Traditional or Absurd
In reality, in our society, those who ask, `Who am I?, 'Who should I be?' or `What is my identity?' are of two types. One type is a person who is attached to out‑dated, existing traditions that are called religion and ethics, which that person wants to impose upon others. He can't. Even though he knows he can't, he still sticks with them, he still retains them. He tries to impose them upon the young people.
There is another type who is afraid to act even under the pseudo‑name of intellectual, modern or freedom seeker because he thinks, 'If I interfere or if I negate or agree and control the `ifs', I will be condemned as being old‑fashioned, eastern, backward and religious. So against the social changes, changes in the types of young men and women, he plays the role of a `dead person'. In other words, his child acts while the mother and father create possibilities for him. They are called intellectual parents. But their silence and surrender does not stem from their intellectual abilities. It does not come from their beliefs but rather from their impotency and weakness. He says to himself, 'if I interfere, I will give up my outer, external strength and my inner emptiness will show.' Prestige, Papa!
These are two types, two types of people who can be moulded. One is attached to the traditions of the Chahar Bagh in Isfahan ‑ huge, ugly, crooked and decayed. The second is a product of European brick kilns ‑ straight; subtle, without endurance, hollow and absurd.
These are two types and two ways, both are incorrect and lost. Why? One stands against the roaring flood of realities which is about to ruin everything. He tries to turn back the waters with his hands. He tries to stop the flow. He swears, cries out, laments, sobs, and cries at the flood which builds up and flows out and takes everything in its way.
The other one stretches himself out next to the flood waters, like a dead person, like a useless observer. This dear man who has no personality of his own, is quiet, works from morning until night, commits murder, rips people off, is a pickpocket, performs a thousand dirty deeds, praises, tricks people and then fills his pockets in order to have them emptied by foreign companies and to have himself poured into their pockets.
Women ‑We Cannot Know
There are only some European women whom we have the right to recognize. It is they whom we always have to refer to. They are the women introduced through films, magazines, television and sexy movies by writers who have given them sex. They are introduced to us as a universal type of European woman.
We have no right to get to know the European girl who at the age of 16 went to the deserts of Nubi, Africa, the deserts of Algeria and Australia. She spent all of her life in wild places. She lived with the threat of sickness, death and wild tribes. Throughout her youth and old age she studied the waves emitted from the antennea of ants and the antennea which receives them. When she grew old, her daughter carried on her work. The second generation of this European woman returned to France at the age of 50. At the university she said, 'I discovered the language of the ants and I learned some of their signs of communication:'
We have no right to come to know Madame Guashan who spent her whole life studying and finding the roots of philosophical ideas and the wisdom of Avicenna, ibn Rushd, Mulla Sadra and Haji Mulla Hadi Sabzevari in Greek philosophy and many of the works of Aristotle and then compared them. She showed what our philosophers received from them. She corrected that which they had badly translated and incorrectly understood for the 1000 years of Islamic civilization.
We have no right to know the Italian Mme. De la Vida. One of her works was to edit and complete the `Science of the Soul' of Avicenna from the ancient Greek manuscript of Aristotle on the soul.
We have no right to know Mme. Curie who discovered quantum and radioactivity or Resass Du La Chappelle who knew more about the sanctity of Ali than all the Islamic scientists and even all the Shiites who claim today to be aware of Ali and the Alavis. She was a young, beautiful, free Swedish girl, born far from Islamic culture. She was distant from Shiite behaviour and beliefs. From the beginning of her youth, she devoted her life to knowing that spirit which had remained unknown in the structure of Islam. She followed a man who had been covered over by the hatred of his enemies, and caught in traps laid by hypocrites and embellished by poetic praises and meaningless friends. She discovered the most correct manuscripts about Ali. She came to know the most subtle waves of his spirit, the depth of his feelings and his highest leaps in ideas. For the first time, she felt his anger, pain, loneliness, brokenness, fear and needs. Not only did she show Ali in the Battles of Ohud, Badr and Honein, but she found Ali praying in the mihrab of the mosque in Kufa. She discovered his nights and his complaining around the wells of Medina. She gathered together the Nahjel balagah which the Arab Moslems have access to through the literary edition of Mohammad Abduh, the great Sunni Mofti, whereas Shiites have the lectures of Javad Fazel which is related to Ali or the Faiz translation (which is correct but has to be read with the help of the Arabic text!).
This girl ‑ a disbeliever destined for hell ‑ who gathered all of the writings of Ali in this and that book, notebook or recorded in a manuscript, hidden here and there. She read all of them and translated them and interpreted them. The most beautiful and deepest writings ever written about someone flowed from her pen. For 42 years she has continued to study, think, work and research Ali.
We have no right to know Angela; the American girl in prison who is not only the hope of two countries, but of all the free people of the world, of all the wounded, all those condemned through humanity's racial discrimination ‑ the oppressed.
We should not know that foreign women are not just toys of the Don Juans who take money, unattractive things and jewels ‑ female slaves serving men as long as they want them, as long as they are interested. We should not believe that they are only worthy of the attention of their pleasures, desires and lusts. After that period, they are like machines that have become out‑dated. Rather, the foreign women have progressed to the point of becoming the embodiment of an ideology of a country and place, of salvation (escape), pride, and the honor of a generation. But we have no right to know them.
We only have the right to know Mme. Twiggy! And as the final level of the ideal manifestation of Western civilization, the Queen of `71, and along with her, the highest form of European woman, Jacqueline Onassis, who uses her money as a means of exchange for everything, B.B. and the Queen of Monaco and all of the 7 female guards around James Bond. They are the sacrifices of the departments of the production of Europe. They are the toys and wind‑up dolls of the wealthy and the slaves of the new civilization for the houses of the new merchants.
We Iranians only have the right to know them to be examples of women of European civilization. I have never seen photographs from Cambridge, the Sorbonne and Harvard University showing and telling about female .university students who go to the library and work on 14th and 15th century manuscripts and artifacts from 2500‑3000 years ago in China, or who bend over Qoranic manuscripts based upon Latin, Greek, Cuniform and Sanskrit texts without moving and without allowing their eyes to rove. They don't take their heads out of their books until the librarian takes their books away or asks them to leave.
You men and women, seekers of knowledge, scholars, researchers, have you‑ ever heard of the famous contemporary German scholar, Frau Hunekeh? Have you heard that she has recently written a very comprehensive study of Islam and its influence upon European civilization which has been translated into Arabic and is entitled, The Arab's Sun Spreads over the West.
These are not today's women and they should not be known. Why? Because one group is old fashioned. They are tradition seekers. The other is superstitious and hidden and at the same time known and apparent. If they join hands, they will awaken us. They will destroy everything we have. So people are obliged to take the form of tamed consumers and quiet slaves.
These two old‑fashioned, traditional and newly wealthy, for all practical purposes, work together so that a new type comes into being, one under the name of ethics and religion and the other under the name of freedom and progress. The old‑fashioned worshippers of tradition hit women with prejudicial fanaticism and push her, leaving her without bread and water. They show her anger. They have no compassion. They treat her so badly that the woman, half crazy with her eyes and ears closed, throws herself into the skirts of those with cylindrical hats and goat‑like beards, who welcome her, take off their hats respectfully and with correct manners, bend their heads forward politely and with a smile upon their faces, treat her gently.
This very European woman whom we have come to know is a woman. of today. She delivered herself but she is the progeny of the Middle Ages. She is reacting to the inhuman treatment and fanaticism of the priests of the Middle Ages, who, in the name of Christianity and religion, misguided women and cursed and enslaved them. They even showed her to be hated by God. They were the activators of corruption. She was the main cause of Adam's fall from Paradise to the earth!
In the Middle Ages, they asked the priest :If there is a, woman in a house, should a man, who is not related, enter? They said, `Never. Because if the man is not related and he enters the house where there is a woman, even if he does not see the woman, still he has sinned.' In other words, if an unrelated man goes to the second floor of the house and a woman is in the basement, sin occurs. It seems that the sins of women spread through the air.
St. Tomas Dakin said, 'If God should see the love for a woman upon a man's face, even if the woman is his wife, he becomes angry because no love, other than the love of God, should sit upon his heart. Christ lived without a wife and a man can be a Christian, never having touched a woman. This is why Christian brothers and spiritual fathers and even Christian sisters never marry, because marriage is a tie which arouses God's anger. We should only join with God through Jesus Christ because two loves do not fit into one heart. Only those who remain unmarried can carry the Holy Ghost.'
In Christianity, the first sin was the sin of woman. Every man, as the child of Adam, who, turns towards a woman, even if that woman be his wife, as Eve was the wife of Adam, repeats the first, primordial sin. The sin and disobedience of Adam is renewed in the memory of God!
Thus one must do something so that God will forget Adam and his sin! This is why a woman in the thoughts of the people of the Middle Ages is so hated, weakened and held back from the ownership of anything. It even extended to the point that when a woman, owning property, went to her husband's house, she lost the rights to her own property. Her ownership was of itself transferred to her husband. A woman had no legal status. The effects of this can still be found in European civilization, which is completely unacceptable to us.
Even today, if a woman marries, she changes her name. This is not just for use in her home or unofficially. Her education certificates, her identification, her passport, everything is replaced from carrying her father's name to her husband's name. This means that a woman herself is nothing. She has no essential existence. A name is significant. A creature who lacks significance stands through others. In her parent's home, she uses her father's name. She lives with her first owner. When she goes to her husband's home, the name of another man, her new owner, distinguishes her. She does not possess sufficient value or credit to have a name. This tradition has also influenced Iran because it is a European tradition. Their traditions are better than ours. Even if it is a tradition from the slave age, even if it is nonesense, a destested and ugly action, the very fact that it has a foreign mark upon it, is sufficient for our modernists, characterized by their impotent imitation.
In imitating, whether a modernist or a traditionalist, reflection in choosing. There is no questioning or judgment about good or bad, no distinction between the useful and the useless. The basis of their imitation is the principle that 'whatever defect the King accepts, is art.' They confirm him until it reaches the point where if he says, 'Day is night', they add, 'Yes. I see the moon and the stars.'
In the official European marriage forms, the two people to be married are asked, 'Name?' Secondly, girl's family name. In answering the first question, the family name which will be taken after marriage, that is, the family name of the husband‑to=be is recorded. In answer to the second question, her unmarried family name, the name of her father, is recorded.
In other words, a woman belongs to the owner of the house. Even if a house had originally belonged to her, she could not continue to own it because she is a woman. In her father's house, it was his name and in her husband's house, it is his name which is used. This is why she officially changes her name through marriage.
Our modernists have recently become aware of this foreign tradition. She also changes her first name after marriage ‑ she does not change her family name, but rather her first name! This is ridiculous. This is just an example which our pseudo‑foreigners take from the foreign 'better race'. Whatever that race does is copied without even knowing its reason, purpose or value, because our modernists have no common sense.
This idiot ridiculously, unconsciously acts and thinks like a foreigner because he or she cannot distinguish. This is why we say pseudo‑foreigners have been born into our modern society who do not resemble foreigners and pseudo‑Europeans have come into existence for which no example in Europe exists.
According to the present divorce law in France, when a woman separates from her husband, she has absolutely no right to her children. Whereas in Islam, from the very beginning, the purest form of Islam, not the present composite form of Islam, she is completely independent in respect to woman's rights. She can even seek payment from her husband for nursing her child. She can carry on her own businesses without any interference from her husband. She can work. As to production, she can independently and directly put her capital into effect. She has the most economic independence of any member of society.
All of the anti‑human and pseudo‑religious pressures committed against women in the name of religion have caused a reaction among European women. This reaction by women is directed against the Middle Ages. The memory and thought of it has remained with her. In Italy and Spain where religion is still strong, women are denied many of their human rights in spite of the signs of freedom and emphasis upon human rights and other such grand jokes.
We are talking about human freedom and social rights, not sexual freedom and sexual rights. We see with what speed the latter becomes prevalent. In return for the second world's (the previous third world) oil, diamonds, rubber gum, copper, coffee and uranium which inexpensively enters Europe, Europe exports freedom, ethics, techniques, culture, art, literature and, in particular, sex, to this hungry, plundered world ‑ freedly and with generosity. All means of communication and advertisement, social, technical, artistic and educational possibilities of an underdeveloped country come into the service of propaganda, promotion and distribution. These things are all other than freedoms and the rights of man!
Sexual freedoms are deceiving. It is part of a new exploitation, a type of limitless deception, which the impure system of Western capitalism in today's world, causes both the East and West innocently and of itself to reach out towards it until it gets to the point that the influence of. Western people and the influenced Eastern countries find a secure and safe environment for themselves and find continuity.
The young generation, in particular, those who contain both the elements of rebellion and audacity and those who lack patience as well as those who are not stupified by religious stipulations and have released the hereditary chains of traditions which crimp their thoughts because they find they do not relate to their sensitivities. At any moment it is possible that, based upon rebellion, they take up a notion contrary to their interests and as a result put their heads into an inexpensive foreign lovers cesspool and become so drowned and giddy in the artificial freedom as presented by capitalists that they no longer know what the world is about. They so completely saturate themselves with it that they no longer sense their poverty and slavery. This is why we see to what extent the internal conditions of despotism in Asia, Africa and Latin America result. in an insane‑like emphasis, seriousness and insistence upon the rights and freedom of sex by the Western capitalists. It is emphasized and strengthened so that the groundwork is laid for its daily increase.
We can, with a little bit of caution and discernment, come to know what is behind these attractive forms of the thunder struck, sexuality which is none other than the denial of the modern world. We have to come to know these great idols and the three faces of the contemporary religious trinity: exploitation, colonialization and despotism. They make Freud a prophet of lies. From Freudism they build a scientific and human religion. From sexuality, an ethical conscience, a real institution and finally, from lust, a blessed temple is built. They build this place of worship and create a powerful servanthood. The first sacrifice recorded in the threshold of this temple is woman.
Who is the Contemporary Woman? Serving Oneself vs. Serving Others
In the 15th and 16th centuries, following the Renaissance, 'with the passing away of traditions and ancient religion, the thoughts of Descartes and the logic of analytical science replace natural sensitivities and religious feelings.
According to Durkheim, the concept of individualism, in other words, individual independence in one's relationship to one's society (family, tribe or country) or the serving of oneself replaces the spirit and unity of society and the serving of others (the socialism of Durkheim). Utility replaces values. Realism replaces idealism. Instincts replace spiritual‑ efforts. Welfare and the problems of life replace the seeking of perfection, consciousness of God and self‑sufficiency. Intelligent logic is consciously chosen on credit to substitute for the sacred, spiritual and cultural roots which, through an unacceptable process of analysis are related to a kind of eternal pleasure.
Finally, known and suitable phenomena, capable of analysis and synthesis, which are reasonable, can be considered to be relative and materialistic, in totality, form the world as they accept change. They form the people, life, culture, all of the dimensions of the earth, elements of society and the unlimited attractions of the new spirit. They replace the essence of inspiration and the composite truths of values which are above one's individual will. They do away with anything which is only understood by the supra‑intellectual, that is, everything which is beyond the intellectual continuity of logical science such as the eternal, the hidden and the Platonic.
The roots of these things exist in the depths of being. Since the beginning of humanity, they have poked their heads through. They are enigmatic attractions from another ‑world. They are from the essence of fate. They are absolute. Their source is divine destiny. Finally, nature replaces metaphysics. Science replaces inspiration. Pleasure replaces chastity. Happiness replaces perfection. Tranquility replaces piety. As interpreted by Francis Bacon, `Power has replaced Truth.'
This spiritual and intellectual change in the deep evolution of human values, the change in the main direction of culture, knowledge and feelings, the new means of earning a livelihood in families, new views of love and the relationship between men and women, the place of women in society and their relationship to men, has left revolutionary effects upon the roots of the fabric of life, literature, art and sensitivities.
All things are analyzed according to the science and logical vision of Descartes. This includes the sacred and ethical principles which people have always looked at with the view that they were values above human knowledge, that is, divine virtues. These are now analyzed as material things. Among the values are women and love which had previously existed together in a halo of sanctity. They were hidden in the imagination, spirit, inspiration and common sense, where these forms remained untouched. They place them upon a blackboard and analyze them.
One of the people responsible for this is Claude Bernard who saw human beings as corpses without a spirit. Freud considers the spirit to be a sick pig, and in the view of the bougeoisie, life is money. The result of their research is what we see now.
Opposed to these were the Christian priest. Next to their laboratories were churches. The had nothing to offer other than `excommunication'. They were club wielders whom on one feared. Compared to these people whom at least reasoned and gave‑ examples, they simpley cried out, `Religion is dying!' They issued unreasonable cannon laws. They constantly threw the fire of hell into the faces of their parishioners but to no avail.
A woman, as far as her life was concerned, was part of a family. Even though she had no independent human personality, at least she could easily be dissolved within the family, which was one spirit. Little by little she became economically independent. She began working outside of the home. With industrialization in full motion and full of new twists, with the daily progress and improvement in social occupations, women were pulled out as well and went to work.
From society's point of view, economic independence has also made her socially independent. Thereafter she finds individual existence beside her husband and children. Today, before marriage and setting up a household, she has individual independence. Because she has developed intellectually and logically, this has of itself altered her relationship with others a man, her lover, her father and with her family. It is no longer based on sensitive feelings or instinctive attractions or deep, unconscious, spiritual efforts but rather upon the policy of intellectual accounting and detailed calculation. She has been freed from many social, family and religious chains through her accountant's vision of the situation. She is now capable of seeing reality, being able to analyze and intellectualize, seeking the self, finding her own interests and individual profits and spending for herself. She authentically seeks pleasure, encounters things, and looks for tranquility, intelligence and happiness. At the same time, however, many of her deep feelings have been taken away from her. Her hereditary feelings, which are other than the intellectual, have been removed. Her humaness has suffered (and has left her lonely). But it has made her independent.
Durkheim has shown that in the past, the social spirit was strong. Whenever economics and individuality grew, from the economic point of view, individuals cut their family roots, their sensitivities, their traditional ideas and their spirit. They became independent. This independence gave them multiple possibilities. The very fact that an 18 year old girl can very easily get her own apartment and live alone without any supervision is one of them.
A woman is allowed many freedoms in her home because of economic reasons. Whenever she becomes angry over life, she can flee from her situation as she has individual rights. Because she has economic independence and because she exemplifies an intelligent behaviour, having the patience to bear the sorrow of another does not fit with a healthy intelligence, therefore, whenever she must make a sacrifice, or give in abundance, she closes her eyes.
For peace of mind, pleasure, freedom, and for anything which affects her own well‑being, she opens her eyes. This is because things like loyalty, sacrifice, generosity, gratitude, pledges, contracts and love are all spiritual and ethical things. They are not capable of intellectual and logical reasoning.
`Sacrifice my life so that others may live,' or 'bear sorrow so that others may have peace,' are transactions which do not pay off no matter how you account for them. 'I have no need of him!'
Then who can answer her question, `Why should I sacrifice myself for he who needs me? Why should I remain loyal to him? Why should I remain with this ugly, weak man because 'of a promise, an agreement, an agreement that was made when he was handsome, strong, and he was the only creature around me at that time? I bore him patiently. Why should I now close my eyes to the handsome, strong man who is available and who understands my spirit and, my goals?'
Sartre presents an example. A woman is the wife of a man who has no attractive qualities. In comparison to him, there is an attractive man who loves her. The intelligent way is clear. Both men need her. One needs her as a wife, the other as a lover. The woman does not need the first man but rather the second.
By remaining loyal to her husband, two needs are sacrificed and one is satisfied.. In fleeing from him and letting, him go, two needs are satisfied for one. The duty of this woman is clear. Her intelligence makes the decisive decision, a clear mathematical formula. The reason behind why a woman would sacrifice two needs for one is not simply an intellectual, logical Descartian or Freudian one. An intelligent woman thinks and acts logically. Economic reasoning and social rights present her with the possibility of doing it. She does it.
Children come into the world. A child restricts the freedom of her mother and father. Intelligence cannot accept the fact that the peace of mind and freedom of two people be sacrificed for one person. They either do not bring children into the world or they leave them with a nurse or in an institution. Among all of these impractical roots, illogical feelings, ethical and traditional binds, there is a conscience, a spirit which a woman holds onto. She solves it by immersing herself into the fabric and spiritual depths of a family.
There are a hundred unclear, irrational and impractical rationalizations which encourage her to choose forgiveness, suffering, sacrifice for her husband, children, home, family, relatives, principles and the sensitive values of life which have all been disconnected. Because of economic and social independence, a logic which may underlie feelings and seeing reality in her search for truth, she had developed an individual spirit and independence instead of gaining a social spirit where the individual is dissolved.
Loneliness is the greatest tragedy of the century. Durkheim has analyzed the situation in his book entitled, 'Suicide. Suicide in the East is an exception. It is not a common accident. In Europe it is not looked upon as an accident but as a social phenomenon. It is not a happening or an accident. It is a reality. Its curve grows higher and higher everyday in developed societies, The rate of suicide in Spain, which is an underdeveloped country, is less than in other European countries. In Northern Europe it is more and in North America it has the highest rate. This same curve exists in a country between the villages and the urban centers, within an urban development between the developed areas and the more underdeveloped areas and within a society between the non‑religious, modern group and the old‑fashioned religious group. Why? Because people are lonely.
Religion ties people together. It causes a common spirit which is born in its followers to be shared. It nourishes a sympathy between each individual and God. In the past, each individual was linked through hundreds of connections with others ‑ family, friends and tribes. Social and economic self‑sufficiency makes them each needless of the other.
It used to be society which gathered individuals together. Now instead of gathering individuals, the family, neighbors, mothers, fathers, children, friends and relatives, defend the individual and his or her material needs. Intellectual growth and logic attack the spiritual and traditional religious connections. Intellectual growth, the logic of mathematics, the spirit of materialism, innate changes and encounters cause the spiritual connections to become unstable and other than intellectual.
The individual became independent. Individual reasoning of necessity becomes self‑seeking. It becomes needless of others and then it stands alone. Because others have become as this and no longer needing an individual, they uproot themselves from them, each person then seeks out his or her own interests and benefits. Individuals are alone on their islands. Then the thought of suicide attacks them (because suicide is the neighbor of loneliness).
Women choose their men and men, their women. But the very fact that men and women are both independent and powerful and without, need, causes them to move towards each other only because of sex. Other factors such as feelings, love, kindness, social and traditional roots, inclinations towards friendship and sympathy, friendly companionships are not taken into consideration. Today, these sorts of invitations have died. Then what remains? A frail intellectual calculation without light, a logical necessity or a force.
Sexual freedom in men and women's thoughts, which officially begins at puberty but for all practical purposes begins whenever one wants, brings a phenomenon into being. That is, in order to satisfy a sexual urge the only requirement is the sexual urge. And, if it is weak, its weakness can be eliminated with money. Only money is necessary. At different levels or with different amounts of money, the sexual urge can be satisfied. One can at any time and under any government be a Don Juan or an Onassis. The First Lady of America can also be‑bought for a price. The difference between her and those who stand on the street is one of rate. Since boys and girls both enjoy sexual freedom, neither one wants to restrict themselves for the whole of their lives. It is not to their interest to restrict the power of their sexual urges.
And here, none of the answers of logic or wisdom justify an individual choosing one person for one's whole life thereby restricting all of the freedoms of choice as to pleasure, beauty and attractive things in life.
Forming a Family
At the present time, men and women freely satisfy their sexual urges in universities, restaurants, outings, and various gatherings of this kind. They continue until a woman comes to herself and sees that it is empty around her.
No one any longer seeks her out and if they do it is to review, to revise the memory of the past. When a man has passed the freedom of his sexual cycle, when he has picked a flower from every garden and from each flower, its perfume, and it has passed, there is nothing any longer for him which is interesting or new. His sexual urges have subsided. It has been replaced by attachment to his position and his money. He seeks fame and worships position. His inclinations are now towards getting a house and forming a family. These feelings appear in his being.
A woman, face to face with the reality that she is no longer busy, and that no one seeks her out, and, a man, exhausted from his freedoms and forbidden endless sexual experiences which have finally turned his heart, confront each other. They reach out towards each other at the end of along and tiring road. They want to form a family.
A family is formed but that which drew these two together, that which caused them to join hands, is the fear on the part of the woman of bankruptcy and no longer being attended to. The man is‑ tired and no longer interested in anything. A family has been formed but in place of love and the 'intensity of an ideal, instead of creating feelings, pulsations, happiness and imagination together, exhaustion and fed‑up‑ness sets in so that nothing is new. They know what is there. Nothing!
There is nothing which their hearts beat for. They know why they have found each other. They know what needs they have from each other. Both, completely conscious, calculating, aware, seek each other out. Each knows what the other meant by the words, 'be my divine sacrifice'. Each has achieved their means. Both sacrifice for the other. Both die for the other. But in the opposite way from which we normally understand it.
This is why on the day of their wedding, the main hall of City Hall is filled because they are not allowed inside the churches. Someone from City Hall, with a medal on‑his coat, looking like an employee of City Hall, attends to them, not a clergyman who is a symbol of the spirit, faith, reverence and sainthood. Each couple is called forward exactly like moulded sugar cones. Their names are read from a list. They answer, 'Yes.' Often several children standing behind the bride and groom also answer yes. It shows their existences have influenced the 'yes' of their mothers and fathers. They pay their money. They sign the register. The ceremony is over. Each returns to their mould, their home. The interesting part is here. From among the 200‑300 brides only 20‑30 wear a bridal gown. Most of them say, 'What, at my age, in my condition, it would be degrading to wear a bridal gown. It is not right.' Then the wife goes to work and the man as well. They have a rendezvous with their friends to meet at noon in a restaurant and eat lunch together. This, of course, only happens when the wedding to some extent has been full of happiness and excitement. Otherwise they forget what had happened and what event had occured. Most often, outside City Hall after the civil ceremony, the bride and groom, who have been living together for a year or years and each one has spent a year or even years living with someone else, give each other a cold look as if to say, 'So what? Where should we go? Fun? We've gone out a thousand times together. Embrace each other? We've tasted each other a thousand times and we've fled from the taste. Home? We came from home. What appeals to them? Do they excite each other's imagination and feelings? Not at all. Then its best if each continues their work each day like always.
Families are formed in this way. Both the man and the woman, with good scheming, found each other and they formed an economic company, or else, they were married because of the pressure of the law. Perhaps a child was born causing the father and mother of the child to become a bride and groom. They show no understanding, feelings and desires towards each other. They do not sense any secrets in each other, no paradox in their union. Nothing begins . Nothing changes. No imaginary points, no heart beats. Not even a smile upon their lips. This is why the foundation of a family becomes frail. Once the foundations have weakened, the children in that family no longer see understanding, warmth and attractions. Because the mother and father cannot sacrifice all of their freedoms for their children, they put their child in a school or pension and they only give it money so that they can continue their free life.
Afterwards, having formed a logical and deceitful partnership according to the laws and having created a family, they then separate from each other and the spirit and those possibilities continue for the man who has experienced thousands of warm and young embraces. How can this woman who is tired and fallen in spirit and whose masculine dominated actions cause disgust in the man, satisfy his needs? And keep him? And visa versa? A woman who can make a thousand comparisons, takes the worn‑out man into her arms. Through her comparisons, his number is up. In such a situation, within a household which lacks understanding, feelings, novelties, and is as unattractive as always, with the loss of embraces, he turns to cafes, fraternities, new experiences, official and unofficial centers. Once again, contrary to the original invitation, the factor which keeps these two within the same household is an illogical one.
Women in the Consumer System: Sex instead of Love
Societies which only authenticate things in the economic terms of production, consumption, consumer goods and products only understand economics. Women are no longer creatures who excite the imagination nor speakers of pure feelings. Neither are they the beloveds of the great lovers nor do they have sacred roots. They are no longer spoken of in terms of mother, companion, center of inspiration and mirror of life nor are they faithful. Rather, as an economic product, women are bought and sold according to the positive‑negative qualities of their sexual attractions.
Capitalism, as a result of having developed leisure time, has shaped a woman to serve two purposes. )n the first place, she fills the time between two jobs which is part of the fate of society. The bourgeoisie exploit her and create a dry and absurd future for her without any purpose whatsoever. Should she not ask, `Why am I working?' `Why am I living?' `Whom am I suffering for?'
Secondly, women are used as an instrument for entertainment. As the only creature who has both sex and sexuality, has been put to work so that workers, office employees and intellectuals can think about ways of spending their capital during their leisure time instead of thinking about the ideas of classlessness, for instance. Women have been put to work to fill every empty moment of the life of society. Art quickly joins the market so that they can meet the orders of the capitalists and the bourgeoisie. The main purpose of art has always been beauty, spirit, feelings and love which have now been changed into sex. The market of Freudism, the worship of the most vile and wretched sex has been given as an intellectual philosophy. Realism is presented today in the form of an intellectually aware person. Imagination, poetry and feelings of idealism have been emptied and sex is introduced as the virtue behind contemporary art. This is why we find instant paintings, poetry, films, theater, stories, novels and plays surrounding us in the framework of sexuality.
Capitalism encourages people to consume more in order to make people more dependent upon it. It is also to increase the amount consumed and the products produced. Women are presented only as creatures who are sexy and other than this, nothing. In other words, .she is used as a one dimensional creature. She is placed in advertisements and used as propaganda for creating new values; new feelings and drawing attention to new consumer products. They bring about the necessity of artificial feelings in people. In order to kill the feelings which endanger the profits of capitalism, women are thrown in. (n order to kill the great and spiritual feelings which destroy capitalism, she participates to prevent capitalism's death.
Sexuality replaces love. Woman, the imprisoned creatures of the Middle Ages, has taken the form of free slaves in the new age. In history, it is in great civilizations with progressive religions that women have held a high place through the kind of love she can give, in people's feelings and ‑in the arts even though she does not have absolute unity or a direct relationship with art. But, she is looked upon as the point of inspiration, feelings and spiritual characteristics. Now she has taken the form of an instrument employed for serving social and economic purposes. She is used to change the form of society. She is used to destroy the highest values of the traditional societies. She is used to change ethics. She is used to change a traditional, spiritual, ethical or religious society for the sake of an empty, absurd, consuming society. She is used to transform art which had been the theophany of the divine spirit of humanity. She is changed into an instrument for sexuality in order to change the type of humanity.
But in the East
Now it approaches the East. It is our turn. Here its work is very easy. Since the Middle Ages, especially in the West, in Sweden, Norway and even France and Germany, the sexual feelings of boys develops late so that at 17 or 18, a boy feels no attraction towards the opposite sex, whereas girls are at the peak of their sexuality and seek out the boys. That is why men get the feeling of wanting to‑ escape and women take on the offensive. It is this condition which causes disgust in men and brings about a deviated sexual life which, until the end of their life, hangs around their necks and even has an affect upon their home.
It is because of this that sociologists and psychologists of northern European societies have many plans and designs‑ about awakening the sexual urges of young European men with artificial stimulation and natural sex urges by means of women.
In the East, this is not a problem. Young eastern boys, before they reach the age of puberty, reach sexual puberty and it is this very early sexual awakening which causes eastern sociologists and psychologists to face many other problems. But where .is the owner of this generation who thought about them? There is a war between two groups. And because of other things, conversations lead to type of clothes, special behavior, habits and tastes. Human problems, whether they are new or old, do not concern either side. The war is between being old‑fashioned and modern. Winning is to the advantage of neither of them. One, lying, is called civilized and the other, lying, is called pious, religious. Neither one of them relate in the least to either civilization or religion. One, the ideological type, calls out, Fatima, Zainab and the other, `European woman'. Both are insulting to each other. Either they are lying to each other or their own ideologies are innocent and even separate from themselves.
Europeans want to change eastern societies so that they can plunder our property, ride upon our thoughts and our feelings. They want to take the food from our mouths as well as to destroy our common sense values. Without destroying these things, they cannot take the food from our mouths; they cannot take our property.
Thus we must first empty ourselves and leave our moulds. We must forget all of our human values and all of our traditions which were the very things which kept us upon our own feet. We must give these up and break them within ourselves. Once, empty‑headed with an impotent spirit, crippled and without content, we must become exactly like garbage cans which are filled with dirty and useless things and then are emptied.
With the brain and the spirit of the East, they are doing this. They empty their contents. When they have no faith in anything, they‑ have no intelligence or awareness so that they have no hero, they think their past is completely without value. When they believe their religion to be empty and full of myths, they feel spiritual meanings to be old‑fashioned, reactionary and that way of life to be ugly and detestable. They either do not know themselves, their children and their spirituality or else they know it badly. So what form do they change? They come out empty and thirsty and in need of the orders of the exploiters. Whatever the exploiters want to pour into their interior, in whatever order they choose, they get to work plundering.
It is because of this that they assign permanent slogans to plundering the East, emptying the minds of Moslems, Buddhists, Hindus, Iranians , Turks, Arabs, Blacks and Whites. All must take one form. They should only have one dimension. They must be consumers of Western economic products and have thoughts, but not think for themselves.
Insistence upon old values, human values, tradition and religion which are full of meaning, close the way to the West and guard the East. Insistence upon traditional values stands like a watch‑tower with a strong spirit against the West. They defend Islam and independence. Foreignness does not penetrate. Moslems are overflowing with honor, spiritual meaning, values and pride. Their history, people, culture, faith and religious characteristics give them independence, greatness and something to hold their heads up high for.
They see the Westerners as nouveau riche and newly civilized. They criticize them, humiliate them and confront them. But the West falls upon the soul of the Easterners like termites. Little by little they empty out the contents. They even destroy all of the forces of resistance which remain. In place of the brave guardians of the watch‑towers, full of spirit and pride, they build a people empty of common sense, perseverance and pride. The Easterners even forward to meet the enemy. They take whatever the West gives and do whatever they want them to do. They become exactly as Westerners had ,willed they would be.