A Leprechaun who evolved from Monkeys!

Recently while on a plane from Dubai to Riyadh, I had a chance to browse Friday (June 8-14, 2007), an expensively and beautifully produced magazine, filled almost entirely (in my opinion) with trash, that accompany the Gulf News every Friday.

I browsed through its pages and stumbled upon the first piece titled Animal instincts written by a Mr. G* Nice.
http://www.gulfnews.com/friday/People/10130683.html.

I was curious to know what G* stands for. Conservative media use asterisks when they have to print expletives (e.g. s**t, or f**k etc., see how useful the asterisks are). May be there is one, but I could not think of a two letter expletive that starts with G. The blurb mentions that Mr. G* Nice is a Dubai-based columnist who writes an exclusive column for Friday. The column includes an unusual photograph of the author; a rear view of his bald pate with an oversize headphone strewn around the head. In the photo, Mr. G* Nice is apparently looking at the blank screen of his notebook PC. Perhaps he is having trouble booting up the device, or he gets his stimulation for his columns by staring at a blank screen (I am inclined to think that he is doing the latter). Since his face is hidden, I cannot guess anything else apart from the fact that he is a male Caucasian, completely bald, perhaps 30-40 years old, prefers to wear blue denims and black jacket even on a very hot summer day in Dubai. I would be interested to know what he is listening on that oversized headphones while staring at a blank screen - music, a podcast, Gospel?

So, who or what is this Mr. G* Nice?

1. An erudite columnist – especially on matters of philosophy, science and evolution, who occasionally gives intelligent teasers to his readers.


2. A creationist, who believes that the Bible’s account of the Creation is literally true and that G** created man to rule over this world.


3. An obtuse, dull-witted humor writer masquerading as a specialist in “creative circles, psychology and stuff”.

I would rather let the reader come to his/her conclusion after reading his column and my comments below.

Since there was no other worthwhile pursuit I could do in that plane journey, I read his column. That confirmed my hunch that he is not only staring at a blank screen, but also is fond of listening to silent, imaginary, non-existent music through oversize headphones. Perhaps, the information that he gathers from blank screens and silent music also fills his brain with the same. How else can you explain such utter hogwash in a magazine, unfortunately read also by at least a few impressionable youngsters, who might believe anything they see in print? Then again, seeing such articles, one feels happy that kids of this generation aren’t that much interested in reading anyway!

In his column, Mr. G* Nice poses a very interesting question: “If you were an animal – what kind of animal would you be?” Can anything be more brainless? What does Mr. G* Nice thinks of himself – a Gremlin, Elf , Goblin or most likely a Leprechaun? - Doesn’t this guy know that he is already an animal, a mammal called Homo sapiens (Genus: Homo, Familiy: Hominidae, Order: Primates, Class: Mammalia, Phylum: Chordata, Kingdom: Animalia)?

In fact, he also has a challenge for his dear readers; his offer of a “life changing mental stimulation”. Perhaps, he intended to ask, “If you were a different animal, what kind would you be?” That makes some sense. If you are not born in the family of H. Sapiens, what else would you be? That is a reasonable question to ask, an interesting thought experiment. Mr. G* Nice weighs up several options – penguin, dog, donkey, lion, etc. before giving his personal choice (after careful consideration and due diligence) – that he would want to be a ‘Monkey’! There is nothing wrong in that, except he did not specify which species of monkeys he would like himself to be when he becomes one.

In spite of our distinct and different looks, whether Black, Caucasian, Mongolian, Chinese or Japanese, we all can interbreed and produce offspring; hence we humans belong to the same species. Unlike H. Sapiens, there are more than 250 different species of monkeys currently living in the wild that do not interbreed at all. Come on, Mr. G* Nice, specify which monkey species you want to be in – Rhesus, Colobus, Langur, Macaque, Baboon, Mandrill, Capuchin or any other? That will pose another problem. Will his chosen species want Mr. G* Nice in their midst? If I were a Rhesus monkey, I know the answer already.

I must assume here that Mr. G* Nice would want to be a real monkey rather than be a member of another ape family such as orang-utans or chimpanzees. From the wording of his teaser, I could easily guess that he doesn’t know that he is already an ape, that the Hominidae family includes chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas and humans and is collectively known as the “great apes”.

It is a common misconception to call our ape cousins monkeys. The monkeys and apes (including us humans) belong to the Primate Order, but are different families. How do we differentiate? We humans are hairless (some are baldheaded, like Mr. G* Nice) apes, our cousins (chimpanzees, orang-utans, gorillas etc.) are hairy, but none of us have a tail. Monkeys on the other hand are hairy like the apes, but also have a long and very useful tail. Perhaps Mr. G* Nice is missing his tail. So, when he becomes a monkey, we could probably expect a new photograph to accompany his columns – a photograph of his posterior adorning a real masculine tail!

Then he digressed away from an otherwise interesting argument with a “quick aside” – “if we did evolve from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?” I wouldn’t mind a thirteen-year old asking that question, but this is an exclusive columnist of Friday! That’s when I realized that that this guy really spends all his time (except perhaps when writing his columns) staring at his blank computer screen and listening to silent, non-existent music.

Give me a break Mr. G* Nice, where did you get the idea that we evolved from monkeys? Perhaps you don’t know that all animals that we see around us today underwent millions of years of evolution and are the perfect examples of those species that survived?

We, Homo sapiens, did not evolve from monkeys. Let us do a thought experiment. Let us assume that Mr. G* Nice has a family, and that he can trace his family tree sufficiently back, perhaps millions of years. Let us also assume that a wise old Rhesus monkey in India called R* Nice also has a family and can trace his family tree back millions of years. Both gentlemen will trace their respective family tree to find a common ancestor, who probably lived around 25 million years ago, in the jungles of Africa. If an energetic young chimpanzee in Angola called C* Nice will do the same exercise, she will trace her ancestry also to the same common ancestor. That perhaps will be the 1.5 millions-greats-grandpa of Mr. G* Nice, the wise old R*Nice (Rhesus monkey from India) and the energetic young C* Nice (the chimpanzee from Angola). Their greats-grandpa, who was neither a monkey nor a human, would probably have nice narrow, downward facing nostrils somewhat similar to Mr. G* Nice’s nostrils and a perfect long tail almost as our wise old R* Nice has. It is not a coincidence that Mr. G* Nice and our venerable R* Nice share 93% of their DNA sequence.

Incidentally, Mr. G* Nice and the young energetic C* Nice will share a common ancestor much earlier than that, say around 5 million years ago. This ancestor, perhaps their 250,000 greats-grandpa, also lived in Africa, and probably looked more like C* Nice rather than Mr. G* Nice, but this greats-grandpa was not a chimpanzee.

What I am trying to say is that none of us evolved from chimpanzees or monkeys. We, i.e. the apes and monkeys, all evolved from a common ancestor, who lived perhaps 25 millions years ago in the jungles of Africa.

For a very interesting and scientific account of where we came from, right to the origins of life on this planet, I would strongly recommend Mr. G* Nice to throw away his oversized headphones and blank-screen PC to read The Ancestor’s Tale – A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Life by Professor Richard Dawkins, a world-renowned evolutionary biologist and author. That will probably help Mr. G* Nice to realize that he is not a Leprechaun and we humans did not evolve from monkeys!

The World's Best Country

Finally, I discovered the best country to settle in the world; a country with a post modern world view that helps mankind to find an easy solution to an everyday problem faced my millions – without any guilt or remorse. It hit upon me because for the past one month I was in great turmoil - my wife is away on holiday and I am leading a miserable solitary life. Every evening I return to a dark, damp and dirty house. There is no one to greet me with a smile - no one to bring me a cup of tea, no one to tell me the neighborhood gossip, no real food to eat, nothing, nada! With a sullen face, I change into my pajamas and make a cup of tea that tastes like muddy rain water. Ignoring the accumulated dust and litter all around the house, I’ll soon settle by my corner table to start browsing on the internet – all in total silence and solitude till I drop off to bed some time past mid-night. Often with a very hungry stomach – because the fridge is empty and I did not feel like driving to a restaurant.

Today, a news item on the BBC website grabbed my attention “Iran talks up Temporary Marriage”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6714885.stm
Aha!! Isn’t that a solution to my problem? Isn’t that a perfectly legal and moral way to solve one’s loneliness without losing face or reputation in the society? The report says that in Iran it is perfectly legal to marry a woman for one hour, one day, one week, one month, one year or even up to a century. I cannot understand how you can have a temporary marriage for a century – perhaps, with all the temporary marriages, Iranians lead a very healthy and active life and live up to hundreds of years. In any case, that will be an added bonus I wouldn’t mind. The report also did not specify whether they will allow temporary gay or lesbian relationships in a similar legal manner – perhaps that is too much to hope for even in a post modern religious country.

Assuming this could be a hoax, that some smart hacker sabotaged the BBC website, I checked for the authenticity of the claim – by doing a quick search on the internet. There are hundreds of websites on the subject, many authored or supported by well read religious scholars

Below is the verse from Holy Quran, the scholars say that will justify a temporary union – (I looked up three translations and they all agree). I couldn’t believe it; the BBC report is true – there is no doubt about that.

These are the three or four popular translations (translator’s name given in the beginning of verse): The previous verse in the scripture (i.e. 4-23) gives a list of women you cannot marry – mother, mothers-in-law, foster mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, nieces etc.

Sura 4 - verse 24

1. YUSUFALI: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.
   
2. PICKTHAL: And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
   
3. SHAKIR: And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.
   http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
   
4. Another translation is even more specific, it explicitly uses the term ‘temporary’:
   “To women whom you choose in temporary and conditional (muwaqat and muta'a) marriage, give their dowry, as a duty.". http://home.swipnet.se/islam/articles/Temp.Marriage.htm

It is now very clear. Except for close blood relatives and married women, all other women can be approached legally for a temporary alliance and without any guilt. You just pay for their services or duty from your wealth by mutual agreement. After that, you can do whatever you want and there is no sin. Don’t you think it is a perfect legal and moral solution to a common, everyday problem faced by men all over the world – for example what will you do when your wife takes a sabbatical and leaves you in solitary confinement for a day, a week or even a month? That is longest my wife goes away – definitely not for a century.

The report says a man can have any number of temporary marriages but does not specify how many temporary wives you can have simultaneously. In Islam, you can have up to four wives simultaneously. I am not sure whether that limit is for four legal, permanent wives excluding the temporary ones; I have to ask an ayatollah. Perhaps he could find a justification for four legal wives and any number of temporary wives.

Of course, woman will not be allowed to have more than one husband at a time – permanent or temporary. That means, my wife who is on sabbatical is not allowed to have a temporary husband – unless I divorce her first (she cannot divorce me easily). Isn’t that a beauty? That’s what I like about it – everything is in favor of the males of the species.

There is at least one country in the world where they neither allow women to touch a steering wheel, nor walk alone in the streets. A clever society indeed, who knew from the beginning that women are bad drivers and cause accidents! So they totally banned them from the roads. I could think of a few other places where women should be banned – politics, schools, workplaces, public gatherings. I will have to change my residence to regions under Taliban control for that ultimate bliss. Also, according to these people, women titillate you so much; so to prevent any harm, they are ordered to cover in black from head to toe and wear a face mask and veil with only a small slit for the eyes.

Mr. Mostafa Pour Mohammed, who is the interior minister of Iran and himself a junior ayatollah says that marriage is a human need and temporary marriage should not be used just for sex, but to solve social problems”. He cannot be more correct. How else can I solve my solitude when my wife is away? Who will give me company? Who will make me food? Who do I sleep with? What solutions do other societies prescribe for similar grave social problems? Alcohol, drugs or much worse, cable TV?

A woman MP asked the honorable minister how many temporary marriages his daughter had so far. The MP was promptly sent to jail – that suits her. I do not know why ministers are always called honorable? The only thing these specimens invariably lack is exactly that – honor.

The beauty of the temporary marriage concept is that you do not need a cleric to solemnize it or a registrar to issue a contract. You just read an oath in private and that’s that - you are husband and wife – albeit temporary. The duration is specified at the time of oath taking. Since it is a private affair, probably you could alter it at your sole discretion.

It is also a convenience for young girls to travel with their boy friends or vice versa and share a hotel room without worrying about police knocking at the door at the inappropriate moment. Poor women who need financial support also can legally do it; other societies might use a different word for such temporary alliances but they are primitive societies still in the dark ages who do not know how to solve a basic moral problem. In Iran such relationships are perfectly legal and moral under the temporary marriage act.

It is also a good business opportunity for the travel and tourism industry. Already a Tehran travel agency is advertising holidays by the beautiful Caspian Sea for couples who want to have temporary marriages – the package includes a free one week accommodation in a three-star hotel and solemnization of the marriage by a local ayatollah. So, you are legal in front of the police and morally clean in front of the character in the heavens. It did not specify whether they will arrange a temporary wife as well – probably they will, for a small extra fee.

Good bye for now. I am packing my bags to catch the next flight to Tehran!