throughout history, authority rules, be it an authorial religion, “race”, party, or even gender. it is not a question of this particular religion that rules the rest, it is a question of an authorial religion that uses its authority to control the rest, community or a society. so basically authority sucks.
when it comes to gender, “manhood” and “femininity”, these too are constructed and developed in relation to power- because the male sex was/is institutionally authorial, for different reasons, he created an image for himself as a “man”, and created the other sex, the female, according to her authorial (or lack of) position in society as a “woe+man”, “mother”, “beautiful”, that should be either veiled or exposed, either way she is the sex that is sexually sexualized.
what happened and what’s still happening all over the world is the mixation of meaning with form: the functional role of a sex (a form is for example: to deliver a baby) becomes a social role ( meaning: she must be ideal wife, housewife, perfect mother), and this social role has a political and economical impact on the role of a female throughout history for it becomes a social, economical political system, not to mention its affect on one’s self-image and “identity”.
so if “manhood” and “femininity” are authorial constructs, that confused body function with social/political role of it, doesnt that make homosexuality pretty much normal? (actually it is normal but perhaps what i mean is not gay not even one bit) and actually, “manhood” and “femininity”, which are sexist constructs, hence, overtly meaningless and waste of our existence?
homosexuals are actually the ones who fled this authorial game of systems, they recognize their sex, and use it without giving a social meaning to their sex orientation. no social roles whatsoever are involved. female homosexuals recognize themselves apart from a system, and so does males. and when they’re not, i think (and this is my hypothesis) that’s a sign of a denial in this stupid world to their homosexual tendency, and it’s pretty a normal reaction.
i am not really good in writing in english or in arabic, i have issues with writing my thoughts, and this is me trying. this is to be translated soon in arabic, that should be interesting, i think.
Exiled Razan رزان في المنفى 
“homosexuals are actually the ones who fled this authorial game of systems, they recognize their sex, and use it without giving a social meaning to their sex orientation. ”
Absolutely. I certainly agree with this – homosexuals, particularly those who have been “allowed” to grow up with openness and honesty about their sexual preference, tend to be much better-adjusted than heterosexuals, particularly those raised in sexually repressive societies (um, so that would be nearly all of us?)
The fact remains that the way we have constructed our social structure has worked for such a long time, and the only time it hasn’t worked is when you get a rise in things that disrupts the essence of a healthy society and the basic units of a society which is the family. Things like homosexuality, adultery, teenage pregnancy, single parents all lead to social corruption. Other than the moral issues there is the failure of ruling entities to place a fair rule over people which I believe would also lead to social corruption.
Homosexuality is not normal for purely scientific reasons which is people from the same gender cannot reproduce, and will not be able to maintain a healthy family.
I think the reason for the allocation of duties for genders in a society is something of a necessity rather than discrimination. For example men are “hunters” women are “gatherers” and men “work” and women “raise family”. I think this is the case because men are better than women in some activities while women are better than men in other activities where both complement each other in the given needs of a society.
I guess Homosexuality is normal to homosexuals, femininty is normal to the feminine, and masculinity is normal to the masculine but to those of us who fall somewhere in between then the very fact that we don’t fit into a particular bracket is normal to us
Yaman, I think I tried to say so much with the least amount of words. It is obvious to know what the needs for a healthy and strong society are. Those are good moral and ethical codes and an authority/government that treats the population well and according to the same moral and ethical codes without distinction. A society that works is one that flourishes. Let me point out that I am completely for the Islamic view of, well, everything. I really do believe that Islam has a social structure that works.
If you look into history the rise and fall of nations required a strong society that held its fundamental principles. Take for example Andalusia. The fall of the Islamic control over anadalusia happened mainly due to social decay of values and morals where women for example were treated as “sex objects” like the singing slave girls and what not. You can also relate this to the rulers by comparing for example Abulrahman the first and abdulrahman the third. One who encouraged knowledge, progress and ethical and moral values based on Islamic rules and laws and the other who deviated from all of this.
Not every society is one that works. The society in Syria, Damascus does not work, because the government does not support it. The society in Saudi Arabia does not work, neither in Egypt, with all the corruption and poverty in the society.
hmm yea your right.. What I actually wanted to say is that homosexuality has a negative effect on society because they cannot reproduce, and is not normal for scientific reasons, since homosexuality is not something you genetically inherit, (even though there are studies that claim it is), it is either got to do with a wrong amounts of opposite sex hormones, or psychological reasons. your taking what im saying out of the context that I put it in just to ridicule it. Which is fine since it seems you are much more intelligent than I am.
What is the goal of living? To live is to survive grow and reproduce right?.. Isn’t this what “living” or life is defined as in biology? on a more humanly level and as a person who believes in Islam, we have been given this life to build this Earth, and to gain knowledge about that which we don’t understand.
Just comparing between the past and the present. I think you do know that in the early tribes and other form of communities, in most cases men “hunted” and women “gathered”?
In our times, I’m not saying that only men should work and woman should only take care of the family just saying that that is how it was throughout the past century, the man provides for the family and the women takes care of the family. Let me ask you something, if a man and a woman were to get married, if they both worked and had their own careers, and then they had children, who is more likely to quit their job to look after the children? what “normally” happens?
Whenever you have a social structure that works, you have a nation that works. Whenever you have a society that is confident and progressive you will have a prosperous nation.
I think if you look into history and look at the reasons why nations rise and fall maybe you will agree to some of the things i said.
What an ignoramous… starting by confusing Yazan for Yaman… and going down hill from there…!
Very well said Jabz. Man and woman complement each other, it is not a challenge, its is about each one doing his natural duty thus fulfilling his or her purpose. The values and ideas post-feminists are preaching for deprives women of their feminity and their basic and natural value, under the illusion of a fake freedom, freedom from what?
hey razan
have you read “gender trouble” by judith butler? i just saw this post and great job btw. inti bt6ayyri il3a2l!