"Sexual fascism â?? the violent denial of the fundamental right of human beings to define their essential nature in an open and accountable manner â?? is at the heart of totalitarianism, whether in an Islamic, a Christian or a Marxist context."
I'd have a lot of problems wiht the terminologies "sexual fascism", "essential nature" and so forth, not to mention a highly compromised term like "totalitarianism" (which should probably be treated in a manner similiar to fascism). As for the term fascism itself, it is an essentially political - and not "cultural" or "sexual" - category.
Otherwise, these discussions of Arab/Islamic ("traditional") morays are very much besides the point. They are not the issue, as they are not the active cultural agent in our historical period, which has been American culture. This mis-focus is a typically American projection. In this case, it is AMERICAN SEXUALITY - in its projection upon others at Abu Ghraib - that should be the focus and issue.
Sexual repression can also take the form of an apparent "freedom" or negatively, "licentiousness", terms that really describe in the American context a kind of sexual obsessive-compulsiveness as the American form of sexual repression. I think we can all guess that that has its roots in capitalism and America as the chosen historical avatar of capitalism. I also think that is what we saw run amok (run "free") at Abu Ghraib, and we know what the reputation of American prisons are in this regard.
That for starters. Make the peculiarities of American sexual modernity, and not Islamic sexual tradition, the focus and issue and you'll have a much more interesting discussion.
-Brad