Type to search

We The People Wine: Get your conservative wine today!
News

News from the Taliban patriarchy: Insurgent officials can now only have one wife

Avatar

On a lighter note about the soon-to-be-history Trump administration amid the current dreariness, we should consider its impact on fashion. After all, we did have a professional model as first lady for four years.

One clown of late made a media splash with a horned headdress that resembled something out of “Conan,” the Aahnald Schwarzenegger variety, not O’Brien. Then, we had those Democratic women lawmakers dressed in white when President Donald Trump spoke to Congress. And, of course, the red MAGA baseball cap was ubiquitous, enough to show your “America First” pride as well as trigger liberals to flee in terror or punch the wearer in the face.

But we cannot overlook the regular appearance of the Margaret Atwood brigades, donned in their blood-red cloaks and white nun’s habits to protest Trump’s treatment of women, or his desire, to borrow from Joe Biden, to “put y’all back in chains,” or the impervious power of the American patriarchy, or something.

Atwood’s 1985 novel was essentially about women being forced to serve male desire, specifically to conceive and bear children for them. With Trump in the White House, which routinely featured women speaking on his behalf and leading his agencies, liberals took it on faith that the president was ready to unleash the power of government to force women into parturition slavery.

Blogger Rachel McMillan offers an example. In 2017 she posed the idea that “The Handmaid’s Tale” was “a glimpse into America’s present – and future?”

She argued that the novel shared a connection with “the current religious landscape of America and beyond.” “The theocratic state in The Handmaid’s Tale shares … attributes with a variety of domestic and international fundamentalist groups, including the New Christian Right in America and the Taliban in Afghanistan,” she wrote. Among those attributes was “a staunch defense of the patriarchy.”

Hindsight is, naturally, 20-20, as well as so 2020. But suffice to say McMillan was a tad off in her assessment of how things might go under Trump. (For Exhibit A, see Harris, Kamala)

Now we know, however, that not even the Taliban could sustain Atwood’s dystopian future – although the mullahs are driven more by economics than enlightenment.

As Voice of America explains, “In an unprecedented move, the head of the Afghan Taliban has restricted officials in the insurgent group from marrying more than once.”

Mawlawi Hibatullah Akhundzada, the head of the fundamentalist Muslim group, had instructed his officials “in accordance with Islamic Sharia, to avoid second, third, and fourth marriage if there is no need.”

C’mon fellas. No jokes needed here. No comments about how polygamy is defined as having one wife too many, and monogamy, is, well, the same thing – or how in the age of the “throuple” that we shouldn’t punish polygamy because two wives is punishment enough.

Trump’s almost gone. We’re living in the Great Awokening.

VOA noted that Taliban leaders had been hammered with complaints about paying a dowry. Talk about customs in service of the patriarchy.

Historically in many cultures, dowries were paid by the bride’s family to the groom. But in this case, VOA notes, Taliban leaders were going to their bosses for money to help pay a “bride price,” which is paid by the groom to the bride’s family.

The going price for a bride, so to speak, in Afghanistan is almost $26,000. The average salary in Afghanistan, by the way, is about $12,000.

According to VOA, the costs piled up fast. A Taliban source told the network that “many Taliban with multiple wives keep them in separate houses and require additional money for their upkeep.” Kept women. Very patriarchal.

The VOA also reported that Islam allows men to have as many as four wives. “However,” it added, “the practice of keeping multiple wives is frowned upon in some Muslim communities that hold more progressive or liberal views on marriage.” Monogamy is the “progressive” view? How backward can you get?

As Breitbart News noted, the Taliban hauled in $1.6 billion last year through extortion drug dealing and other wholesome enterprises. Yet, with this development, “The cost of multiple wives must be skyrocketing to put significant stress on such a huge income stream” – not to mention how it cuts down on the Taliban’s budget for murder and mayhem.

It appears Atwood’s fantasyland lives for the moment – just not here in America.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!
DON’T MISS OUT!
Subscribe To Our Newsletter
There are a million ways to get your news.
We want to be your one in a million.
Stay Updated
Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime.
close-link
%d bloggers like this:
Send this to a friend