Lola Small

I'm always quite uncomfortable with the idea that by virtue of utilising modern tools that a movement therein takes the mantra of modern. If the goal of a movement is to convince a population that islamic conservative governance is the best structure, then sending up smoke signals is hardly the best option. Rather the use of facebook is simply a natural adaptation to the current century as oppose to a profession of modernity and globalisation. I regard these types of fundamentalist movements as being very similar in two ways: (hindu nationalism, Christian and islamic fundamentalism and even jewish orthodoxy). Firstly, rampant machoism: these groups seem to be full of males determined to subjugate women as an enduring test of their manhood. If they can subjugate women, they can subjugate other men. Secondly, it's a sort of sexual fantasy, the obsession with the naughty or prohibited. If you ban all of these modern ideas or ideas imposed by some other externality etc then it makes doing them all the more exciting. Having the freedom not to be judged almost removes the kink. Not restricted to any one culture mind. The permissive so to speak breeds boredom. In this respect, these movements are not new but the span of many years of history. Women and the amount of them have since the age of monotheism (and probably before) been seen as a phallic symbols of virility and human beings are messy creatures prone to bad behaviour regardless of that which is mandated against.