Afghan Sex Crisis - WOW

[swordfishME]

i lived in afghanistan for two years and im going back in a few months after a siz month break. we had about a dozen local workers that did warehouse work for us and the common consensus is: women are for babies, boys are for pleasure

I highlighted the key word here..............it is really not a MSM culture but rather a form of pederasty (known as 'baacha') that exists there....

 

[helgaleena]

Wonder where In Hamad, Hamadin, whatever he is calling himself lately, stands upon this issue? Not that he is Pashtun, he is Muslim though.

I was familiar with it from the literary historical side, and it's interesting to find that it persists.

 

[goodwood]

OK - so that is what works for that Pashtuni men that feel they are straight but do not consider themselves gay.

What would such behavior in the U.S. be considered?

 

[Mem]

OK - so that is what works for that Pashtuni men that feel they are straight but do not consider themselves gay.

What would such behavior in the U.S. be considered?

Being on the down low.

 

[goodwood]

well what does 'being on the down low' mean?
why is no one answering this question of mine?
- those afghan guys - what they have going on,
it sounds gay to me, but no one is saying its straight.
they flat out say they don't want women for sexual pleasure
so how can they believe they are straight? someone ecplain this to me please.

 

[D_Cateryke Cheesysmell]

Well, they say when a Tajik wants to make love to a woman, his first choice is always a Pashtun man... It’s funnier in the original Pashtu.

 

[joyboytoy79]

well what does 'being on the down low' mean?
why is no one answering this question of mine?
- those afghan guys - what they have going on,
it sounds gay to me, but no one is saying its straight.
they flat out say they don't want women for sexual pleasure
so how can they believe they are straight? someone ecplain this to me please.

goodwood,

You're getting a little too caught up in the modern Western idea of gay/straight dichotomy. And you're misunderstanding some fundamentalist religious ideas. In some rather extreme interpretations of Islam, to think of a woman lustfully is as bad or worse a sin than rape. It has nothing to do with gay, the way you are thinking of it, and everything to do with what is socially acceptable. If you were religiously forbidden from thinking of women as a means for sexual pleasure, and women were hidden from view to prevend such lust, but you not expressly forbidden from thinking of men as a means for sexual pleasure, would you consider yourself gay? Or would you just get so horny that even the vaguely feminine features of a young man would turn you on?

You have to let go of the idea that man on man sex is only the result of gayness. "Gay" is more complex an issue than simply who you have sex with. For example, I was gay when I was 14, though I was still a virgin. My friend, who was married until he was 45, and had children with his wife, was gay before he came out at age 45, though he'd only ever had sex with women. The SEX he had was straight. He only engaged in straight sex because that's all his view of society and acceptance allowed him to have. These men in Afghanistan are having gay sex because it's the only thing available, and it's better to fuck an ass and pretend it's a pussy, than it is to have no sex at all. It has nothing to do with love.

Of course, the wording of the Fox article you sited only helps you to believe there is some sort of underlying sexual identity involved, when that couldn't be farther from the truth. Our friends at Fox are simply unable to separate gay sex from gay people.

 

[goodwood]

thanks joyboytoy. I gues what i can't wrap my head around is the whole idea of men not being allowed to think of women in a lustful/suxually pleasurable way. That is a topic for a whole different post. But bearing that whole religious instilled notion in mind, if the only thing that is acceptable to be able to have any kind of release is with another man, then all right.

 

[helgaleena]

To me this really explains why they opress the women so much. They are like human cattle, just there to make children, not have any fun. Die in harness, cunts....

 

[deleted3782]

It is difficult for Westerns to comprehend sexuality beyond the hetero and homo construct. It's black and white with us...you are either...or. (bisexuality is just a train-stop away from gay, right?).

I do think what is common in Afghanistan might be rooted to a different construct of male sexuality, and one that might be very old. Its a construct that is more connected to male bonding, maybe even "bromance" than relationship and gender roles as Westerns tend to accept. Beyond romantic male-female relationships...maybe there are intense same-sex relationships that exist for good reason...like "tribal bonding" or warfare survival.

I certainly don't know all the answers...but I do recognize that Modern Western sexuality might not be the "right way" to understand sexuality. History (both western and nonwestern) seem to indicate that sexuality can be quite complicated. There are too many men in western culture who readily admit they are "unsure" or "confused" about their sexuality...and don't fit clearly into the homo- hetero-construct. For some of these guys, this practice of bromancing would feel perfectly comfortable and satisfying.

As an aside...somewhere north of Iran/Afghanistan there was a practice of dressing boys up in elaborate costumes and having them dance for entertainment. Older men would shower them with gifts and their attention...and they became quite sought-after. I can't remember the name of the practice...I think it ended about 80-100 years ago. I see it as part of the tapestry of the region...and trying to understand its breadth.

Another aside...I do have to think Fox shared this "unclassified" information to discredit the "enemy" forces in the minds of their viewers. Damn homersectuals.