The Little Skalliwag - The 4 Freedoms Library2024-03-29T15:10:39Zhttp://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/the-little-skalliwag?groupUrl=Sikh&commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127839&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A250&feed=yes&xn_auth=noFair enough!tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1278392013-06-24T15:11:40.469ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Fair enough!</p>
<p>Fair enough!</p> It's not my theory. It is so…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1276532013-06-24T11:58:32.284ZJoehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>It's not my theory. It is something I read in some of the books on how the British interacted with hindus and muslims during the Raj. If you want I'll dig through my notes and find where I read it. I've also seen documentaries on TV where the narrators have said the same thing. </p>
<p>The imagery on those hindu temples is still shocking to a debauched 21st century homo like me. It doesn't take much imagination to consider how the Victorian British would have been appalled by the idea…</p>
<p>It's not my theory. It is something I read in some of the books on how the British interacted with hindus and muslims during the Raj. If you want I'll dig through my notes and find where I read it. I've also seen documentaries on TV where the narrators have said the same thing. </p>
<p>The imagery on those hindu temples is still shocking to a debauched 21st century homo like me. It doesn't take much imagination to consider how the Victorian British would have been appalled by the idea that things like that were "holy". Them preferring the comparative austerity of mosques is entirely understandable. Even now there are significant numbers of British people who think muslims have a point: covering women from head to toe seems acceptable to them if it stamps out prostitution.<br/><br/>"<span>British society was a seething mass of sensuality." If you read the studies of the Victorian London working class, by people like Mayhew, it's clear they were mostly irreligious, often debauched. It was the middle-class who attempted to impose religiosity on the urban working-class. It was the middle-class who went off to run India.</span></p>
<p><br/> <cite>Alan Lake said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/the-little-skalliwag?groupUrl=Sikh&commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127833&xg_source=activity&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A250#3766518Comment127646"><div><blockquote><p><span>I think what happened with the Raj, is that the Victorian sensibility was disgusted by all the nakedness/fornication/pleasure exhibited in the statuary of hindu "religious sites". The victorian British found the relative primness and prudishness of muslims far more compatible to their own mentality.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span>Its an interesting theory, but perhaps we should wait for more evidence. Other people have told me that beneath the veneer that Queen Victoria tried to perpetuate, British society was a seething mass of sensuality. I don't know what the truth is, except that the latter was certainly true in Kenya before it gained independence.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote> I bought a copy of that book…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1276522013-06-24T11:49:43.644ZJoehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>I bought a copy of that book a few weeks ago, but it has not arrived yet. The summary I'm giving is how I remember the book being discussed when it was first published 30 years ago.<br></br><br></br>Perhaps I am confusing which of Boswell's books contain that thesis. He also wrote this: <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Marriage-Likeness-Same-sex-Pre-modern/dp/0006863264">http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Marriage-Likeness-Same-sex-Pre-modern/d...</a></p>
<p>It seems not unreasonable to me that since…</p>
<p>I bought a copy of that book a few weeks ago, but it has not arrived yet. The summary I'm giving is how I remember the book being discussed when it was first published 30 years ago.<br/><br/>Perhaps I am confusing which of Boswell's books contain that thesis. He also wrote this: <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Marriage-Likeness-Same-sex-Pre-modern/dp/0006863264">http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Marriage-Likeness-Same-sex-Pre-modern/d...</a></p>
<p>It seems not unreasonable to me that since even Jews in Palestine had been "hellenized" around the time of Jesus (they were doing naked sports like in the Olympics, they stopped circumcising boys), that such hellenization continued into the early christian church. "The vice of the Greeks" would thus likely be tolerated/incorporated in pre-islamic Mediterranean christianity.</p>
<p>I'm sticking to my guns: islam is a counter-reformation against the modernisations of the Biblical religions which occurred in both judaism and christianity. That is how muslims themselves see it (no doubt islam also incorporated elements of Arabic paganism, and even elements of other Middle Eastern religions).</p>
<p>It's perfectly clear that to the extent that there is homosexual behaviour between men in muslim countries, it is entirely disavowed and denigrated and dangerous. Boswell's thesis is that there was tolerance (and maybe more than tolerance) towards homosexuals in the early christian church. At some point, european christianity became intolerant of homosexuality. Christianity became de-hellenized. I don't know of any evidence that islam was ever significantly moderated by its encounters with other cultures. Clearly judaism was, and that transformation is the kind of thing Mohammed despised.<br/><br/>I'm not really interested in looking at european history through conventional, accepted views. European history and thought seems to have a total blindness when it comes to acknowledging the ways in which it must have been transformed by the 100s of years of sustained (and successful) islamic military assaults on the Middle East, North Africa, Spain, Anatolia, the Balkans, Italy, etc.<br/><br/>Look to conventional academic thought on these matters, and you will find barely a mention of how christian Europe responded to the unrelenting wave of assaults by islam. I had thought this was going to be due the academics in the past 40 years re-writing the accepted view. But I recently bought a 1000 pg book on medieval Europe written in 1937, and though it has a chapter devoted to the rise of islam, the rest of the book barely mentions the 542 wars to which Bill Warner refers. <br/><br/>How can a 1000 page book on medieval Europe ignore those things? Christian Spain/Portugal was mostly islamic for 700 years of the 1500 year period of that book, and it devotes 30pp to the rise of islam. Then apart from the Crusades, does not mention any interaction between muslims and christians in the last 350 years of the period it covers.</p>
<p>If the Crusades had not happened, I think that such huge tomes would not even refer to any of the 542 assaults that muslims made against christian Europe. That is how huge the blind-spot is. </p>
<p><br/> <cite>Kinana said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/the-little-skalliwag?groupUrl=Sikh&commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127833&xg_source=activity&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A250#3766518Comment127833"><div><p>'<span>before islam started the onslaught on Europe, the catholic church was apparently marrying same-sex couples...'</span></p>
<p><span>Joe, i have not read the book you refer to, but i read the reviews and none of them say this. the Christian church had about 800 years to develop its position and understanding of same sex attracted people. if anything, could the influence have been the other way around? Also, Mohammed was keen to associate his new religion with the Jewish people. And the Jewish position was also fairly clear about this issue and had even longer time to arrive at and develop its understanding.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote> 'before islam started the ons…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1278332013-06-24T08:14:11.725ZKinanahttp://4freedoms.com/profile/Kinana
<p>'<span>before islam started the onslaught on Europe, the catholic church was apparently marrying same-sex couples...'</span></p>
<p><span>Joe, i have not read the book you refer to, but i read the reviews and none of them say this. the Christian church had about 800 years to develop its position and understanding of same sex attracted people. if anything, could the influence have been the other way around? Also, Mohammed was keen to associate his new religion with the Jewish people. And…</span></p>
<p>'<span>before islam started the onslaught on Europe, the catholic church was apparently marrying same-sex couples...'</span></p>
<p><span>Joe, i have not read the book you refer to, but i read the reviews and none of them say this. the Christian church had about 800 years to develop its position and understanding of same sex attracted people. if anything, could the influence have been the other way around? Also, Mohammed was keen to associate his new religion with the Jewish people. And the Jewish position was also fairly clear about this issue and had even longer time to arrive at and develop its understanding.</span></p> Joe - agree with your comment…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1276472013-06-24T06:02:19.144ZAntonyhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/Antony
<p>Joe - agree with your comments on the British establishment, the importation of muslims etc from the 1950's onwards, aside from using them to undercut British workers, also had a distinct air of snobbery and contempt for the working class to it (and still does whether the snobbery is in left wing or right wing guise). The proles were/are there just to put up and shut up.</p>
<p>Joe - agree with your comments on the British establishment, the importation of muslims etc from the 1950's onwards, aside from using them to undercut British workers, also had a distinct air of snobbery and contempt for the working class to it (and still does whether the snobbery is in left wing or right wing guise). The proles were/are there just to put up and shut up.</p> I think what happened with th…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-24:3766518:Comment:1276462013-06-24T06:02:11.072ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<blockquote><p><span>I think what happened with the Raj, is that the Victorian sensibility was disgusted by all the nakedness/fornication/pleasure exhibited in the statuary of hindu "religious sites". The victorian British found the relative primness and prudishness of muslims far more compatible to their own mentality.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span>Its an interesting theory, but perhaps we should wait for more evidence. Other people have told me that beneath the veneer that Queen…</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span>I think what happened with the Raj, is that the Victorian sensibility was disgusted by all the nakedness/fornication/pleasure exhibited in the statuary of hindu "religious sites". The victorian British found the relative primness and prudishness of muslims far more compatible to their own mentality.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span>Its an interesting theory, but perhaps we should wait for more evidence. Other people have told me that beneath the veneer that Queen Victoria tried to perpetuate, British society was a seething mass of sensuality. I don't know what the truth is, except that the latter was certainly true in Kenya before it gained independence.</span></p> The elite do not care who the…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-23:3766518:Comment:1278252013-06-23T12:43:02.212ZJoehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>The elite do not care who they rule over. Provided they and their progeny are in charge, it is of no concern to them. We only have to look at the utter contempt and disdain that students/graduates of British universities have for those "beneath them" to realise how much contempt the elite have for everyone beneath <span style="text-decoration: underline;">them</span>.</p>
<p>I think what happened with the Raj, is that the Victorian sensibility was disgusted by all the…</p>
<p>The elite do not care who they rule over. Provided they and their progeny are in charge, it is of no concern to them. We only have to look at the utter contempt and disdain that students/graduates of British universities have for those "beneath them" to realise how much contempt the elite have for everyone beneath <span style="text-decoration: underline;">them</span>.</p>
<p>I think what happened with the Raj, is that the Victorian sensibility was disgusted by all the nakedness/fornication/pleasure exhibited in the statuary of hindu "religious sites". The victorian British found the relative primness and prudishness of muslims far more compatible to their own mentality. Muslims exploited this (such as the construction of islam as "the religion of peace" in the 1920s, when muslims had been assassinating British rulers in India just 60 years earlier).<br/><br/>One thing we must never forget, is the blind-spot in European history concerning the transformative influence of islam on christianity and european culture. That Victorian prudishness could well have been an echo of the impact of islam through the ages. For example, before islam started the onslaught on Europe, the catholic church was apparently marrying same-sex couples. <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Christianity-Social-Tolerance-Homosexuality-Beginning/dp/0226067114/">http://www.amazon.co.uk/Christianity-Social-Tolerance-Homosexuality-Beginning/dp/0226067114/</a></p>
<p>Gandhi was a traitor. He was just like Burnham's "managerial class". Gandhi did not object to imperialism; he objected to the British having an empire. He came to London in 1918 (I think) with an otherwise all-muslim delegation, to push for Britain to allow the Caliphate to be maintained after WW1.<br/><br/><br/> <br/> <cite>shiva said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/the-little-skalliwag?groupUrl=Sikh&commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127821&xg_source=activity&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A250#3766518Comment127821"><div><p>This is just one in many instances where the English elite have sided with the moslems, so it comes as no big surprise that we see the elite folding to the fascists in the present day.</p>
<p> We see many today in the CJ who quote Churchill, but they overlook that Churchill locked up Ghandi, thus enabling Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the <span>Muslim League.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote> This is just one in many inst…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-23:3766518:Comment:1278212013-06-23T11:14:45.126Zshivahttp://4freedoms.com/profile/shiva
<p>This is just one in many instances where the English elite have sided with the moslems, so it comes as no big surprise that we see the elite folding to the fascists in the present day.</p>
<p> We see many today in the CJ who quote Churchill, but they overlook that Churchill locked up Ghandi, thus enabling Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the <span>Muslim League.</span></p>
<p>This is just one in many instances where the English elite have sided with the moslems, so it comes as no big surprise that we see the elite folding to the fascists in the present day.</p>
<p> We see many today in the CJ who quote Churchill, but they overlook that Churchill locked up Ghandi, thus enabling Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the <span>Muslim League.</span></p> Wow. It wasn't that long ago…tag:4freedoms.com,2012-08-04:3766518:Comment:1092022012-08-04T14:35:13.066ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Wow. It wasn't that long ago either.</p>
<p>Wow. It wasn't that long ago either.</p>