in our lives, instinctively making do, so I

don't doubt a person can find some degree of happiness in most

situations at some point.

And back to the

physical side of a relationship. So important, but sometimes, ill

health, physical impairment and just old age intervene, I understand

these things, but we still love, care and be

affectionate.

None of you know me,

but if I am a gobby sow sometimes, I am also a good listener. And as

my group of friends has a wide age range, I sometimes find that one

in a young couple, male or female will tell me things. They berate

the lack of physical intimacy when there is no good reason and it

causes much upset and frustration, sometimes the excuse is simply

fatigue, but sometimes it is worse and a punishment when one

considers that the other person is not pulling their weight. No

wonder there is so much divorce. Hard finding the balance and so sad.

So what happens when

the couple is not a partnership, but someone is in charge,

and unless that is the particular 'game' a couple chose to play and that is

a real choice.  But if it is not a game, how does that work when the 'boss' wants sex and

the underling does not...... although as I said, humans are adaptable

and make the best of situations and at the end of the day, most of us

deep down need some sort of affection / attention. And that too is sad.

I would love to say

that I don't give a hoot about my appearance, but I sometimes I do.

In general I don't like a fuss, but when I have got all dressed up to

go out, I admit freely that I like it when someone says I look nice,

I am not above a bit of old fashioned flattery when I have made an

effort, even if it is just from friends or even my old man. So who

have I made an effort for, 'me', well partly, but not completely. I

admit I have a certain vanity. And maybe there are those that think I

should have a bag over my head, tant pis, if they do.

But I shall never

understand a world where it is acceptable in some societies, for a woman to

not have the freedom to go out in public as she wants, especially

when she has made herself look as attractive as she can and at any

age, and the 'chosers' are just reinforcing the sorry lives, of those that do not have a

choice......... If that is a moral high ground, then I'll have to stick to my

little hillock and hope for a better future for all women.