4.2.2
“‘You forbade me before to deal with you on the basis of suspicion,’303 I said, ‘but now you’re the sinner in that regard.’ ‘On the contrary,’ she replied, ‘I’m the one sinned against.’304 I asked her, ‘Does the word “no” have no place in your mouth?’305 She said, ‘It used to be pronounced “yes.”’306 I said, ‘A no from a woman is a boon,’307 to which she replied, ‘And a yes means pleasure.’ I asked, ‘Have you made the latter your habit?’ to which she replied, ‘Indeed — and become habituated to the rewards.’ I said, ‘That’s not fitting for a woman with children,’ to which she countered, ‘If a woman doesn’t fit properly, she’ll never give birth.’308 I said, ‘It’s the same Matter,’ to which she responded, ‘If the Matter isn’t “copious and inseparable,” it must necessarily take different Forms.’309 I said, ‘And how can it remain inseparable if the Forms are different?’ ‘The individual nature of the Forms is not a problem,’ she replied, ‘for one may stand for all. What we are discussing here is how to define “quantity.”’ ‘And what are the terms of the argument?’ I asked. She said, ‘That in seriousness is humor and in humor seriousness.’
4.2.3
“‘What would you think,’ I asked her, ‘if I got someone to deputize for me in that matter while I’m away?’ She laughed and said, ‘According to my taste or yours?’ ‘To yours, naturally,’ I replied. She said, ‘No man would agree to such a thing unless he was devoid of jealousy, and a man can be devoid of jealousy only if he hates his wife and is enamored of someone else, so you must be enamored of someone else.’ I said, ‘I am neither enamored nor inconstant, but when a man is deeply in love with his wife he hopes to please her in everything, though we must not overlook the fact that jealousy is not always, as people would have it, a product of love: some women’s jealousy regarding their husbands comes from hatred of them and a desire to hurt them. An example would be if a woman were to prevent her husband from going out to a park, a place of entertainment, or a bathhouse along with a number of other married men; she knows that they cannot meet up with women in such places and she only does this to exercise control over him and to stop him from talking about women with his friends and enjoying himself in ways that can do her no harm. It’s the same if she forbids him to look out of his window at a street or a garden frequented by many women, and the same judgment applies to a man if he behaves the same way with his wife. People call such things “jealousy” but in reality they are a form of hatred, or it may be that hatred begins where jealousy leaves off, just as excessive laughter is the first stage of tears. However that may be, a man cannot truly love his wife if he doesn’t allow her to enjoy herself in the way she wants and with whom she wants.’ ‘Does anyone in the world behave that way?’ she asked. ‘Indeed,’ I responded. ‘Many behave so in countries not far from us.’ ‘Good for them,’ she replied, ‘but what about their women? Do they behave the same way with their husbands?’ ‘They have to,’ I answered, ‘to keep things in balance.’ ‘Personally,’ she said, ‘I wouldn’t put up with such evenhandedness. As far as I’m concerned, a tilt is better.’ ‘That’s my opinion too, in certain circumstances,’ I said. ‘And where the circumstances of certain people are concerned,’ she riposted.310
4.2.4
“‘Let’s get back to traveling,’ I said. ‘I leave today.’ ‘Indeed,’ she said, ‘—for the lands of the white-skinned beauties.’ ‘Do you talk of men or women?’ I enquired. ‘I talk of one sex,’ she replied, ‘but what worries me is the other.’ ‘And why should that sex be a concern,’ I asked, ‘when it’s you women who, in any circumstances, are the ones pursued, which is why they call a beautiful woman a ghāniyah?;311 as the author of the Qāmūs says, “the ghāniyah is a woman who is pursued and does not herself need to pursue.”’ She said, ‘Excellent words, but earlier he says, “ʿawānī312 is a word for women, because they are mistreated and no one takes their side,” though the dot on the one ought to put in a good word for the other.’313 ‘Love of “dotting,”’ I said, ‘is an ancient habit among you women.’314 ‘As “scripting” is among men,’315 she retorted, ‘but be that as it may; our being desired is the root of our worries, for the woman who is desired is by definition a woman whose honor is valued and guarded. Woe betide her then if she betrays her guardian and woe betide her if she denies the one who desires her, for then she will spend the night worrying over having denied him and over his disappointment and the fact that she has become a cause of his sleeplessness, anguish, and sorrow, and the woman who chases men ends up unchased.’316 I said, ‘Men’s morals are not all the same where that’s concerned,’ to which she returned, ‘I mean the men who desire, and fall in love with the ones they desire, not those fornicating omnivorous fickle-hearted ones whose custom is to take a nibble here and a nibble there and move from one object of desire to another, taking only what is of use to them without caring about what may be of use to others. How few, though, are the former! Is there a single man who can maintain an affection and not deviate from it every day? I swear, were women to desire men as much as men desire women, you wouldn’t find a single man unbewitched.’
4.2.5
“‘Is there a single woman who can maintain affection and not deviate from it each day a thousand times?’ I asked her. ‘All books bear witness to the trustworthiness of men and the treachery of women.’ ‘Weren’t the ones who wrote those books men?’ she countered. ‘They’re the ones who made up those stories.’ ‘But only after investigation and experience,’ I answered. ‘If you go to the arbitrator alone, you win,’ she said. ‘Quite the reverse,’ I said. ‘They have provided testimonies. The words of Our Master Sulaymān, who said, “I have found one righteous man among a thousand but I have not found a single righteous woman” may serve as sufficient proof and evidence.’ ‘Even if Our Master Sulaymān was granted wisdom given to none other,’ she said, ‘his excessive indulgence in women rendered him incapable of distinguishing the righteous among them from the unrighteous. Have you not observed how the musk-seller’s sense of smell weakens from length of exposure to its strong odor until he can no longer distinguish any more delicate scent? As far as providing the testimony of men against women without providing that of women against men is concerned, it is patent injustice and high-handedness.’
4.2.6
“‘Indeed,’ I said, ‘evenhandedness in such citations would be preferable but, glory be, you women level every possible charge against men and then fall over one another to make a fuss over them!’ She responded, ‘Were it not that society works to make them martyrs, women wouldn’t allow such ideas anywhere near their medulla oblongarters.’”317 “I laughed,” continued the Fāriyāq, “and said, ‘What kind of a plural is that?’ to which she replied, ‘I made it by analogy.’ ‘Are the original word and that formed by analogy to it equal?’ I asked. ‘There’s no difference,’ she replied. ‘On the contrary,’ I said, ‘they’re entirely different, because lexicon cannot be derived by analogy. If it could, there’d be no conformity between male and female or between female and male,318 or between the masculinization of the true feminine319 and the feminization of words that have no equivalent.’320 ‘Another example of men’s high-handedness and confusion of the issue!’ she said. ‘They are virtually incapable of dealing with anything straightforwardly.’ ‘And there you go again!’ I retorted.