Thursday, October 29, 2009

'Cos it's true... I do, I do, I do, I do, I do...

ABBA’s lyrics have resonated in another way since I attended Keysar Trad’s talk on polygamy last month at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas here in Sydney. Arriving sodden at the steps of the Opera House one languid and drizzly Saturday morning, I collected my delegate pass and wandered over to the Studio theatre to hear Mr Trad; first speaker of the festival, former interpreter for the outrageously divisive Sheik Taj El-Din Hilaly, and founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia.

Entitled Polygamy and other Islamic values are good for Australia, it is not within the realm of common sense that Mr Trad felt he would gain acolytes on this occasion. Indeed, the Festival’s organisers might have just been cunning in placing him as the first speaker on the first day, since almost anything with Islam in the title is sure to hasten disparagement and denigration in our irreligious, secular and promiscuous society. With the amount of media vitriol previously directed at Mr Trad, he must also have known he’d walk onto that stage a marked man. Unlikely as it was that a middle-class crowd of Sydneysiders would become openly hostile, question time assured a few heated exchanges.

The premise was as follows: In a society that protects all forms of intimate relations amongst consenting adults (excepting incest), why do we criminalise a branch of those legal relations when a person seeks to make a formal commitment? Such relations are only criminalised if one seeks to formalise them, if not, they are perfectly legal whether as boyfriend(s)/girlfriend(s) or de facto or as casual intimacy, they are only crimes if we make the commitment of a formal partnerships.

Regrettably, the proposed evidence for the argument was, putting it diplomatically, inadmissible.

After a significant swathe of precedents originating almost exclusively from scripture, it was put to us that polygamy should not be ridiculed as long as prostitution exists in the West. It’s tedious and tiresome to hear the holy texts quoted, and scant credence can be given to the claim that Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. Who believes that? And should the early Jews, Christians, Muslims or followers of any other faith have practised polygamy a millennium ago, that is hardly logical reasoning to continue any cultural tradition. As to prostitution, no civilisation worth its mettle has not had sex-industry workers toiling for the greater good alongside its politicians, scholars, scientists and artists.

Metering out anecdote and personal opinion does not constitute a sound method by which to influence and persuade. And for the majority among us, holy texts are anthologies of the fantastical, the fabulous, and the simply untrue.

As for "societies that practise monogamy and clandestine relations", they are demonstrably not, as Mr Trad, put it,"delusional." Monogamy is certainly not a perfect modus operandi for all. It is a manner in which millions of people with different beliefs and values take on, for better or for worse, with or without official sanction of the church, temple or mosque. Besides, a single fertile male and a single fertile female are the minimum ingredients required to procreate; if begetting children was the sole reason for our existence, mathematically two provides less relationship permutations that three, four and more. Further, no proof was offered that infidelity is less present in polygamous than monogamous relations. Why complicate the recipe by adding unwanted complexity into the mixture? Keep it simple.

After attempting to explain the shortcoming for one-on-one liaisons, we learn that Mohammed came upon the solution: polygyny. Quite naturally, the audience must’ve felt duped. Polgyny, the act of a male entering into conjugal relationships with more than one woman, was the only real thing on offer here. Its counteroffer, polyandry, where a woman possesses more than one husband, was not on the agenda. The reason for this? Scripture. More like bollocks. Further, apparently there are medical reasons that women should be disallowed from entering into polygamous relationships. What they might be, well, we weren’t to discover.

There are too many educated, independent and free-thinking women in today’s society to really bother any further with the remainder of Mr Trad’s speech. It was supposed to be a dangerous topic, however, inanity wasn’t what the audience had looked forward to. Well, maybe just a little.

As Mr Trad dug himself a deeper hole with the shovels of illogical anachronism and ancient mythology, he didn’t seem too bothered. Digging a small trench along the way, he even suggested the sexual proclivities of men predispose them to polygamy, and that women lose their libido if left to languish in monogamy. You had to wonder if the man remembered that question and answer time would inevitably follow.

But it should be stated: there is a sound, ethical argument for polygamy. Better still, polyamory, having a number of sexual partners at the same time, appears the egalitarian and just path down which to stroll. There might just be enough love to go around, without anyone belonging to another by law.

Keysar Trad's full speech is here: Supporting the right of women to choose

[It's worth noting, Keysar Trad is no fire-breathing monster. There are certainly attempts in the Australian media to cast the man as totally objectionable and offensive, which often detract from what he actually says. His ideas are more nonsensical than offensive, and it doesn't pay the smug, the highly literate and the University-educated to denigrate him. In public he has a warm smile and is approachable. He does believe what he puts forward, and since very few of us would show the courage to stand by our convictions under such scrutiny, I'll at least give him the benefit of an open mind. Even if I did have the odd wry smile myself during his speech. Vive la difference, I guess - just don't elect the man into office.]

No comments: