AN IRISHMAN'S DIARY

YES, yes, no doubt this newspaper is absolutely right to treat the subject of sex with customary lofty disdain

YES, yes, no doubt this newspaper is absolutely right to treat the subject of sex with customary lofty disdain. Yet three filler paragraphs in this newspaper the other day, February 24th, one after the other, give such startlingly different insights into different sexual cultures.

. Item one. Marseille. A woman who won the blessing of President Chirac to marry her dead lover found her trip down the aisle blocked at the last minute by the dead man's family.

. Item two. Tehran. A senior Iranian cleric accused Britain yesterday of sending a British woman to spy on Iran posing as a male Islamic theology student.

. Item three. West Sussex. Ford was yesterday at the centre of controversy over a sexy advert just days after being involved over a "racist" advertisement. A picture of a semi naked woman was due to appear in the company's in house publication, Ford News, in an advert for a West Sussex based dealership.

READ MORE

First, the wedding. Do you not thirst to know about the marriage ceremony which the blushing young bride had planned for herself?

Was her ardently rigorous husband to be propped up in a coffin waiting for her trembling young hand? Was a consummation of a kind contemplated? Had she consulted a family planning clinic? Was she on the elbow of her proud dad as she walked towards her betrothed?

Necrophiliac Exiles

This we do not know. And would Mary Robinson have behaved like President Chirac, permitting the wedding to go ahead, with the grinning cadaver waiting for his winsome honey? And would Mrs Robinson have a lit a low watt age candle in her window, for all the necrophiliac exiles unable to marry their dead loves at home?

And there is the British female spy allegedly posing as a male Islamic theology student. How was this admirably skillful agent supposed to get by in the showers and the toilets?

Deft with the towels, our Mahmet there, Good heavens above boy, let me look at you, do you find it that cold?

And finally the advertisement which features a semi naked woman. Since I have not seen it and am not likely to see it, I'm not able to comment on it.

But I'm pretty sure I can be expected to comment on it by certain taboo groups, regardless of my ignorance, as indeed, I can be expected to condemn the "racist" advertisements which got Ford entangled in such trouble recently.

The point is surely that all three news stories are news stories only because they offend taboos. The taboo on a semi naked woman in a Ford ad is a new one, but an old one too.

The important thing about such a taboo is that it is meant to be self evident to the reader. No explanation is required. Had the advertisement featured a half naked man, the news story would have made no sense.

The ad as it was made would probably have made no sense anyway in France, where the new taboos of feminist PC have made no progress at all. The ad would have aroused not a flutter of Anglophone objection 15 years ago.

But now, unseen, it can be relied on to be regarded as objectionable, disgraceful, degrading, etc., etc.

Decorous Dread

Alas, I am deplorably ignorant of Iranian attitudes towards necrophilia, though to judge from the way in which the Ayatollah's body was treated at his funeral ceremony, dead bodies do not inspire the decorous dread which we feel towards them.

This is not to say that Iranians would go so far as the young woman in Marseilles. She merits a story an infuriatingly incomplete story because she appears to be violating some taboo. Yet within the limits of the story as printed, nobody was proposing she had carnal expectations of her dead lover or is there something about dead males I haven't been told but should be?

Maybe within Iranian culture such reverence for the dead would be simply admired have they not a fountain in Tehran which is dyed a bloody red to commemorate the hundreds of thousands of dead in the Iraq war?

Is our Marseillaises not taking the respect for the dead a step farther than most of us can contemplate?

As no doubt the Iranian cleric felt, some central taboo was being assailed with his allegation that an allegedly male Isalamic theology student was in fact a British female spy.

But are we without equivalent sensibilities? How would most Catholics here feel if it were discovered that the priest serving as Cardinal Daly's private secretary was in fact a transvestite lesbian staff sergeant from the SAS?

I personally would be overjoyed. Women priests at last, etc. And how would Democratic Unionists feel if it were discovered that Peter Robinson were in fact a Poor Clare from Kerry who regularly pilgrimages in Knock? Ecstasy would be my response but would they feel the same in Castlereagh?

One man's taboo is another woman's delight. I find naked women unobjectionable, yet in the feminist '90s some feel that a violation takes place when an unclothed woman is seen in public.

Source of Mirth

The question, of course, is when do you decide when you should impose your taboo on other people.

The truth is, we always impose our taboos on other people. We let them believe what they want but they must conform with our taboos. These taboos tell us most about our value system.

For most of us, marriage to a dead person violates a deep taboo, but an Englishwoman posing as a male Islamic theology student is a source of mirth. We are divided on female nudity with, alas, the Politically Correct in the dominant.

Moods change. Taboos alter. Perhaps in 10 years' time Ireland will be trembling with rage when it is discovered that Mary O'Hara is an Iranian male spy and in the Pro Cathedral the mellifluous notes of Here Comes the Bride welcome the perfectly radiant coffin.