Monday, December 31, 2007

Last Sunset in Bahrain


I wanted to do something for the new years but I am dog tired so I think I will sleep, plus I decided to take someones watch tomorrow so I will need my sleep anyway. I decided to get the first sunrise of the new year tomorrow but we will see how I'm feeling.

Goodbye 2007 I hope it was good for you too.
Posted by Picasa

Wednesday, December 26, 2007


Silence isn't always golden
Sometimes Silence brings Pain
Like when all the sweat and tears
Are washed away by rain

Sometimes daylight is forsaken
By clouds from behind
Showing the lack of laughter
The children left behind

A crowd isn't always company
Only a manifestation of just One
Empty smile after another
Erased by the sun

Mistakes are made and then forgave
Like shifting of the sand
Left with the reality of watching,
Loyalties disband

Dark and light and Dark again
Who cares it's all amiss
Silence comes and steals
the difference of bliss

The sun is shining a bright new day
But silence claimed the light
Futility is all remains
for now the day is Night

Drop, Drop, drop the rain begins
No there is silence in sound
It echoes all around us
with no trace of its pound

No shuffle, No splat, no clickety clack
Of trains upon a rail
We all move on noisily
but silence still prevails

Open, close, open, close
the senselessness of mouths
They have said nothing
No spark have they aroused

The masses are forsaken
from silence and its wiles
No retreat or return to peaceful Noise
which brings the truest smiles

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Cosmo, Women, Men and Sex

Warning This is one of those posts!!

I was roaming around the warehouse and I found the December issue of Cosmo in one of the boxes. Thanks to and the folks back home. So I grabbed it because I've been wanting to thumb through it. I wanted to read through the tidbits on the Deep Sex they were talking about. The article was mildly informative, which is what I usually find out when I read the articles in women's mags. Sometimes some interesting tidbits of female psyche come out, but most times it is just a rehashing of something someone wrote six months ago.

Then what got me thinking as I started thumbing through the magazines while looking at the ads was exactly how much sex was being talked about in this magazine. I became even more curious. There were TONS of articles dedicated to nothing but sex. Sex positions, sex problems, Kinky sex, sex toys, sex techniques, How to make him crazy about sex and on and on. So then I started looking at the photos because I'm interested in this whole photography scene and possibly taking it professional I start looking at technical things like lighting and angles and such, but then it struck me that there was one consistent thing that all of the women in the ads were being portrayed as saying. I want to get F@#ked. So I started looking at them and sure enough looking at each and everyone of them they all said the same thing. Hi my name is Candice I would like you to take me in the back and bend me over the table, cause I'm into that sort of thing. I mean these are all girl magazines, men don't normally read these magazines and unless there is a consortium of lesbians that exclusively read women popular magazines I can't understand why all of the ads depicting women in them would have this sultry tone. This come hither big daddy look to them all, and I do mean all, every single one of them. Dedicated to the sole purpose of the act of procreating (sans actual procreation) with your man. I mean is it like an advertisement " Oh dang man she just got finished reading that issue of Cosmo you know she wants to screw now, I gotta go man you better buy your girl an issue of Cosmo." I mean really.

So then I thought deeper about this. Either A there are a S#!tTon of women out there that are completely and utterly dissatisfied with their love life or B the Publishers are all men and really want to make it keystart easy to get laid, or C there have been tons of psychiatrists that have studied the female psyche and know that sexually women are vindictively competitive. I think that it is a culmination of all three. So I counted the number of sex articles on the Cover alone, there are more in the actual magazine. There are 6 references to Sex and getting some on the cover. I then looked through a stack of Men's magazines that my roommates have in the bathroom (I know the yeah right is coming, but seriously magazines are expensive and I'm cheap so they aren't mine). There are 2 copies of Barely Legal (a Hustler full hardcore pornography magazine), 2 Playboy's Pornography again, 2 FHM, 1 GQ, 1 Fantasy (Fantasy football), 1 Men's Health, 1 Loaded and a covergirl magazine of some type. The maximum references to sex on the cover in the hardcore mag was 4. In playboy 2. In all the other men magazines possibly 1 maximum 2. Flipping through the magazines at product advertisements NONE of the ads depicted women in come hither poses, with the exception of the Porn mags that were actually selling sex products. Going there I would have to say that 95% of the facial expressions posed on women in Porn mags were the exact expressions found on the women posing for ads or article spreads in Cosmo including the cover.

So then I had to start really thinking about the whole picture, about women and their sexual self awareness or authority (not really the word I'm looking for), but their bravado or ego that thing that defines them as woman. This thing as I have observed is the thing that makes women desire to be on a stage the center of attention the superego of woman, this however is very fragile, and so I slowly thinking upon it all came to the conclusion that women are in a constant state of competition with every other woman in existence, except those who choose to remove themselves from this constant rat race, but even in very stable autonomous women this desire to be out in front can be seen. They want to be on stage as long as no one laughs or calls them out on anything or worse yet another woman takes the stage. So I can see if we assume this is the natural state of women that a polygamous relationship will always be a source of turmoil because the field becomes super expanded to cover many individual acts of life. Cooking, cleaning, mothering, sex all aspects of life bring the natural competition of women to a constant in your face type of reality. However in Non Polygamous relationships there is only the hope that what you have is fully satisfactory, because if you listen to Cosmo and the like there is always something else you are supposed to be doing and presumably if you don't start there is some other chick that is dying to do so.

Anyway that is what I thought about when I read the issue of Cosmo. How far off am I?

So to be fair I had to keep thinking. So I thought why this great difference between women's and Men's magazines? So I had to think about the men's magazines and in them you will find things, status symbols that represent power and wealth. Cars, expensive items and fine clothing, Real Estate, Business and articles on how to win defeat, dominate or some other way to summarily rise to a point of prominence. Sex although present is a side note in the corner of the magazine neatly tucked away amongst the rest of the guy stuff that is being presented. There are no Men Magazines that devote article after article to sex and relationships. Most things are related to dominating and acquiring stuff. There is even a magazine called stuff for men. In Men's magazines you will find pictures of men showing off this bravado this I have arrived air and don't you want to too you fat slovenly pile of crap. I know you wish you could be me. Because I am the way that I am I have the woman that I want and the next week I will have one better than her, because I got it like that. These are the types of articles that you find prominently displayed in men's magazines.

So then I would have to say that it would define the way that men define themselves, quantify themselves actually. Growing up it wasn't ever a focus on the quality of relationship that you could have with a woman, but the quantity and this game lasts until it fully runs its course in the life of a man, but the less desirable men I would suppose would move past this shallow reality of life sooner because women and or things aren't thrown at their feet.

So then getting into the psyche of a man it would seem that primarily the focus is based in the material, because materials are what define the quality of life you and your family can live and how you measure up to other men. Depending on the circle of Men that a man is attached to there is a material focus that defines them. Whether that be education, video games, cars or women there is a material focus that defines the man in the circle.

So then that would leave the last topic of SEX. For men primarily I believe that sex is an extension of power, prowess, ability and domination. If you look at all of the come hither looks of the women in Cosmo their sex is subdued by their partner. They are completely encased in their lover, subject to his every whim. They are helpless waiting intently on the moment that HE comes and takes them satisfying his every urge and leaving her throbbing in every sensual satisfaction. If you look at the ads in the Men's magazine it oozes of power and the ability to sway any woman to the whims of his Sex at his desire, on his schedule and as he sees fit. The financial power is astounding and the style is set to invoke envy.

Looking back into this lifestyle and even now (as I can really only speak for myself) sexual domination is the extension of manhood. The James Bond ability to satisfy women at every session and leave them begging and wanting their shining knight to take complete control. (This of course is an over generalization) For men with sex, it is all about control and domination. Sometimes this may or may not include the satisfaction of the woman. This control looking at it can actually go either way with or without satisfaction of the woman. In both there is an aspect of control. If when the man is engaged the woman is in deep throws of passion to the point that she will do anything he wants he is in control, or if the woman completely dislikes what is happening but is powerless to do anything about it he is in control. In both circumstances there is a kind of domination. I suppose this can be divided into pleasure and pain. The man that dominates with pleasure is the one that insists on the woman having multiple orgasms and going as long as he can until she's at his mercy begging for clemency. The man that dominates with pain instills fear and powerlessness upon his victim and sex is sometimes involved. I would suppose that in this there can be an understanding of men and multiple women. It all boils down to control and power.

For women looking at the magazines it would seem that their power comes from their ability to make men submit to them through their transmission of sex. I.E. I know you want to F#&k me so now you must do my bidding. If you look at the Power transmission in the ads the woman's power is strictly defined by her sex, never mind that she has 3 PHds and made 4.8 million dollars last year that is not the portrayal of her power. If a woman has seized a man's power and has come into a power of her own and independent then she is shunned by men and women. Hillary Clinton is an excellent example. Her personification is an open expression of Raw Female Power. She is a very powerful woman no doubt, however sexually she is bankrupt. Looking at her from an outside perception. She is no longer attractive and has become old, and psychologically in this country she doesn't appeal to the younger crowd as she isn't looked at as a nurturing figure or sexy figure in our sex sells economy. She has no sex to sell so dealing with her would mean you would have to do it on an intellectual, business equal level which only has the power as far as a females credibility and resources can take her. So unfortunately from the male side you have a lot of "that bitch" type remarks concerning her, as you would of any powerful female without any sex to sell. They are naturally seen as an adversary.

In a materialistic world everything boils down to its base elements. Sex becomes a physical act like basketball or soccer without any real weight on who the opponent is man, woman, animal, toy. Emotional bonds become windows of opportunity strung together to achieve the next rung of success. A void of spirituality leads to intense depression, loneliness and denial and a world of constant accumulation of worthless junk to deafen the sound of spiritual chaos. Hopefully in a couple of days I will write about true depth of a relationship that includes the spiritual that gets past the material and petty competitions of commerce inspired life and all of the drama that it inflicts.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Mom what were you thinking?

I've always known my Mom not to have any problems with polygamy, but tonight was mildly uncomfortable whilst on the phone with her discussing my children's possibility of risk for diabetes, she suggested that I take my ex-wife for a co-wife was more than awkward. I know that my Mom really isn't concerned so much with the relationship aspect as she is of keeping all of her children and grandchildren close by. She is really only concerned about the children having their father in their lives more so than my marital-communal bliss. It however was very weird and when I thought about it, it became even more unnerving. I don't hate my ex-wife (I used to make myself hate her), but I don't think I could take her back as a wife either. There are way too many emotions and issues there that really weren't resolved and so it was just tied off and left, and we learned to accept that.

I couldn't do it anyway as it would be totally unfair as I said before, because I'm head over heels in love with my wifee. So I just sat there on the phone feeling kind of oogee at the suggestion. I feel safe that my Mom wouldn't bring such nonsense up to my ex-wife though, but still it felt strange. A close friend of my Mom's son has two wives so she may have delusions of grandeur. So I urge Sakinah to be quiet, cause I know my Mom and she would probably bring home some poor puppy dog girl (religiously sound of course) and ask me to pop out some more grandkids.


Saturday, December 15, 2007

Al Assab

I have been meaning to do this piece for quite sometime. Assab is defined by Al-Krenawi as a nervous state including anxiety and tension.

Al-Krenawi, Alean, Graham, John R., Al-Krenawi, Salem
Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal; Dec97, Vol. 14 Issue 6, p445-458, 14p
Social Work Practice with Polygamous Families.
Al-Krenawi and other social workers/ psychologist also state that somitatization, poor appetite and low self-esteem are also typical accompaniments to polygamy.

I want to speak on this anxiety and tension thing which I believe is unilaterally tied into the low self-esteem issue. My wife and I have went around the polygamy tree twice now and both times were rent with inner turmoil and strife and I have made some observations and deductions on what are the inner problems emotionally for women with polygamy. The obvious argument would be for men to see how it would be if the shoe were on the other foot however Allah didn't work it out that way so it is something that you would have to take up with Him.

The first time around the polygamy bush the major emotional issues for my wife were exclusion, being left outside of the inner part of me to the loss of someone else. The second time there were the same fears however more intense. There was an intense fear of loss of those things that are deeply rooted in our relationship that we hold dear. Things like pet names, phrases, family rituals. She was continually threatened by the encroachment of things that we call our own. The personal stuff. This may have been exacerbated by the model we chose where all wives live together and there was a mutual communal effort dedicated to building a stronger family.

However the anxiety I noticed was formed in a threat or perceived threat of losing ones place. This I have noted in Aiesha (RAH) the mother of the believers and my otherwise very confident wife. The connection and strength of our marriage was no match to the fears of losing place and being thrust into a constant state of competition to be the favorite. To be the alpha, secure and superior one. This isn't the way men do it, because men probably more naturally resort to violence which is probably in Allah's wisdom to make this arrangement one way instead of a unilateral type of marriage arrangement.

Women will apparently go into this state of constantly vying for the number one position which in turn leads to the psychosomatic problems that were listed at the beginning of this post. Now on my blog I really don't try to claim that I know what is going on in women's heads, that would be stupid instead I try to give a masculine perspective on men women relationships so that women who read my blog can have some kind of clue to what may be going on in the heads of their mates. Furthermore since most women do not, or probably not have close communication relationships with men, I feel that my point of view may be of vital importance for them putting it all together.

My quest for polygamy has passed, I have fully come to the conclusion that I would never be able to be fair because I love my wife way too much. So it would be pointless to put them both through such grief unnecessarily. I did want to let you all know though for me it was never an issue of my first wife losing her position to the second. It wasn't a replacement of one for the other. It was just different, and I believe that this is the way that men (I can only specifically speak for myself) categorize relationships. Each relationship is based on its own merit. Especially where women are concerned. Each relationship is placed into its own tiny box and compartmentalized as relationship A, relationship B etc. The relationships do not affect each other except in the terms of material resources that they use. Men are single tracked, goal oriented, point to point beings. One activity does not automatically blend with the next. Each activity is its own entity. When you are at work all of your focus is at work, when you are at home all of your focus is at home, or should be. When you are watching the game or a movie that is where all of your focus is as a man. This isn't the same for women. Women's activities blend into several multitasking situations. They watch TV while cooking dinner and talking on the phone. I can't do that. Either I'm on the phone, watching TV or cooking dinner and don't ask me to "multi-task" while doing a single activity. This leads to frustration.

So in this plural marriage thing whatever wife A does for the man is viewed completely independent of wife B, because men can only process one relationship at a time and the most significant is what was the last significant memorable event. Why because this is how men's memories work. whenever I get into an argument with my wife and she recalls something from the past I have to say if that is how you remember it that is the way it is, but I am not going to argue on that point I can only argue on what is present in front of me right now. Because frankly 9 times out of 10 I won't remember what you were wearing on that day or what I said three months ago on this day.

The problem with coping with polygamy aside from men not doing it right is viewing the relationship like a woman or at least your husbands side of the relationship because he doesn't see it the same way as you do, or at least I wouldn't. When I started working on this post I began to think about what are the points of binding for men that make a relationship what it is. I can say unilaterally that it is not sex. Although sex is very important for men in a relationship it is not what binds a man in a relationship, and it is not held as personal and special by a man as it is by women. There have been studies that show that perfectly loving husbands can sleep with women other than their wives and then go back to them as nothing has ever happened. There are also relationships where there is something very wrong with the relationship that this happens in also and I am not trying to rule that out or make an excuse for this behavior but what I am saying is sex isn't the magic key when it comes to men. For me the binding of the relationship is first the commitment to the relationship. Love doesn't come until sometime thereafter even if there is a strong personal attraction. Beauty, sex, wealth, nor Deen is the magic glue that is the relationship for a man. It is something deeper than that. It comes somewhere between sacrifice and deep trust and respect. In relationships where these are absent or there are significant communications issues then the reality of the true relationship can become skewed. It is probably during this time that many impatient men do something stupid.

I don't think that the anxiety of being in a polygamous relationship will ever really fully pass, and I believe that the ease of coping with it depends entirely on the man. I think that over time it decreases, as the reality of knowing that your husband is happy with what he has with you and with what he has with her becomes more manifest assuming he makes it this pleasant. I think that if you are in a relationship of this type there are a few key things to remember. Your husband's happiness is directly linked to his last pleasurable memory, your husband's relationship with another woman in his mind is completely separate from your relationship and in his mind chances are you are not in a contest, his love for you hasn't changed. Possibly only his behavior because of the stresses that each wife places on him and are probably primarily materially based.

Monday, December 10, 2007

10,000!!! Whoo hoooo!!!

And to think I missed it. Grr. Oh well I guess we are on to the next milestone. I wonder if I can beat Safa to 100,000. Probably not with only posting once or twice a month what is up with that. I don't know but Insha Allah I will get more on the ball. Peace, Love, Hairgrease out to KNB and Back and out and back and well you get the picture.