Women forced to marry men who rape them

[Manoir]

As for the US...  We have plenty of cases where Black men go on about how White women are "naturally" destined for them on whichever physical or moral grounds

Mind citing a source for this assertion? Haven't run across it.

[NatalieB]

 

Right NatalieB! I do find it in the Webster's Third though not much elsewhere. Therefore I'd modify the point to how rarely it's used or seen, compared to its lexical siblings.

Thanks!

Now that I can't argue with.

Ditto with polygamy and polyandry.  I'm not sure why it is, to be honest.  I don't believe (and this is pure belief, I have not a single stat to back this up.  Nor article, reference, etc.) that misogyny is so much more prevalent than misandry to account for the vast difference between the occurance of the words. 

If I had to guess (which, as mentioned above, I am) I'd say its a reflection of societal views on the misandrous and the misogynous respectively.  If a man hates women he's misogynous because thats a nice technical term that sounds vaguely like a medical condition - not entirely his fault.  If a woman hates men, though, she's a skinheaded dyke.

[kylie]

Kylie,

This is an excellent point.  I think its a fluke of arabic though.  "The" in arabic is "al-" and is used in a slightly different way than in English.  One of the primary differences is that "al-" is used to indicate a class noun or a group.  So al-muktasib doesn't just mean "the rapist" as it does in English.  It also means "all rapists" and "rapists as a type of human".  Obviously in a legal code that sort of distinction is important so you need "her rapist" to identify the specific person you're talking about.

     Argh.  I realized, I am very bad about finding links that hide under one or two words in flowing text.  I honestly tend to read right over them and never notice.  So even with the little underlines, I didn't actually realize there were some links in the OP.  I was commenting more on the general tendency for us to say "her rapist" in English...  Although I suppose to some extent, it could apply to any sort of stashing a possessive after the victim of whatever type.

     It seriously wasn't meant to pick at the thread title.  Rather, it was just to point out that there's a certain commonality in the way that responses tend to more or less isolate the victim and make it "their problem" (and sometimes by extension, "their family's choice" etc.) in more than one region. 

[NatalieB]

Ah, my apologies then, I had grabbed the wrong end of the stick.

[Kirce]

     Wait a minute.  It helps if you say more precisely what you mean by "forced to mix."  Are you saying this is why -- what exactly, all Muslims?  Muslims from a certain country or sect? -- should be kept out of France?  Or, out of certain schools or neighborhoods in France, perhaps? 

     As for the US...  We have plenty of cases where Black men go on about how White women are "naturally" destined for them on whichever physical or moral grounds -- and we also have our share of moral panics about Black men as a generalized "threat."  We have a good few radical religious figures demanding women stay in certain boxes, or making wild claims about what they should do lifestyle-wise.  Some of these people have a considerable, vocal, occasionally violent following. 

    However, again in the US:  Apart from some de facto private, police, and bureaucratic discrimination against Blacks...  If the issue comes up to a legal test, we cannot segregate for "no excuse," or on the basis of some generalized "cultural difference."  (Although some of the excuses we do have are pretty silly.)  Considering how many of the misogynist radicals are apparently White and Christian of some stripe, I'm skeptical that we do very much to forcibly segregate them either.   As to immigration:  We can go on about terrorism or economic benefits, but we cannot block immigration on the basis of religion per se. 

    I don't know about France and Sarkozy and what rules they operate under -- which persons exactly are entitled to "Liberty" and "Equality" under the law there (can we put "Fraternity" aside for now?)...  I'm also not sure if your view amounts to a critical look at how the situation of interest to the OP happened.  (Maybe this thread needs a particular case to unify what's going on?)  But it sounds to me, more like a scattergun prescription for what to do in response.  I'm also dubious about whether it's a practical prescription: I would expect those Muslims are in France for some pressing economic or political reason. 
     Well, thank you.  That's a bit clearer than firing curses in the general direction of any and all. 

     The US could get better or worse, too.  For instance, we have Tennessee attempting to explicitly deny orientation, gender and even any other group not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution through legislation.  Which would make discriminating against women just fine if it passes as "gender" and not "sex" discrimination, and the founding fathers never mentioned protection for disabled persons...  Let alone the question of gay or trans rights.

I will try to explain it with an example. When some muslims come to Spain to stay, they don't even bother in trying to meld with the new culture. Nop! Some will ramble and complain and call everyone racist and worse things due to why their daughters are "forced" to not cover their faces when they go to school. However if you go to their country? Hah! Good luck if you're a woman and refuse to cover yourself. Double moral? Yeah but then again it's proof that the two cultures are not very compatible at this point.

[Samnell]

Ok, I am not going to argue with you on this, and you are right that monotheism is just as bad as the Greek polytheism. However, I can tell you for a fact that not every religion is like this. One simple reply here: Do not judge a whole bushel by one or two bad apples.

I am prepared to revise my position in light of new evidence, as any rational, responsible person must be. This might not be the thread for it, but if you have some good apples you're welcome to present them.

[kylie]

Mind citing a source for this assertion? Haven't run across it.

Black guys claiming natural attraction or superiority for White women?  The point was more that we can't segregate or deport a group from the US -- at least not explicitly -- on the basis of a perceived generalized sexual threat or vaguely imagined cultural difference, to the best of my knowledge. 

      To be fair, it would have been academically cleaner to simply say claims of "big" and virile Black men -- and the use of that for sexual dialogue of one flavor or another -- are in broad circulation among many communities.  However, this is consistent with what I have read academically about Black men in certain hip-hop festivals approaching women in general.  It's been a couple years or more and I don't remember the author.  Edit: Did come across a couple examples of racial-sexual bravado in Lester (2007), Racialized Politics of Desire in Personal Ads (p. 24)./edit This is not to say that most or all Black guys would do this, of course -- but there are situations and groups where I seem to recall, it flies.  Show me that hardly any Black men ever come onto White women with claims of say cock size or some other "intrinsic" racial advantage, and I'll be very surprised.  But the point is more that a few Black guys do it vocally (quite as some White guys point to their family or European ancestry or American region as a cue to their supposed virtue, I would add) and here, it fits/feeds a threatening stereotype of the racial group.

     I think it's often reported that Black men playing up an image of tough, somewhat dismissive of women, and prone to violence is common in hip-hop circles doing "gangster" masculinity.  Even if you didn't find some explicit claims of sexual prowess or entitlement (and I think we would), I'd be very surprised if we couldn't build a case about images of aggression.  Who sponsors this stuff I'm not sure, but there are Black men there on the camera.

     Finally, if weaker:  I have run into several people online in the past with ghetto handles, claiming to be Black guys, going on about their size and appeal to White women to me.  Several of them talked to me in ways that are pretty distinctive -- either an actual Black dialect, or something passable as a slang that I would never bother to learn.

Overall:  I would be pretty surprised if we went out and researched a larger number of people (tell me where you finally get the grant for this one!) and didn't find any groupings where Black men actively take advantage of the "Once you've gone black, you can't go back" sales pitch.  But you're welcome to research the people or the secondary sources and online commentaries, too.

     One curious sidenote:  For some reason, I'm actually finding it easier to locate studies on stereotypes of Black women as sexually threatening, off the bat......  But we can't deport them for that, either!

[Sabre]

I will try to explain it with an example. When some muslims come to Spain to stay, they don't even bother in trying to meld with the new culture. Nop! Some will ramble and complain and call everyone racist and worse things due to why their daughters are "forced" to not cover their faces when they go to school. However if you go to their country? Hah! Good luck if you're a woman and refuse to cover yourself. Double moral? Yeah but then again it's proof that the two cultures are not very compatible at this point.

They feel there is no incentive to integrate.  It's a common problem among Muslim immigrants throughout Europe but not in America.  In America, a Muslim family and their children will more readily integrate and proclaim themselves a part of the same American society as their white, black or Hispanic neighbors because they believe such behavior will result in acceptance, social and financial opportunities, and among youths acceptance as just another peer with his or her own peculiarities that everyone has.

Muslim youth in Europe, however, have begun to feel they will not receive either acceptance, respect or job opportunities from their native European neighbors.  There's no real drive for them to be more Spanish, or German or Swedish.  Perhaps this is because of the lack of nationalism, so that compared to a boring 'normal' lifestyle with poor job opportunities they prefer a more interesting and proud lifestyle with poor job opportunities (which unfortunately tends to be destructive and inclusive).

[Iniquitous]

I am prepared to revise my position in light of new evidence, as any rational, responsible person must be. This might not be the thread for it, but if you have some good apples you're welcome to present them.

I could, if I were so inclined, send you a pm with several different religions that do not show a jealous deity (deities), deities that did not interfere with the affairs of humans. Discussing religion and explaining my own faith is something I have done on numerous occasions since I am an ordained High Priestess. However, I am a firm believer in people researching things on their own instead of taking the word of someone else. If you refuse to do the actual work on your own then you have already closed your mind to anything anyone else can say. That is your right.

[Maiz]

     Black guys claiming natural attraction or superiority for White women?  The point was more that we can't segregate or deport a group from the US -- at least not explicitly -- on the basis of a perceived generalized sexual threat or vaguely imagined cultural difference, to the best of my knowledge. 

      To be fair, it would have been academically cleaner to simply say claims of "big" and virile Black men -- and the use of that for sexual dialogue of one flavor or another -- are in broad circulation among many communities.  However, this is consistent with what I have read academically about Black men in certain hip-hop festivals approaching women in general.  It's been a couple years or more and I don't remember the author.  Edit: Did come across a couple examples of racial-sexual bravado in Lester (2007), Racialized Politics of Desire in Personal Ads (p. 24)./edit This is not to say that most or all Black guys would do this, of course -- but there are situations and groups where I seem to recall, it flies.  Show me that hardly any Black men ever come onto White women with claims of say cock size or some other "intrinsic" racial advantage, and I'll be very surprised.  But the point is more that a few Black guys do it vocally (quite as some White guys point to their family or European ancestry or American region as a cue to their supposed virtue, I would add) and here, it fits/feeds a threatening stereotype of the racial group.

     I think it's often reported that Black men playing up an image of tough, somewhat dismissive of women, and prone to violence is common in hip-hop circles doing "gangster" masculinity.  Even if you didn't find some explicit claims of sexual prowess or entitlement (and I think we would), I'd be very surprised if we couldn't build a case about images of aggression.  Who sponsors this stuff I'm not sure, but there are Black men there on the camera.

     Finally, if weaker:  I have run into several people online in the past with ghetto handles, claiming to be Black guys, going on about their size and appeal to White women to me.  Several of them talked to me in ways that are pretty distinctive -- either an actual Black dialect, or something passable as a slang that I would never bother to learn.

Overall:  I would be pretty surprised if we went out and researched a larger number of people (tell me where you finally get the grant for this one!) and didn't find any groupings where Black men actively take advantage of the "Once you've gone black, you can't go back" sales pitch.  But you're welcome to research the people or the secondary sources and online commentaries, too.

     One curious sidenote:  For some reason, I'm actually finding it easier to locate studies on stereotypes of Black women as sexually threatening, off the bat......  But we can't deport them for that, either!

What you're talking about is the "brute" stereotype. In American/Western culture it's one of the only ways that black men are viewed in media. It came up post civil war as a kind of black peril against ex-slaves.

As for the US...  We have plenty of cases where Black men go on about how White women are "naturally" destined for them on whichever physical or moral grounds

What cases are you talking about? Because I have never heard this in my life, and it seems to play on the fear of the "brute" caricature, that black men will steal/rape white women. See Birth of A nation and other media like that. Some black men might use this stereotype to their "advantage" but lbr it's a small minority and it's also blaming black men for the stereotypes placed on them.

[Oniya]

What cases are you talking about? Because I have never heard this in my life, and it seems to play on the fear of the "brute" caricature, that black men will steal/rape white women. See Birth of A nation and other media like that. Some black men might use this stereotype to their "advantage" but lbr it's a small minority and it's also blaming black men for the stereotypes placed on them.

lbr?

I do have to agree - in my entire life, I've known precisely two black men who used the 'black is better' line.  One was a complete ass, and probably would have been waving his dick-size around like a flag, even if he had been Caucasian.  (And reports were that he was severely exaggerating.  His numerous 'bed-post notches' were mostly because he couldn't keep a girl for longer than it took to get to know him.)  The other was actually a very partner-oriented man, who probably would have had the success he had regardless of race.  It's hard to express tone through the Internet, but he always voiced the line in a joking manner (as opposed to the jerk, who was always dead-serious about it.)

[Maiz]

lbr?

I do have to agree - in my entire life, I've known precisely two black men who used the 'black is better' line.  One was a complete ass, and probably would have been waving his dick-size around like a flag, even if he had been Caucasian.  (And reports were that he was severely exaggerating.  His numerous 'bed-post notches' were mostly because he couldn't keep a girl for longer than it took to get to know him.)  The other was actually a very partner-oriented man, who probably would have had the success he had regardless of race.  It's hard to express tone through the Internet, but he always voiced the line in a joking manner (as opposed to the jerk, who was always dead-serious about it.)

'let's be real'. slipped by.

But anyway, I think that it's a totally overstated thing, and is used to show/prove the stereotype and shut down discussions on race, as well as perpetuate racial myths.

[kylie]

Some black men might use this stereotype to their "advantage" but lbr it's a small minority and it's also blaming black men for the stereotypes placed on them.

The point that was relevant to the thread is not precisely how many do or don't.  It's enough for purposes of present discussion that a few do, and the society is set up so that a moral panic often results. 

     Do you actually think I was trying to argue that most or all Black guys do that in some way, or that Blacks should be punished more than anyone else for doing so??  If so, then you missed part of what I wrote.  (Fine, it happens.) 

     I was replying to Kirce.  By analogy:  She says a few Muslims are spotted claiming ownership of local women generally.  Presumably not every Muslim in France does so or even demands that women wear face covering, either.  Yet some people feel that immigration from Muslim areas to France should be curtailed partly because of the gender or sex approaches that certain Muslims adopt.  On the American side, some Black guys do bluster about their endowment or some supposed superiority linked to racial experience, whatever.  Some people feel that Black men must present a particular sexual threat, and deserve the high rate of policing they get, or maybe deserve to be segregated/somehow removed from the scene. 

     My response is:  Okay so...  Then would that really make excluding large numbers of Muslims, or Blacks (purportedly in order to avoid these situations ever happening), reasonable or practical?

     Perhaps Kirce was actually wishing more to rollback the clock, although I took her as almost arguing for deportation of a whole group.  In any event:  I was saying that it may not be so simple to break contact with a substantial group of people -- or what we typically call a "culture," which was her wording -- over such a claim about general, more or less "religious" incompatibility. 

[Oniya]

'let's be real'. slipped by.

'Sokay - Just hadn't run across that one before.  ;)

[kylie]

I do have to agree - in my entire life, I've known precisely two black men who used the 'black is better' line.  One was a complete ass, and probably would have been waving his dick-size around like a flag, even if he had been Caucasian.  (And reports were that he was severely exaggerating.  His numerous 'bed-post notches' were mostly because he couldn't keep a girl for longer than it took to get to know him.)  The other was actually a very partner-oriented man, who probably would have had the success he had regardless of race.  It's hard to express tone through the Internet, but he always voiced the line in a joking manner (as opposed to the jerk, who was always dead-serious about it.)

That's totally fine.  But this is the thing:  Where people are on a tripwire about the expected views of a given group to begin with, it only takes a few visible cases for someone -- often someone equally uncivil or equally flippant, as the case may be -- to start another moral panic.  I don't believe it's most of the Muslims in France claiming they own every woman in sight, either!  Still:  I would say there's fuel for panics about race in the US similar, in some ways, to the fuel for panics about "religion" or "ethnicity" (as French politics tend to label race/immigration issues - from reading Wacquant) in France. 

     I believe we could find a few vocal people in America saying more or less seriously (depending which talking head you pick), much as Kirce did:  Oh, we never should have mixed in these Blacks to begin with.  Wasn't that the start of all the trouble?  Or perhaps it's to imply, Oh if only we could isolate or deport them, this stuff could stop happening?  I may be jumping the gun on that last one; something about her cussing out a whole population really fired me up back there. 

     I really don't expect the broader American society will ultimately treat those suggestions as practical to act on -- no matter how confused or panicked many of us are generally.  In the US at least, at least those responses are often recognized as not changing much (for wishing to turn back the clock) or (for the others) ethically dangerous and probably illegal -- not to mention, the economic damage could be massive. 

[Kirce]

I was pointing out that the two cultures are not very compatible. It would be easier if the two shared the same values of democracy, women's rights, freedom of expression, religious freedom or sexual tolerance. I don't think that they do right now... which may explain why those tensions are appearing and the current reappearance of ultra-right parties on a few European governments.

[NatalieB]

I think what Kylie's saying, Kirce (and forgive me if I'm wrong Kylie) is that culture can be overstated in these cases as its a highly visible facet of a person.

You and I might not share the same values of democracy, women's rights, etc etc etc.  And that we are happy to chalk up to personal differences.  You either think I'm a facsist or a hippy depending on where my views fall in relation to yours.  However, as soon as its someone of a different culture then their difference in views becomes a "cultural" thing, and a problem that must be overcome.

Of course, Im not arguing that some cultures aren't more left wing/right wing/tolerant/intolerant than others.  But I doubt you'll find a muslim (to use your chosen grouping) male with views meaningfully more extreme than can be found amongst non-muslim males.  It's well within the deviation of the "native" population.

[kylie]

     Kirce, it seems too simple to me. (or too messy, depending on which way you turn the question).  Maybe we just need a better word than "culture" to get at the problem here.  "Culture" to me implies a very large, unified group of people.  If you say a whole "culture" is incompatible but I suspect those people are there for good reasons, then it sounds like wishful thinking or frustration or bluster to me...  I feel like okay, you're obviously vehemently against someone...  But if it's really a whole nationality or wave of immigrants you're marking as carriers of the problem, what can we do?  You presumably aren't going to forcibly indoctrinate immigrants across a whole district of Marseilles or wherever they're presently concentrated, and I'm skeptical that you could afford to deport all of those recent immigrants just to push out the "bad apples."

    To predict and deal with it, or even to just be critical of it, I think first we need to pin down exactly what the issue is.  I don't think all of the Muslims in France are into forcing marriage in these situations?  I'd be more likely to agree that there is a broader shared, international "culture" of limiting and subjugating women throughout much of the Judeo-Christian world at large - and other faiths, too (though it certainly doesn't always take the forms of stoning or force-marrying them -- e.g. often, it doesn't pay them equal wages).

    So when you knock it down to being "incompatible," I guess I'm not sure exactly how you want to define that so it could be useful.  What makes some Muslims, some Catholics, some whatever committed to forced marriage?  (I'm thinking a little less religion and a little more economic structure, geography, reasons given for marriage generally and even immigration laws.)   And perhaps, is it somehow possible to reach them and affect some change of heart/direction... I would prefer to say, without adopting the old "Clash of Civilizations"-style rhetoric of 'natural' differences between whole peoples/regions?

[Sabre]

I was pointing out that the two cultures are not very compatible. It would be easier if the two shared the same values of democracy, women's rights, freedom of expression, religious freedom or sexual tolerance. I don't think that they do right now... which may explain why those tensions are appearing and the current reappearance of ultra-right parties on a few European governments.

I would say I agree with you, but also say that the two cultures here are not what they are claiming to be.  'Muslim' culture, as the kind flourishing in many ghettos and cities in Europe, is akin to 'African liberation' culture of some Black Americans.  Which is to say they have a shallow resemblance to Africa or the Middle East and at its core the true culture that is clashing is an image-obsessed machismo gangster sub-culture and not a case of a piece of Morocco or Turkey or Pakistan being airlifted and then dropped into the middle of Madrid.  It's almost entirely home grown in Spain, Germany, France and other countries.

Its closest parallels are not Muslim vs Western faultlines (because there's nothing in Islam about a clean shaven teenager in jeans and t-shirt walking up to a female white stranger, soliciting her in public, then striking her across the face) but American street-gang culture versus an ethnic majority (which affect Black, Hispanic, East Asian, Jewish and many other ethnic groups).  You don't find them in mosque on Friday, and it's doubtful they can even read Arabic, but 'Islam' for them is a rallying point to form an anti-establishment sub-culture around.  Thus the only Islam topics they care about are those that support a thug lifestyle.  And those they get angry and up in arms about are those that insult them either directly as immigrants or indirectly as 'Muslims.'

These are anti-social youths that will crowd a street corner and perhaps mug you with knives at night, but not one of them will be able to answer questions like which surah in the Quran does Muhammad preach about the Byzantine victory over the Persians, or how many Ruku can the entirety of Surah An-Nisa be completed in.

You are right they are not very compatible with a Western Liberal culture, but neither is a Western far-right culture that believes in many of the same things.  Nor is their culture compatible with the cultures in Morocco or Turkey. 

[kylie]

     Natalie:  Yes, more or less.  I'm not versed enough on Muslim sects and localities to say whether/where there may be some local pockets that are really hyper misogynistic/awful.  I suspect there are.  Afghanistan (speaking broadly, not of all Afghans but if we must finger point somewhere) did not become infamous for no reason whatsoever, to the best of my understanding.  Assuming my understanding isn't warped completely beyond empirical reality, by the ubiquitous media feed, yes. 

     But then, I also suspect there would be a little room for hope if we could even shake out differences and precedents for change inside those pockets -- large or small.  When it comes to Kirce's examples, I'm just not seeing a direct connection with immigration policies for all of France.  Are they somehow only importing fundamentalists from the most troubled places possible?  I'd be surprised -- but even if so, then is there no hope for most of these people, or all? 

Poking at this a little more with the proverbial mischief stick:  I wonder if actually, immigration policies aren't also actively encouraging people to immigrate/reside as married couples.  Who really needs to force marriage, where Immigration will do it for you -- or where separation means losing income/savings, or facing possible deportation?

     I even think that it may be a more pronounced problem about forced marriage per se in more fundamentalist Islamic circles...  But I agree that people (erm, not only men!) vary across a spectrum of gender ideas within many communities and faiths.  I don't think the underlying problems are usually all that different from one society to the next.  I would guess:  Just the symptoms are.   

[Kirce]

I honestly stopped understanding your replies kylie, you seemed to speculate about what I meant or not, or seemed to assume things. Maybe it's a problem in my reception but I think that you're being a little nitpicky about my exact words. My very first post in this thread was an obvious outburst of disappointment, I think that it was understandable due to the nature of the links, but that was all.

And Sabre, that's true too!

[kylie]

I honestly stopped understanding your replies kylie, you seemed to speculate about what I meant or not, or seemed to assume things. Maybe it's a problem in my reception but I think that you're being a little nitpicky about my exact words. My very first post in this thread was an obvious outburst of disappointment, I think that it was understandable due to the nature of the links, but that was all.

And Sabre, that's true too!

Fair enough.  I just hope you might understand that:

1) When you say "culture" here, it sounds like talking about countries, regions, or very large numbers of people to me.

2) When you say "asshole phase", I thought well, you must believe we're morally superior -- so much more "advanced" in soooo many ways. 

Perhaps you meant it to be more limited and more sarcastic.  It doesn't always come through in text, if so...  I have traveled in Muslim countries and studied a little colonial history.  I know from experience these aren't all clueless barbarians.  I don't think the West is as thoroughly superior as stories of "development" and "liberation" suggest.  Even on marriage: I'm not convinced that single women have easy lives in the present US.   

So that seemed mean and thoughtless to me.  That's all.

[Maiz]

I was pointing out that the two cultures are not very compatible. It would be easier if the two shared the same values of democracy, women's rights, freedom of expression, religious freedom or sexual tolerance. I don't think that they do right now... which may explain why those tensions are appearing and the current reappearance of ultra-right parties on a few European governments.

Your point of cultural incompatibility is not backed by anything. Women's rights are laughable in the "west". There's sexism and misogyny in all over the world. The tools of sexism and misogyny are different, but in the end women are still being killed and oppressed. Democracy in "eastern" countries is almost always thwarted by the "west" if they ever vote in someone who won't agree with "western" governments. See South America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, etc. There is a lack of religious freedom and freedom of expression in the "west" as well (see the burqa ban in France), as well as sexual tolerance (see every victim of rape/sexual assault who was blamed for their assault). Not to mention many attitudes are leftovers from colonial rule, which didn't end that long ago.

The division between us and them is a social construct.

[Kirce]

Wow, I'm totally off this thread.

[Samnell]

I could, if I were so inclined, send you a pm with several different religions that do not show a jealous deity (deities), deities that did not interfere with the affairs of humans. Discussing religion and explaining my own faith is something I have done on numerous occasions since I am an ordained High Priestess. However, I am a firm believer in people researching things on their own instead of taking the word of someone else. If you refuse to do the actual work on your own then you have already closed your mind to anything anyone else can say. That is your right.

Ah I see, I asked you to support your position so now I am a raving dogmatist. I really ought to have seen that one coming. Fair enough. It transpires I've done the research and every religion I've found is the same superstition and horrors in different wrappers. We'd be better off if they all closed up shop tomorrow.