It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Sanday (1981), who examined 156 tribal societies from a cross-cultural sample, found a relationship between rape and the powerlessness of women. Rape-free societies were those with an appreciation for the contribution that women make in society, with equal distribution of power, respect of the natural environment, and the belief that the two sexes are complementary (e.g., the Tuareg of the Sahara; and the Mbuti and Ashanti of Africa). On the other hand, Rape-prone societies were ones in which women were excluded from power arenas (e.g., symbolic rituals, houses, etc.) due to food depletion, migration, or other social or natural forces. As such “females are perceived as objects to be controlled as men struggle to retain or gain control of their environment” (Sanday 1981: 25). Sexual assault is one such mechanism of control.
Otterbein (1994) who examined seventeen primitive cultures from the Murdock’s Human Relations Area Files, found that cultures with inflexible sex-role systems exhibited higher degree of violence, including rape. He further asserts the asymmetry between men and women in his use of fraternal interest group theory to predict rape. The existence of fraternal interest groups - power groups related to males- has been used to explain why some societies were internally peaceful or conflict ridden. Societies with fraternal interest groups had higher incidences of interpersonal violence, feuding and internal war. Otterbein argues that although rape is sometimes an individual act, it is the awareness of available support of male kin that predicts the incidences of rape. Using 300 societies from the Human Relations Files he finds that the presence of fraternal interest groups override the influence of punishment in predicting the frequency of rape.
originally posted by: undo
the tradition of wearing the head covering or veil, started as a result of the events mentioned in the book of enoch and flood chapters of the bible, where it says the "sons of god" or "watchers", saw that human females appeared to be "fit extensions", made a pact not to reveal to the other "sons of god" or "watchers" what they were about to do, then came down to the earth from the sky, landed on mt. hermon, and began abducting human women , who then gave birth to human hybrids (half human/half watcher). so to protect their wives, the women were covered with a veil, so the watchers wouldn't be able to see if they were "fit extensions". paul also mentions this in the new testament. so i'm thinking somewhere along the line, islam lost the story the started the tradition in the first place.
originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Avicenne
yes, i think so. not just enoch. paul in the new testament mentions that women should have their heads covered "because of the angels".
there's also the book of giants and the book of jasher versions of the event.
originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Avicenne
it's not a religious moment, it's a historical account. the ancient cultures of the near, middle and far east, were interacting, even back then. and the abduction phenomenon of their day, was widespread, as it is given as the reason for the flood event.
originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician
"Rape? this is not term for traveling two cars but for one's victory?"
"Ohhh you mean race, that clears alot up."
"And so am still racer for my hate of white infidels?"
"..you mean racist."