Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Muhammad and the Thighing of Aisha

There's been an interesting debate in recent years between Christian apologists and Westernized Muslim apologists over the Islamic practice of "thighing," which involves a Muslim (more specifically, Muhammad) putting his penis between the thighs of a virgin (or a woman during her monthly period) and moving back and forth until he ejaculates.

As usual, Christian apologists got this accusation from Muslim scholars, who refer to the practice in their fatwas (legal rulings by Islamic scholars). The problem is that, whenever we link to a fatwa discussing the Islamic practice of thighing, Westernized Muslims complain to the fatwa site administrators, and the administrators then remove the fatwa. Once the fatwa is removed, Westernized Muslims accuse us of inventing the issue of thighing in order to attack Muhammad!

Just so there's no denying the fact that Muslim scholars issue such rulings, here's a screenshot of a fatwa on thighing that is still available at Islam Web (though it may be taken down once this article circulates):

But this won't convince Westernized Muslim apologists, who, despite their profound ignorance of their own sources, nevertheless believe that they know more about Islam than their scholars and jurists. They will settle for nothing less than a clear Qur'an statement declaring: "Thus saith Allah on the issue of thighing . . .," and even here they would simply reinterpret the passage!

For those of us who are more balanced in our approach and less obsessed with defending Muhammad at all costs, the Muslim sources provide abundant material on the issue of thighing. In order to avoid any accusations of deception, however, I will (1) limit myself to narrations that are available online for everyone to read, and (2) proceed step by step, showing carefully how Muslim scholars arrive at their conclusions.

First, we need to keep in mind that the Muslim sources do not use the word "thighing." Instead, they refer to a practice that is usually translated into English as "fondling" or "playing." The term is used of some sort of sexual practice with virgins and with women during menses (when sex is forbidden, according to Qur'an 2:222). Here are two examples (there are plenty more):
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Number 17:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: When I got married, Allah's Apostle said to me, "What type of lady have you married?" I replied, "I have married a matron.' He said, "Why, don't you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?" Jabir also said: Allah's Apostle said, "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?" (Available online here.)

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Number 298:
Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in Itikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses). (Available online here.)
Notice that Muhammad found the practice of "fondling" virgins preferable to sex with adult women.

Second, Muhammad used to do something that would leave semen on his clothes. Here are two narrations (again, there are plenty more):
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Number 231:
Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar: I asked 'Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, "I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah's Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible." (Available online here.)

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Number 233:
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them. (Available online here.)
What was Muhammad doing that left semen all over his clothes? Since Muhammad condemned both masturbation and coitus interruptus (removing the penis from a woman before ejaculation), this leaves Westernized Muslim apologists to argue that Muhammad's semen marks were the result of nocturnal emissions (wet dreams). But Muhammad had far, far too much sex to have nocturnal emissions.
Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 1, Number 268: Narrated Qatada: Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)." And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven). (Available online here.)

Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 7, Number 142: Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet used to pass by (have sexual relation with) all his wives in one night, and at that time he had nine wives. (Available online here.)
Even with so many wives, Muhammad got in trouble for having sex with his slave-girl, Mary the Copt.

So the semen on Muhammad's clothes didn't result from masturbation, coitus interruptus, or nocturnal emissions. Via the process of elimination, that leaves us with some sort of sexual practice with his wives, which didn't involve masturbation, but also didn't involve penetration. Hence, Muhammad must have been using his wives' bodies to pleasure himself. Apart from penetration, how did Muhammad use his wives' bodies to satisfy his sexual urges? Muslim scholars have a simple answer that explains all of the data: Muhammad practiced "thighing."

Moreover, since Muhammad found the practice of thighing virgins preferable to sex with grown women (as we saw in Sahih al-Bukhari), he must have had some experience with thighing virgins. Muhammad married Aisha when she was six years old, but didn't consummate the marriage until she was nine years old. This three-year period between marriage and consummation must have been the time when he practiced thighing (unless our Muslim friends want to argue that he practiced thighing with a different virgin).

Of course, if Westernized Muslim apologists want to argue that Muhammad didn't practice thighing, they're free to explain the data in some other way. They merely need to tell us (a) what the practice of "fondling" involved, (b) what Muhammad was doing that left semen all over his clothes, and (c) why Muslim scholars have concluded that Muhammad practiced thighing. If they can explain these issues successfully, I suppose we'll have to drop the issue of thighing.

In the meantime, it's a bit disingenuous for Westernized Muslim apologists to accuse us of deception, when we only started drawing attention to "thighing" because Muslim scholars were talking about it. When we factor in the evidence from the Hadith, which is entirely consistent with thighing and inexplicable without it, we can only conclude that Muslim scholars who describe this early Islamic practice are absolutely correct.

Alternatively, Westernized Muslim apologists might want to take an indirect approach, by arguing that Muhammad couldn't have practiced thighing, since Muhammad is the pattern of conduct for all men (Qur'an 33:21), and "thighing" a little girl obviously isn't something that Islam's highest pattern of conduct would do. But let's face it. Muhammad (1) had sex with a prepubescent girl, (2) had sex with nearly a dozen women in one day, (3) had sex with his slave-girl in his wife's bed, (4) married the divorced wife of his own adopted son, (5) married a woman after having her husband tortured and killed, (6) allowed his followers to rape their female captives, (7) allowed his followers to hire prostitutes, and (8) promised his followers a paradise of eternal erections, which they will use to endlessly deflower their virgins. If Muslims want to argue that a man who did and taught all of this simply couldn't put his penis between his child-bride's legs, we'll have to wait patiently for their proof.


Sisgp said...

I was going to comment, but I'm simply speechless!


Termin80r said...

What a Filthy person he was? and people pray to such sex-maniacs. may our risen lord and saviour guide whole of these followers out of adultery and filthiness...

Christlike said...

Musllims have blasphemed greatly against God, thank God they have a unique name, Allah

Anonymous said...

You should do a quick blog about this, how blonde girls are special treat for Muslim men;


...and remind everyone that Muhammad enticed his men, and some of them were shocked, by telling them they should attack Europe to get BLONDE GIRLS. (more proof Muhammad was NOT a prophet);


Here is more proof that Muslims LOVE THEIR BLONDE women (Western Blonde girl treated like goddess and sex object while visiting the Egyptian Pyramids). This is why Muhammad tempted his men with blonde girls as booty to follow his false prophethood;


Anonymous said...

“Muhammad… promised his followers a paradise of eternal erections, which they will use to endlessly deflower their virgins.”

How is this possible if we are just spirits in the afterlife without a physical body?

As the Jesus of the original true Gospels says,

“The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage” Luke 20:34-35

Muhammad, that great adulterer/fornicator’s promise of endless adultery/fornication in the afterlife (if this is forbidden on earth, why would it be allowed in heaven?) shows that he was just another carnal, self-serving criminal/gangster who sowed to the flesh and gained the things of this world (worldly gain) rather than sowing to the spirit to gain eternal life.

…for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption (dead end), but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap eternal life. Galatians 6:8

Surely the penny has to eventually drop for some of these Muslims in regard to the true identity/criminal nature of this so-called 'prophet' that they are blindly following. Eventually they must have to wake up to themselves and realise what is going on. They surely could not be that dumb.

David Wood said...


Resurrection is physical, according to both Christianity and Islam.

Unknown said...

Great article, I will save this post for use it later while talking with Muslims, thanks David.

kleitman2@aol.com said...

His predilictions are interestingly similar to the infamous cult leaders David Koresh and Jim Jones (of the Jonestown Massacre, where he convinced his followers to drink poisoned Koolade).

Both of those men had predilictions for both the wives of their followers and for little girls.

Just sayin.

Anonymous said...

David you said,

"Resurrection is physical, according to both Christianity and Islam."

I stand corrected, but there will be nothing like the Islamic heaven, since God's purpose from the start (before the fall. Genesis 3) for creating male and female (Genesis 1:27) in the first place, is for them to get married to one person and form a single family unit (Genesis 2:24).

And after all is said and done, the curse (Genesis 3:17) will be no more (Revelation 22:3) and there will be a new heaven and earth (Revelation 21:1) with the old one gone (2Peter 3:13) and everything back to the original good creation (Revelation 21:4), with nothing evil in it. So there obviously won’t be anything like the Islamic heaven in existence.

David Wood said...


MrGreen said...

Hi everyone, I have to start by saying I am a Muslim (shiia) and I believe in God and prophet Muhamad (PBUH) and Prophet Jeasus(PBUH).
Regarding this Article. Many Muslim do not take Sahih Bokhori as an official "Hadith-religous text" book. as it is an extremely corrupt book.
the only way to clarify is to compare with the Quran. And In Quran It directly says maximum number of wives at the same time is 4 but it says a man has to take first wife permit to marry second and so on. It is true that Prophet Got married to about 9 women but they were not at the same time frame. also Aisha is a controversial figure as She cause a lot of mischief and her records has no legitimacy. as she caused bloodshed between Muslims.
I have to admit Many Sunni Muslims regard this "sahih Bokhori and sahih Muslim" as legitimate but honestly it is as legitimate as harry potter books.
you need to study way more about this issue to conclude at any point.

Danny L. Newton said...

I wonder if Mr. Green was channeling the Green Prophet.

Bart said...

Mr Gree3n asserts "sahih Bokhori and sahih Muslim" are unreliable
Yet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith
"Bukhari's collection is considered by many traditional religious scholars as the most reliable." Maybe Mr green should try editing the Wikipedia entry to assert that most muslims dont believe this and see what Muslims think of that?
Furthermore ignoring the above two as unreliable

Lists SIX additional sources and continues "The majority view affirms the reliability of these hadiths. If the hadiths and historians are to be trusted, then Mohammed, at around 53 years old, did have sex with a nine year old girl. "

He offers a scorecard with 21 strong references 7 weaker ones and only 1 counter reference al tyabari ( which by the way also has 3 of the weaker references)

Bart said...

subsequent to Mr Green I note he mentions being a shia muslim. Note Sunni Muslims are more likely to value hadith.A study conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2010 and released January 2011[10] found that there are 1.62 billion Muslims around the world, and it is estimated that the Sunni population is between 75% and 90%.[11] Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_Islam
Kutub al-Sittah are six books containing collections of hadiths. Most Sunni Muslims accept the hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim as the most authentic (sahih, or correct), and while accepting all hadiths verified as authentic.
Shias like Mr Green prefer hadith attributed to the Ahl al-Bayt and close associates, and have their own separate collection of hadiths.[36][37] Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam#Hadith
The Shi'a view of Aisha is generally unfavourable. This is primarily due to what they see as her contempt for the Ahl al-Bayt

Donna Morrow said...

I just want to say that when Mr. Green came here to offer a Muslim's viewpoint, some of you displayed impolite, malicious attitudes. How do you ever expect to win him to the Lord if you act hatefully?

Disagree with him, sure, but use an attitude that Jesus would approve of. At the very least, be as polite as Mr Green is.

Donna Morrow

Donna Morrow said...

I just want to say something here. Mr Green was kind enough to share his opinion in a respectful manner, and the attitudes of some of the comments to him were not what Jesus would have approved of.

Why do people need to be hateful when they disagree about religion? ARE you all trying to win Mr Green to the Lord Jesus, or are you just looking for a chance to sneer at him? Where is your love for his soul? Mr Green, I apologize for the wrong attitudes expressed here, Sir.

Donna Morrow

Bart said...

Donna Morrow . there have been TWO posters since Mr Green and yourself. One poster posted a one line comment. I posted two longer posts. You then suggested that SOME posters have been nasty . Your actual words were
"some of you displayed impolite, malicious attitudes."

Some means more than one so given there were only TWO and "some" means plural could you please point out where any of MY posts were impolite and malicious?

Donna Morrow said...

Hello Bert,

Thanks for your correction. First of all, I didn't mean to post twice. My Firefox browser went into a state of "Not Responding," and I didn't realize both posts went through.

In rereading these posts, I see only one that's offensive. I did not say YOU. I didn't single out anyone. My comment was made with future Muslims browsing the net in mind, as well as Mr Green's feelings.

I came here from a Facebook post someone had made with an image of 10 points where the Qur'an encouraged rape, physical abuse of wives and female slaves, stealing from unbelievers, and so on. In searching the Qur'an scriptures for accuracy that had been given in the post, I saw that none of them were correct according to http://quran.com/.

Then, I learned that the Qur'an has multiple translations. The version used at http://quran.com/ does not have the beat/scourge instruction is it, but it does say to strike a wife as a last resort.

I came here in an indignant frame of mind. No one should purposely misquote scripture or reference books in order to make themselves appear correct. Not here, but in the Facebook post, I mean.

After reading so many mean comments and slurs on Facebook, coming from Christians, I came here and saw "I wonder if Mr. Green was channeling the Green Prophet." And that was my tipping point.

I apologize to anyone I offended. I'm just thinking, how can Christians win Muslims when so many of them backbite and seem so comment to score points? That won't change anyone's heart.

It's no wonder that unbelievers say we are hypocrites, and they don't want what we have. Does anyone believe that Jesus approves of the bad attitudes Christians use when they rebut to win an argument, rather than to share truth?

So, that's where my head was when I posted here. I did not read every post here. I skimmed most of them. So I hope you will forgive my inaccurate assumption.

Apostolicfdn said...

Donna Morrow...I grew up in Pakistan...have you ever lived there? If you haven't... go live there as a Christian and see how "polite" they are to you when you share your opinion about Christianity. I do not want to make this a long post but believe me...when it comes to western muslims they have a whole new way of interpreting the koran. Ex. Western muslims say Jesus is a prophet etc and we respect him. In Pakistan they curse the name of Jesus and they do not respect him. Why the disconnect? Who am I going to believe? White washed muslims?

Bart said...

Donna Morrow
If you are apologising for offending me, and are sincerely sorry I accept that apology. In fact Christianity suggests that all repentant sinners are forgiven. But you still have not answered my question. If you can show where I was malicious please do so because I can assure I beat no malice against anyone who is discussing with me in a peaceful manner.
Now let us suppose someone -not necessarily YOU but I will assume "you" is offensive.
In fact even if I totally disagree with you and you do offend me I still think you should be allowed to say what offends me. Although I would prefer if you did not offend me with your words I will defend your right to say them and hope you will engage and change your mind or admit if you are wrong.
Likewise if i make any mistake I too should correct it and I should not offend you even if it was not intentional.
In this way we both have a fair hearing and a level playing field and can proceed in a just manner. We should be fair and honest in our dealings with each other and this is important because peace is built on justice.

Unknown said...

You are pushing the evidence. You can only maintain that Mohamed Married a 9 y/o and have a good weapon supported by evidence. As for fondling or whatever, married couples do that. The "playing" thing, younger people tend to be more playful. As for the marriage at the age of 9, surrounding evidence invalidates the possibility of that occurrence. Other "facts" are based on hadith and not coran, so its authenticity can always be in dispute, regardless of who give that opinion. You folks are just hateful, you can make anything or anyone sound disgusting. Insults, and hateful speech. That is not a way to dispute Islam. It has many logical flaws of its own. Being disgusting just turns you into a hateful human being. I learned to open my mind with science and data, not this filthy crap of yours

Bart said...

Jake Dones says It has many logical flaws of its own. but he does not supply any?
He also claims "As for fondling or whatever, married couples do that." But this is the point! TODAY older men are marrying six year olds and nine year olds and doing that. saying "wee they are married" does not make it right does it? And they are doing it based on it being the right and acceptable thing to do based on Islamic tradition. So if you think the tradition and the Hadiths are wrong you should say so! You should say that any Imam supporting this behaviour is wrong if you claim it is in fact wrong. You should also claim that any of the 24 Hadiths are wrong and all other sources from those Isnads are ALL also in doubt or wrong if you believe these Hadiths to be wrong. so do you say that the Hadiths are wrong? I do not believe you will. And wher is your other evidence that the ages of six and nine are wrong?

Oh My Gawd said...

Females are only sex toys to these males supremacists. But I don't know which is more revolting, thighing of infants or Muhammad's semen on his pants! Both are too disgusting to contemplate.

Unknown said...

Back then they wouldn't count a woman's age until they hit puberty so if they said she married him at 9 it means she hit puberty 9 years before the marriage. This is proven by the timeline of history where Abu bakr's first daughter (from his previous marriage) was 29 when the prophet Mohommad (saw) married Aisha and they had 10 yrs age gap between them (aisha and her step sister- proven historically) so Aisha wouldve been atleast 19 when she married the prophet Mohammad

Peacefinder said...

The dead have a continued and conscious
existence of a kind in the grave.

Muslims believe that, upon dieing,
a person enters an intermediate phase of life
between death and resurrection.

Many events take place in this new "world",
such as the "trial" of the grave,
where everyone will be questioned by angels
about their religion, prophet, and Lord.

The grave is a garden of paradise or a pit of hell;
angels of mercy visit the souls of believers
and angels of punishment come for the unbelievers.

you feel Hear more in this way it is written.

Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh is born in
"the year of the Elephant". 570 AD

Muhammad marries his wealthy
twice-divorced distant cousin, Khadijah,

who later becomes his first follower.

She had already borne two sons and a daughter
from her previous marriages,
and the union between her and the "insignificant" Muhammad
is a controversial one which almost leads to bloodshed 595 AD

For the first time,613 AD
Muhammad begins to preach Islam publicly in Mecca.
His preaching is met with skepticism,and he is accused
of plagiarizing the “tales of the ancients”.

One of his most sternest of critics is his own uncle,
Abu Lahab, who is cursed by name in the Qur'an.

The Meccans ask for miracles, but Muhammad gives them none.


SEE THIS (A Near Idea Of What and who he was)
YEAR U READ IN 2015 (Mindset´s Defrent NOW)

YEAR 570 595 613
BORN Life make Him Poor
TIME to Build A Future Eyes see

Unknown said...

Mohammed seems like a pretty considerate guy to wait years before doing sex, I bet he did not want to do sex with Aisha until she was 18 and would have been fine thighing until then but Aisha's dad Abu Bakr probably heard about it and got mad and pressured him to do it.

Unknown said...

Nothing more than masturbation.

Unknown said...

you are very good at twisting hadith, 1st might i say for a Christian; you have a high standard for a prophet (for a Christian) ,seeing as your prophets also had concubines and also war, sex slaves ONLY Differance your Biblical prophets commited Adulury & Commited Incest (according to your bible).. now i have have seen your Videos, it is pathetic you twist hadith
the Actual Hadith:
Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah:
My father died and left seven or nine girls and I married a matron. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said to me, "O Jabir! Have you married?" I said, "Yes." He said, "A virgin or a matron?" I replied, "A matron." he said, "Why not a virgin, so that you might play with her and she with you, and you might amuse her and she amuse you." I said, " `Abdullah (my father) died and left girls, and I dislike to marry a girl like them, so I married a lady (matron) so that she may look after them." On that he said, "May Allah bless you," or "That is good."

Vol. 7, Book 64, Hadith 280

there is nothing wrong with that hadith , if anything it Show marrage at a young age was the Norm as it was during Jesus time (Mary 12 year -Joseph 90 years old)

Bart said...

Adam channel misses the point.
1. Christianity or Judaism does refer to the occasional instances of insest or sex with children but IT CONDEMNS SUCH ACTS. It does not hold them up as an example to be copied
2. christianity has a record of at least 1800 years against sex between children and adults.
3.There in NO EVIDENCE of Mary being 12 and Joseph being 90 from any reference in the six centuries before Mohammad and christian and Islamic references ALL SAY Mary was a virgin i.e. she did not have sex with Joseph so the example isnt valid.

Unknown said...

yup idiot motherless pig David wood.you get your pants when when debate with someone.
tell me what you want to prove here?
i do not get ant thing out of what you are copying from other palaces..does not make any sense.

you are discussing some one personal life and slandering him

tell me whats wrong here?????????
also look at your life?????????? what a filth you are

itemabu said...

I think, there is another possibility explaining the cloth full of cement. Muhammad was reported to be witched so that he thought the he had sex with his wives while actually he did not. So he might wet his clothes during his insanity. LOL

McKenzie said...

Now, especially for you Shia out there who try to discredit Bukhari, let is look at the situation from the Quranic perspective:

Normally, there is a waiting period for a divorced woman, (in case she may be pregnant), before she can remarry. The Quran waives this waiting period or "Iddat" if the girl has not yet reached puberty - (her montly ovulation cycle):

{ وَٱللاَّئِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ ٱلْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاَثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَٱللاَّئِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلاَتُ ٱلأَحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ وَمَن يَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِ يُسْراً }

(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months.

Another man asked: “what is the waiting period for those women who are pregnant?” (And for those with child) i.e. those who are pregnant, (their period) their waiting period (shall be till they bring forth their burden) their child. (And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah) and whoever fears Allah regarding what he commands him, (He maketh his course easy for him) He makes his matter easy; and it is also said this means: He will help him to worship Him well.

So we see that this idea that sex with toddlers is not just a Sunni perspective but is a Shia perspective as well, as it is in the Quran itself.

A well known Arab women's rights activist, Ghada Jamsheer, recently confronted the issue on a popular Arab talk show. She exposed how the concept of mutah and misyar marriage, (temporary marriage, Shia version and Sunni version), were being used to pass around children, enen babys, from Muslim man to Muslim man as sex toys. You can find the video on YouTube and on MemriTV websites. There are also transcripts. This is a real issue folks.

I don't think there was every anyone in the history of the world that was as sick and perverted as the so-called "prophet" Mohammad.

truthseeker said...

i have just found that thighing is called intercrural sex .pl see wikipedia.
Intercrural sex (from inter- and Latin crura, "legs"), also known as femoral/interfemoral sex/intercourse, is a type of non-penetrative sex, in which a male places the penis between the receiving partner's thighs (often with lubrication[1]), and thrusts to create friction.
Male homosexuality[edit]
See also: Homosexuality in ancient Greece
Intercrural intercourse was a common outlet for pederasty in ancient Greece,[citation needed] because anal sex was considered demeaning to the receiving partner.[7] The Ancient Greek term for this practice was d?aµ????e?? diamerizein ("to do [something] between the thighs").[8]The historian Kenneth Dover wrote about this extensively in his book Greek Homosexuality (1978), whence current theories on the subject of sex between men in Ancient Greece derive.[9]

Joan Roughgarden refers to standing, face-to-face intercrural intercourse as the "gay male missionary position" of Ancient Greece in a section of her
book Evolution's Rainbow (2004), which draws heavily on Dover.[10]
Intercrural sex among men who have sex with men (MSM) is sometimes known as the "Princeton First-Year", the "Oxford Style", the "Oxford rub", or the "Ivy League rub", and is a form of same-gender frottage, or colloquially "frot".[11][12] The synonyms referring to schools are used to describe "horny young men during the long, cold winters away at all-boys schools", especially in the 19th century.[12]
Intercrural sex has been proposed as an important part of the sexual lives of a handful of notable historical figures known or thought to have been homosexual or bisexual. According to his biographer Richard Ellmann, Oscar Wilde was introduced to intercrural sex by Robert Baldwin Ross, and it appears to have been his preferred activity, even over oral sex.[13] Shaka Zulu is speculated to have encouraged intercrural sex among his troops to "create intimacy and loyalty."[14] Quotes attributed to the Cynic philosophers regarding Alexander the Great, made both during and after his lifetime, seem to presume intercrural sex between Alexander and Hephaestion.[15] Similarly, comments made by a bed mate about Abraham Lincoln's thighs led to speculation of intercrural sex between the two in C. A. Tripp's recent The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln.[16]
It has been subject to various historical sodomy laws and religious restrictions enacted mostly by Christianity.[17] Intercrural sex appears to have been common during the medieval era; for example, a contemporary document titled the "Altercatio Ganimedis et Helene" (The Debate of Helen and Ganymede) depicts Greco-Roman mythical figure Ganymede describing the "slippery thighs of a boy" as superior to the "stink and gaping looseness of the female cave."[18][19]
A 1997 report on the sexual health needs of males who have sex with males in the Calcutta suburbs found that 73% of men asked engaged in intercrural sex, though the frequency varied based on demographic factors: only 54% of sex workers, 50% of lower income men and 40% of Muslims reported intercrural sex; while 82% of Hindus and 88%
of middle income men reported engaging in it.[20] so you should be untellectually honest

cat said...

all i see are Christians interpreting the Muslim books - as with the new and old testaments they can be interpreted many ways especially if you are looking for a way to discredit. this happens to the Bible all the time. hypocrisy abounds in all religions as does the exhortation to violence and punishment and damnation.

what i see here is what Christians take offence at with criticism of the bible, the isolation of one or 2 passages of a holy book out of the cultural and historical context of the time and putting our modern spin on it. holier than thou springs to mind. extremists? Christianity has them. hypocrites? Christianity has them. arseholes? Christianity has them, mirror mirror on the wall.

walk the walk that way your example shows the way, just like Jesus did. there are a lot of similarities between Islam and Christianity and indeed Judaism, the one and same God, the recognition of the old testament. the recognition by Islam of both Moses and Jesus as prophets, the common thread of Abraham at the centre of all 3 monotheistic (abrahamic) faiths. even the language used in the Koran is similar to the Bible as are the instructions on life

i used to live in a Muslim country and i have never felt safer - in that country all faiths lived side by side and everyone celebrated everyone elses holy days - Muslims with Xmas trees? yes. living there i felt it would help to read the Koran which then lead me to study comparative religion - you might try that instead of the separation you now practice- you know the chosen people line gets old very quickly

Unknown said...

soloman have 700wives and 300 keeps ..muslims can read any verses in the quran publicly..can any christian read these verses of bible

And it came to pass, when
Israel dwelt in that land, that
Reuben went and lay with
Bilhah his father’s concubine:
and Israel heard it. Now the
sons of Jacob were twelve. –
Bible : Genesis (35) : 22

And they committed
whoredoms in Egypt; they
committed whoredoms in their
youth: there were their breasts
pressed, and there they bruised
the teats of their virginity. –
Bible : Ezekiel (23) : 3.
And Aholah played the
harlot when she was mine; and
she doted on her lovers, on the
Assyrians her neighbours,
Which were clothed with blue,
captains and rulers, all of them
desirable young men, horsemen
riding upon horses. Thus she
committed her whoredoms with
them, with all them that were
the chosen men of Assyria, and
with all on whom she doted:
with all their idols she defiled
herself. Neither left she her
whoredoms brought from Egypt:
for in her youth they lay with
her, and they bruised the
breasts of her virginity, and
poured their whoredom upon
her. – Bible : Ezekiel (23) : 5 –

While the king sitteth at
his table, my spikenard sendeth
forth the smell thereof. A
bundle of myrrh is my well-
beloved unto me; he shall lie
all night betwixt my breasts. –
Bible : Song of Solomon (1) : 12
– 13.
Thy two breasts are like
two young roes that are twins,
which feed among the lilies. –
Bible : Song of Solomon (4) : 5.

I am a wall, and my
breasts like towers: then was I
in his eyes as one that found
favour. – Bible : Song of
Solomon (8) : 10.

This thy stature is like to a
palm tree, and thy breasts to
clusters of grapes. I said, I will
go up to the palm tree, I will
take hold of the boughs thereof:
now also thy breasts shall be
as clusters of the vine, and the
smell of thy nose like apples; –
Bible : Song of Solomon (7) : 7
– 8.

And David sent
messengers, and took her; and
she came in unto him, and he
lay with her; for she was
purified from her uncleanness:
and she returned unto her
house. – Bible : 2 Samuel
(11) : 4.

i am asking a question is that holy book or book which contain sex story....according to us hadiths are corrupted like as bible... can u take any mistake from quran... stupid fellows...

Donna Morrow said...

Absolutely we can read these publicly! This is the word of God. There is nothing in the Bible that has to be hidden away. God HATES lying and all forms of taqiya or taqiyya. Unlike Allah, who brags about being the best of deceivers.

The Bible is a book of the history of people. People have sex. God gave it! People also ignore God's word whenever they want to. The Bible records the acts of disobedience and the punishment for them.

Song of Solomon is a love poem from a husband and his wife to each other.

Genesis 35:25- The sons of Rachel’s servant Bilhah: Dan and Naphtali.

Ezekiel 23- Read the entire chapter! Samaria and Jerusalem were compared to whores, and their punishment is described, just as the figurative description of their idolatry. Idolatry is the subject of the chapter.

2 Samuel 11- Again read the entire chapter. King David saw her, lusted for her, committed adultry with her, got her pregnant while her husband was away at war, had her husband killed.

Then read 2 Samuel 12!!! God sent Nathan the Prophet to confront David. The Lord struck the child and it died. David accepted God's judgement with repentance, fasting, and worship.

And the Lord gave to David and Bathsheba- Solomon.

And Soloman did well, until those 700 wives and 300 concubines (keeps) turned his heart to idolatry.

1 Kings 11 Read the whole chapter.

1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites:

2 Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.

3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.

4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father.

Unknown said...

i see .... i dont find these story was usefull... these story was written by human that why it is existing in bible... if i accept ur above comment then what is the reason for that sex story between father and daughters.(genesis 19:31 - 37)... is there any punishment for them...give me verse which they were punished.. then bible was written only after death of jesus(pbuh)... then how can u tell that bible was god's word... jesus (pbuh) did not seen that bible in his life then what if anyone made mistakes in bible???

What?? said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
What?? said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
What?? said...

The problem who have corrupted their hearts by watching porn is nothing is sacred to them anymore if there was anything wrong with Islamic texts why would it be available to everyone? People normally hide some things due to embarrassment or whatever but the messengers life is well documented why? So people with clean pure hearts and minds can learn a way of life that is acceptable to God... Peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad and his family and his companions and all Muslims always :) 1 ummah and we will unite against the oppressors one day :D Alhumdulillah Islam is the most amazing way of life.

DavidYeshua said...

The reason Islam is open for all to read is Satan knows he can create the most appalling religeon with horrendous acts of murder, torcher, rape, thefts, evil oppression and all he has to do is stick some good teachings mixed in twith it and people will swallow the whole lot regardless. For eg. The reason he chose the crescent moon as his symbol is because it actually represents his horns.

Unknown said...

Rape, sex, multiple women and concubines have been practiced and still practiced among major and minor religions in the world. Apparently, Christians ignore they own history - chattel slavery and the genocide of the Native Americans. Religion has been a tool by man to exploit and discriminate others. Let's practice love and tolerance please! No human being is better than another;we all have a past that is not pretty.

Joseph Carilus said...

The fact that rape and other forms of deviant sexual behaviour are still practiced does not at all legitimise the said acts. Even if genocide and chattel slavery have at some point been associated with Christians, Christians do not try to justify them or deny facts of history. That's the difference between Muslims and Christians. There is no way pedophilia and rape will ever be right; whether it is legally sanctioned or done by a malefactor or a so-called religious leader. All in all, the author of this post has done a commendable job. Keep it up.

Effgee said...

Joseph Carilus : well said : You speak for me too.

AlexDean said...

All Sunni bullshit. Sahih Bukhari and the rest of their books are full of such rubbish! Little do Sunnis know that their hadeeth collection is full of FABRICATED hadeeth!

AlexDean said...

@William McKenzie if you still alive or have become the "undead"! :) The "iddah" period has not been waived you moron anywhere in Muslim society- observed still! It is you who is sick in the head, esp. trying to misinform people. BTW, your Bible is full of verses approving rape, murder and cannibalism!

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 New International Version (NIV)
11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

So guess you can kill or rape her as you please!

Exodus 21:7-8 New International Version (NIV)
7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.

Incest and drunkeness in the Bible! Here: http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01019.htm

Cannibalism in the Bible: II Kings 6:28
And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow.

More incest and rape in the Bible: II Kings 13:8-12 & II Kings 13:14
And when she had presented him the meat, he took hold of her, and said: Come lie with me, my sister. She answered him: Do not so, my brother, do not force me: for no such thing must be done in Israel. Do not thou this folly. [II Kings 13:8-12] But he would not hearken to her prayers, but being stronger overpowered her and lay with her. [II Kings 13:14]

Anonymous said...

Hello, I'm a learning Sunni Muslim. I'd just like to share my thoughts on this matter if that is okay. I am very open-minded so feel free to contest my points.

Firstly, I'll address the matter of child marriage. In the time of the Prophet (SAW), life expectancy was (approximately) in the 30s - 40s, not just in his area but around the world. This makes sense, of course, because of lack of medical technology and what not. So all around the world (or at least most of the world), including the society the Prophet (SAW) came to, children were married off, due to necessity more than perversion. Because of the lesser life expectancy, families needed to start earlier. Furthermore, because of high child mortality rates, families needed more time to become stable and healthy. Keep in mind that families were undoubtedly a necessity at that time for survival. Thus, despite child marriage's susceptibility to abuse, which I will not deny, children were married off young.

If you would like to condemn the adults of ALL societies of that time for allowing child marriage, then I am okay with that because that is your moral opinion and it is consistent/unbiased. However, I think it should be reasonable to respect a muslim's objective understanding of the time of the Prophet (SAW).

Now, as I mentioned above child marriage is very susceptible to abuse for many reasons, which I will discuss shortly. Firstly, however, it is important to note that in Islam, the parent has an absolute responsibility to protect their child, and that includes marriage. The parent must do what is in the best wishes of their child, and only what is in the best wishes of their child. As mentioned above, in the times of the Prophet (SAW), marrying early was necessary, if not at least beneficial, for the child. In those times, child marriage did not carry the presumption of abuse with it, and we can easily repudiate claims that the Prophet (SAW) abused Aisha in any way that did not simply come with the bounds of a marriage (addressed shortly).

In the modern day, there is very little to no benefit of child marriage in most places: life expectancy is greater and child mortality is lesser. Inshallah (God willing), this will continue to improve with the progression of technology. Because it is possible to wait for marriage, the psychological and mental development of the child should be guarded and facilitated prior to marriage. This is important: PHYSICAL MATURITY SHOULD NO LONGER BE THE ONLY DETERMINER FOR MARRIAGE, AS IT IS NO LONGER IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF A CHILD. This is where I vehemently disagree with modern applications of Shari'a law. These applications often only check for physical maturity. They should check for psychological and mental maturity, both of which serve to further validate their consent (which is essential to an Islamic marriage), and on top of that there should be a strong reason for marriage. Additionally, modern applications of Shari'a often do not check for cases of coercion, which a child is very vulnerable to, and also they often do not provide social-care mediums through which the child can annul the marriage or divorce the marriage after the fact. These only allow for abuse, and are ultimately un-Islamic. For all these reasons, a minimum age of marriage is an effective way to avoid abuse, and create a world which is in the best interests of children. I maintain that the Prophet (SAW) would agree with the minimum age of marriage, and by consequence consent, until the proper and careful implementation of the facilities which I mentioned above are observed. Otherwise, you place way too much trust on people who have shown time and time again that they will abuse.

Anonymous said...

These facilities help prevent what I would say are the three main channels of abuse which arise especially in child marriage, though they can arise in any marriage (feel free to suggest more if I missed something, this is a general list). The first is a lack of proper consent, which coercion also falls under. This is very un-islamic. As mentioned above, in the modern world where marriage doesn't need to be hastened, mental and psychological immaturity should be included here. The second channel is actual mistreatment within the relationship. This has been detailed in the Quran and Hadith, in terms of placing clear boundaries. Mistreatment of your spouse is also un-islamic(please let me know if you'd like to learn more about these boundaries). The third channel is an inability to annul/divorce/escape the marriage. This is also very un-islamic: in Islam either party has the right to annul or divorce the marriage, especially if mistreatment occurs. All sources point to neither of these three channels being transgressed in the Prophet (SAW)'s marriage with Aisha. She was not against the marriage, she was not mistreated at all, and she had the ability to divorce and annul the marriage at any time (I can provide references for these if you would like, they are very plentiful). In fact, it was the Prophet (SAW) who once came close to divorcing her. Keep in mind that any sexual relations in the marriage were not considered abuse, as they were within the bounds of the marriage which had already been arranged in the best interests of Aisha. If this last paragraph is difficult to accept or unreasonable, please tell me and I will be happy to discuss.

Now I will answer the hadith mentioned in the article, starting with the second. I see nothing wrong with this hadith, it is merely to maintain cleanliness while eliminating perfectly natural desires. For the next 4 hadith, it is once again natural situations within the boundaries of marriage. Perhaps I'm missing the point, if someone could clarify? Anyways scholarly opinion that fondling refers to thighing is unreasonable to me, and very odd. Although, I guess to each their own?

As for the first hadith, I am actually unsure. Perhaps the Prophet (SAW) wanted the young to marry due to the necessities I stated above? Though I want to be careful not to irrationally justify him, so I will return with more information on that.

Now I will address the common criticisms against the Prophet (SAW), which the author has conveniently compiled here. #1, Muhammad (SAW) did not have sex with a prepubescent girl, this is un-Islamic. If you trust the Hadith, which you readily do elsewhere in the article, this is completely false. I addressed #2 above. For #3 Mary the Copt was a wife as a far as I am aware. What is the issue with #4, it's not incestuous? Messy in modern times, maybe. As for #5, I don't know where you got that Huayy ibn Akhtab was tortured. Torturing is absolutely un-Islamic. The story here is narrated by Ibn Ishaq who is continually criticized, and his Hadith are not reliable. You should also know that Safiyya came to love Mohammad (SAW), and even said "I have never seen a good-natured person as the Messenger of Allah (SAW)". Furthermore, prisoners of war in Islam (back then anyway) were treated very very mercifully, they are given the option of refuge, are treated kindly and are fed well. This was very progressive for its time. As for #6, rape is completely disallowed in Islam, even if they are slaves. The rights given to slaves in Islam was also very progressive for its time. Is #7 referring to a Mut'ah temporary marriage? If so that was expressly forbidden by the Prophet (SAW) on multiple accounts. Someone please clarify if I misunderstood. As for #8, there will be much greater pleasures in heaven than sexual, as can be read in the Quran. I don't really think this point accomplishes anything.

Anonymous said...

Ultimately, attacks on Muhammad (SAW)'s character simply aren't very well supported, and can be easily argued against. Some claim he's a pervert led by pedophilic desires. Yet, he first married when he was 25 to a 40 year old and all of his wives except for one were widows and ex-divorcees. Some claim he was a ruthless warlord, yet his only wars were in retaliation after years of oppression and attacks on the Muslim community, and even then he implemented very progressive war ethics. Some claim he was a hedonist chasing after worldly pleasures, yet he was well-known as an extremely charitable man, to the extent that he was uncomfortable when 7 dinars were left undistributed in charity. Honestly, if anyone wants to challenge these, or anything I have mentioned in this post, go ahead, I always enjoy a good discussion :).

Alex Smith said...

Login or sign up at office setup and download Microsoft Office. Install and activate the setup on your device. Verify the Office product key | office.com/setup | norton.com/nu16 |norton.com/nu16

Norton setup - Get started with Norton by downloading the setup and installing it on the device. Enter the unique 25-character alphanumeric product key for activation. Check your subscription norton.com/setup | norton.com/setup | norton.com/setup.

MahilMehterlam said...

This seems rather invented to grab just whatever you can get at, even if it doesn't make sense. Merely having sex doesn't prevent wet dreams or one getting semen on cloth.

If he was thighing nearly all of his semen would have been drained outside. But here it seems too much on clothes.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Number 233:
"Narrated 'Aisha: I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them."

Aisha never really seems to notice or say why he got them. Unless he somehow was "thighing" with clothes on, it's impossible.

Pleasw make an argument that makes sense.

MahilMehterlam said...

What's most stupid about comment of Dave Woods is that Muhammad preferred fondling virgins over sex with adult women. This despite that he cited hadith stating he had sex with EVERY WIFE EVERY DAY.

Yet somehow Woods says that he preferred virgins just because he sometimes fondled them in his menses, because sex is prohibited. Woods is lying bare-faced.

Shams said...

You are probably too much of a coward to make my comment public but anyway, God will take care of you sooner or later.

First of all you didnt give us a single evidence that playing/fondling means thighing (no, the words of one or two medieval muslim scholars is not evidence).

Then you were extremely manipulative by implying that "virgin" means necessary child like here: "Notice that Muhammad found the practice of "fondling" virgins preferable to sex with adult women."

I know it's hard to believe for westerners since many of your women behave like prostitutes but THERE ARE ADULT VIRGINS. So when the prophet (pbuh) said virgin, he did not necessary mean child.

Why were his (pbuh) clothes full of semen? Well maybe, just maybe, HE PRACTICED SEXUAL ACTS WITH HIS WIVES?! Ever thought about that? They could have just masturbate him or something like that which is totally normal between married couples. Btw: Even though most muslim scholars (not all) oppose masturbation, I am not aware of a single sahih hadith where the prophet (pbuh) prohibits it.

Just because he (pbuh) visited all his wives in one night doesnt mean he had sex with all of them. This is just an interpretation of Anas (ra). even if: they were his wives, why cant he (pbuh) have sex with them all?

And even if he did practice "thighing", where is the proof that he (pbuh) did this with Aisha (ra) and if he did, where is the proof that he (pbuh) did this before their marriage was consumed? You just throwing that out without evidence.

May God guide or destroy the liars.

nic01 said...


Anantha Raman said...

Shameless cultists, coming up with nuances to explain away the nightmare that M was. You idiots are arguing and writing pages and pages to justify a lunatic who's also a sex addict and perhaps the biggest hypocrite who used his status to grab anything that he wanted. Stop defending this despicable religion and try to realise what age we are living in. Don't behave like teens obsessing with sex and throwing tantrums on anyone who prevent them from having everything their way. Grow up and be useful!