Well, yes and no. Sorry, I’m studying political violence and terrorism for my MA, and have been living in Jerusalem for the last two years, so I always end up responding to these assumptions.

Jerusalem is home to both observant Muslims and Orthodox/Ultra-Orthodox Jews. The Jewish community has basically the same modesty standards as the Muslims community (with the exception of hair covering, which Jewish women aren’t supposed to do until marriage); has arranged marriages (no polygamy); and basically everyone is married by the ages of 21 or 22. I find both communities equally likely to gawk, cat-call, hiss, or otherwise call attention to my cleavage, knees, or *gasp* bare shoulders! As opposed to the secular communities here, who take no more notice of me than American men back home do. It’s simply a novelty in these communities to see a woman not draped in fabric. I don’t know what the porn accumulation rate is for the Jewish community, but they have the same internet access as everyone else, so…

You’re probably thinking, “Yeah, but the Jewish communities aren’t producing terrorists”: While the recent actions of extreme Jewish groups don’t add up to terrorism, they proved they were perfectly capable of it in the past. Did you know Tel Aviv’s first sex-toy shop was burned down by a Haredi group?

As to the economic background of Islamic terrorists, there’s a lot of debate on that. The founders and leaders of their organizations, along with many of their underlings, tend to be university educated and from decent families (decent here meaning ‘at least middle class’). There’s such a mix of educated men and desperate-to-do-anything men in these organizations, I don’t think anyone can conclude that the ratio tips one way or the other.

This concludes your terrorism interlude for the day; you may now return to your regularly scheduled topics, and thanks for letting me hijack (heh) your thread.

ROFL…
…
…
Damn, I kind of want to see that now. ^_^;
Don’t know if one could wank to it, but it would definitely be entertaining to watch!

There and everywhere else. You’ll find a high volume of porn in every part of the world where it can be distributed with relative ease. In those very few places where it isn’t, you’ll find a high volume of recreational sex (paid or otherwise). I would expect there to be a high volume of porn anywhere there are a considerable number of barriers (cultural, social, religious, etc) between a man’s desire to have sex and a woman he can do so with.

On another note, every time I hear that “reward of 72 virgins” bit, I have the exact same thought (born largely of having popped the cherries of 3 different girlfriends in my younger days):

If I die and go to heaven, and there’s some angel there offering me 72 virgins as a reward for having lived a good life, I’m going to immediately raise my hand…

“Excuse me, is there any way I can exchange the 72 virgins for 2 or 3 grownups who know what the hell they’re doing?”

Been there, done that, was mostly unpleasant for all involved (never enjoyed an orgasm less in my life, nor can I see how anyone not a mysogynist that enjoys seeing a girl one presumably cares for in pain ever would.)

I read that she was gay and married her long-time gay male friend. I also read that she spent years denying that she equated all sex with rape. I’ve never read her books (not sure I care enough to start either), but I wonder if people who are uncomfortable with controversy and sexuality are deliberately misrepresenting her writing, much like they did with Camille Paglia.

To the original point, I wonder if she was so deeply traumatized by some event that she would fear/reject sex, or if she just felt that way from a unique quirk of personality. Either way, it is unfortunate that the cross individuals bear become the cross everyone must bear when the moralists get their way.

So they quote her expecting that this will help carry their message to those who really are liberals. Nothing like quoting One Of Their Own, ya know?

Sort of like the way that Democrats, during the debt ceiling fight, started quoting Ronald Reagan and playing recordings of him. It wasn’t because these Democrats had suddenly decided that the Gipper was a lefty liberal, but because SURELY Republicans would have to agree with Saint Reagan!

It didn’t work. Well, at least Reagan really was a conservative. Dworkin wasn’t (though I’ve run into liberals who assume she was), nor was she a liberal (though plenty of conservatives assume she was).

Left and right, liberal and conservative, these can be useful if one avoids falling into a few simple traps, like the idea that one is either ALL LEFT or ALL RIGHT. Hardly anybody is. It isn’t even right to say that…

Meh, this is getting long. If anybody’s interested, I’ll continue. Since I have advanced degrees in Absolutely Nothing, you’ll just have to decide for yourself if I make sense. I certainly can’t back it up with any formally-recognized Expertise.