Not an urban legend to ‘thigh’ babies

In comments about my post on religiously sanctioned paedophilia, it has been said that the practice supported by Khomeini of ‘thighing’ or placing a penis in between thighs of weening babies is an urban legend. I’ve explained how with brutalities such as these, there is no need for such legends; the realities are much bleaker. Here’s a video on the practice:

Here’s link to Khomeini’s Book in Persian.

Relevant piece in Persian is below:

مساءله 12 – كسيكه زوجه اى كمتر از نه سال دارد وطى او براى وى جايز نيست چه اينكه زوجه دائمى باشد، و چه منقطع ، و اما ساير كام گيريها از قبيل لمس بشهوت و آغوش گرفتن و تفخيذ(4) اشكال ندارد هر چند شيرخواره باشد، و اگر قبل از نه سال او را وطى كند اگر افضاء نكرده باشد بغير از گناه چيزى بر او نيست ، و اگر كرده باشد يعنى مجراى بول و مجراى حيض او را يكى كرده باشد و يا مجراى حيض و غائط او را يكى كرده باشد تا ابد وطى او بر وى حرام مى شود، لكن در صورت دوم حكم بنابر احتياط است و در هر حال بنا بر اقوى بخاطر افضاء از همسرى او بيرون نمى شود در نتيجه همه احكام زوجيت بر او مترتب مى شود يعنى او از شوهرش و شوهرش از او ارث مى برد، و نمى تواند پنجمين زن دائم بگيرد و ازدواجش با خواهر آن زن بر او حرام است و همچنين ساير احكام ، و بر او واجب است مادامى كه آن زنده است مخارجش را بپردازد. هر چند طلاقش داده باشد، بلكه هر چند كه آن زن بعد از طلاق شوهرى ديگرى انتخاب كرده باشد كه بنابر احتياط بايد افضا كننده نفقه او را بدهد، بلكه اين حكم خالى از قوت نيست ، و نيز بر او واجب است ديه افضا را كه ديه قتل است بآن زن بپردازد اگر آن زن آزاد است نصف ديه مرد را با مهريه ايكه معين شده و بخاطر عقد دخول بگردنش آمده به او بدهد، و اگر بعد از تمام شدن نه سال با او جماع كند و او را افضاء نمايد حرام ابدى نمى شود و ديه بگردنش نمى آيد، لكن نزديكتر به احتياط آن است كه مادامى كه آن زن زنده است نفقه اش را بدهد هر چند كه بنا بر اقوى واجب نيست .

(Persian link via Keyvan Javid)


      • says

        I don’t think you should have to translate and be put through all that revulsion. IMO, what we’ve read and heard already is abhorrent enough. Oddly enough, have you noticed it is [apparently] men who are requesting that you go through all that trouble or a word for word translation? IMO, it is almost like saying, “Prove to me you were raped by your father.” The fact is, a lot of this crap happens behind closed doors, even among Fundamngelical Xians. Many religious groups, esp extremists, enable and sometimes do the crime themselves, using verses of their texts to either enable it, condone it, or justify their actions. That is just part of religious literalism.

        I’m going to end my rant and go puke now and maybe draw a face of Mo on a pillow and beat the sh** out of it. Humm… That could be some very nice afternoon fun- beating a misogynist or a factitious one. Regardless, I don’t think you should be pushed into giving an exact and potentially traumatizing translation after what you’ve shown so far. I for one believe you without a word for word translation. To do so, is possibly misogynistic, esp given the posters who are asking you to do so.

  1. says

    That is not only sick, but it makes me want to cry to think how many girls/babies this has happened to. While not quite the same as what I went through as a child, enabled by the Xianity my relatives were in, I can empathize greatly. It also brings some questions to mind, but I’m afraid to ask them of you, Maryam. If my suspicions are right, I empathize greatly. Religion can really screw up many people’s lives and it is tragic.

  2. FredBloggs says

    I think people want extraordinary evidence because it is such an extraordinary claim. I am personally very suspicious of Islam and think it’s anti-woman, anti-democratic and anti-free speech. Because I feel this way, when someone places before me something that would not only reinforce those feelings, but make them more extreme, I want extraordinary evidence.

    This isn’t to say that it is untrue. Just that what you’ve shown so far doesn’t (for me) constitute extraordinary evidence.

    • says

      Biblical literalism doesn’t need extraordinary proofs, but Islamic literalism does? I’ll be sure to note that next time some Catholic says they were raped by a priest and the Pope forgives the victim. *rolling eyes*

        • says

          No, what you said was this accusation of child sexual abuse, written in Islamic texts [and happening today, I gather from what you said], was an extraordinary claim. To be exact and I quote, bolding specific words:

          I think people want extraordinary evidence because it is such an extraordinary claim. I am personally very suspicious of Islam and think it’s anti-woman, anti-democratic and anti-free speech. Because I feel this way, when someone places before me something that would not only reinforce those feelings, but make them more extreme, I want extraordinary evidence.

          So what do you want by way of evidence? A medical report or will someone’s translation do? Is it not enough to have several different sources, which Maryam produced, enough? She even gave some translation of said text, besides other sources. Sadly, if you read the Old Testament or the Talmud, you will see the roots of the Islamic texts, which lead some Xians sects to either enable or even justify incest.

          • fredbloggs says

            “Biblical literalism doesn’t need extraordinary proofs, but Islamic literalism does?”

            This appears to be a conversation you were having entirely within your own head, as no-one was making a comparison between the two religions and you have no idea as to MY position on the subject.

          • says

            No, fredbloggs, the Abrahamic religions, at least to me, are all the same, esp when it comes to sexual abuse. So why would one not need extraordinary proofs on this topic when another does? They have all proven to be the same when it comes misogyny, children, and sexual abuses.

  3. Rafiq Mahmood says

    Thank you very much for the link. I think it would be very useful to translate and publish it in its entirety.

    • says

      I have already put translations of some bits. I know it would be good but I honestly have a lot better things to do with my time but I will try and do this bit at least when I get a chance.

      • katrinschwarz says

        Google translate recognizes it as Persian but struggles with the translation. Perhaps someone literate in Persian could correct it.

        Msa’lh 12 – transmittable Vty his wife is less than nine years, he is not permitted when the wife is permanent, and withdrawal, and the palate of the other, such as touching and hugging and Tfkhyz Bshhvt (4) There is no problem though is Shyrkhvarh , and if not years before he Vty Afza’ not if he is anything other than not guilty, and if that means duct lumen catheter and Invalidation of Ablution one has his or her Ghayt duct Invalidation of Ablution and one has to Vty his life, he is forbidden, but the second sentence, however, the precaution is Aqvy Afza’ because of his wife is not the result of parity on all orders of her husband, she and her husband from her and then be MtrtbAlthough divorce is granted, but the woman who divorced her husband after the selection is another precaution that should give him the support of Afza, but this rule is not without its strengths, and is also obligatory on the blood money blood money Afza Watch the woman’s murder if she has to pay blood money is half the man’s marriage and the dowry given Ayk·h Bgrdnsh the entrance to give him, and if, after all, not being able to ride with him and his eternal prohibition shall not Afza’ and blood can not Bgrdnsh, but closer to caution that once the woman is alive to give her alimony according Aqvy although not compulsory.

      • Rafiq Mahmood says

        I do not suggest you do it, Maryam. I am just thinking aloud because I am trying to get a project together to translate material into the languages of the “Muslim world” (Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, Bangla, Indonesian/Malay, Turkish) under the imprint of The Seditious Press. This is an example of a piece of garbage which really does need to be known about more widely from Farsi, although I believe the original was written in Arabic?

        Perhaps the whole thing could be split into chunks and given to various translators?

        If anyone is interested in working with me on the Seditious Press project please email me at

        Thank you.

  4. LeetheGirl says

    It’s incredibly easy to find evidence to support these claims. If you want it so badly then stop being lazy and take a trip around the internet.

    You don’t even have to take a westerner’s word for it, visit some Islamist sites. If that’s not enough of a red flag for you then grow a shaggy beard or cover up your face, dependent of course on whether you have a dick or not.

  5. bspiken says

    I believe that what fredbloggs is saying here is that extraordinary claims (the claim being that there is a mandate to urgh, “thighting”) requiere extraordinary evidence, it is hard to tell someone “it’s ok for Iranian islamists to f**k a toddler as long as it is between the thighs” without at least a citation in a language you understand.

    It is not difficult to be complete and utterly aghast towards the bible literalism found in movements such as quiverful while still look for evidence with a skeptical eye.

    As a side note, thank you Maryam for posting these and bringing attention, I live in Mexico and had no clue to this…horribleness by the islamist movement, I understand much better the position of the secular movement and the difference between muslims and islamists from your writings and analysis. Keep fighting the good fight, I wish I could help in some way, but I guess for now I’ll pass the word over here.

  6. PersianPower88 says

    Iranian men and women WAKE UP NOW.

    These filthy Arab dogs rape children, control “our” government, subvert our indigenous culture, and force our women to dress like filthy Arab rats.

    Arabs are subhuman animals. Islam was created by Satan (Ahriman), Zoroastrianism was created by God.

  7. Uzza says

    I did not see anyone in the comments question the practice of thighing, which is well documented. What I did see was at least three of us ask for a citation giving the source of the specific passage you quoted.
    It seems to be from the website you linked,“Perversion in Iran’s Theocracy”, who cite it as [“Tahrirolvasyleh”, fourth edition, Qom, Iran, 1990], which is obviously wrong since it’s in English; also over the years I’ve seen this more often given as fourth Volume, which as I mentioned doesn’t exist. You gave a Farsi version of what seems the same or similar , but no indication of its source. Lacking that, this is just “something I read on the internet.”
    Another English version of the book is here. It differs from Salemson’s translation, and neither seem to include the passage in question. It seems little enough to ask that writers on Freethought Blogs follow accepted academic practice and provide accurate, verifiable references.

  8. says

    Thanks for the link and quote. I’ve added this to my link to your original post.

    The citation and the link to the original source should be adequate evidence. There are plenty of people literate in Persian on the internet who could tell if the quote didn’t say what Ms. Namazie says it says. And considering some of the other stuff Khomeini says, it isn’t terribly surprising.


Leave a Reply