Do you think if the movie had been made in India or China, the same reaction would not have been expected from the people in those countries? Child forced labours, child sex workers....(boys, especially)elements of homosexuality...it's all over the world. In Afghanistan it's just an over fantasised fact where moslem boys with kohl lined eyes seem more interesting and they have been romanticised in classical poems whereas boys in tattered clothes in Mumbai have not.

To Jamil from Vancouver:

It is sad you sit in a Modern Western country and think in the very medieval way that has stopped progress for our people. I always say modernize, which does not mean westernize, bring education and health to the people not war and strife. For the Western audience 'baygharayrat' loosely translated means a traitor who lacks respect.

Jamil forgets the illustrious Pathans who advocated education and progress to the people, which is a modern way of thinking, and I would respect dissent if it was based on some solid ground, but labels such as this show the intolerance we face today.

Mr.Sher I know pathans so either you can be a "bayghayrat" or pathan, not a modren and a pathan at the same time.

Anwar Sher and the few other brave souls in the Moslem community is the Arabs best hope for a return to sanity.

America and Israel aren't Arabs enemies. The real enemy of the Arab people is their governments.

Arabs beginning to wake up.

There will be revolutions and they will overthrow their governments.

America needs to pull its support from Arab governments and start supporting Arab democracy movements.

We can't afford to keep supporting dictators.

That's how we wound up with a hostile Iran in the first place.

The director of this film is racist. Portray your adversary as a child rapist. I don't anticipate watching the full length feature, in fact the local actors feel raped by a racist director from Hollywood.

"I am not advocating a view that homosexuality is right or wrong, I am merely stating a fact that homosexuality and rape of men has been around for centuries. Yet when exposed such societies becomes defensive..."

...and complain more about the homosexuality than about the rape, as if raping girls and women is somehow better than raping boys and men.

USAMA: having read the book, i feel qualified to tell you the rape scene is the source of the lead characters shame of his own cowardice from not helping a friend, which is his motivation for the rest of his adult life.

why should the author or film maker censor himself? Fear? If you give in to the fear tactics, you've already given up the fight. The fact that someone would hurt an actor for portraying something violent is a sad commentary on the society.

I must admit I know little about the "kite Runner" and I rarely look to fiction or hollywood for edification.

I appreciate Sher's article because he discusses the difficulties of existing between two worlds--oftentimes life is complex.

I also felt Usama; there seems to be a propaganda or western supremacy motif underlying the book/movie.

Regardless, I highly recommend the book: "God's Terrorists: The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Jihad" by Charles Allen.

It eloquently and succinctly discusses some of the issues peripherally touched on here. The roots of the current "war" are centuries old. Anyone interested in what's going on in Afghanistan/Pakistan should read this book.

The substance is more important than any anti-religious foolishness; or immoral bedroom secrets which, unfortunately, are universal.

The prevailing attitude of cultural relativism in the field of sociology -that all cultures are equal-, is utter BS. Some cultures are in fact better than others, some cultures espouse bad, even terrible values. Just because a few tenured guilty white liberals insist that the only people worthy of criticism are white American men does not make it so.

The Pashtun are disgusting.

The very fact that Anwer Sher's original posting on "The Kite Runner" has generated a storm of comments suggests that PostGlobal has done well by inviting him on board as a panelist. In an age when shouting often passes for analysis, Anwer brings informed thought, personal knowledge of issues, and a secular and tolerant attitude. Having spent quite a bit of time in the Middle East and South Asia myself, I can say that Anwer's perspectives are keenly observed and sharply articulated. He has no agenda, as he would himself agree. It's important that PostGlobal sustain the sort of dialogue on world issues that David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria have created in a timely fashion.

I must admit I know little about the "kite Runner" and I rarely look to fiction or hollywood for edification.

I appreciate Sher's article because he discusses the difficulties of existing between two worlds--oftentimes life is complex.

I also felt Usama; there seems to be a propaganda or western supremacy motif underlying the book/movie.

Regardless, I highly recommend the book: "God's Terrorists: The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Jihad" by Charles Allen.

It eloquently and succinctly discusses some of the issues peripherally touched on here. The roots of the current "war" are centuries old. Anyone interested in what's going on in Afghanistan/Pakistan should read this book.

The substance is more important than any bedroom secrets.

I'm disappointed that the comments are so focused on whether homosexuality is or is not more or less prevalent in Muslim or in Christian countries, and whether it is intrinsically evil or essentially okay. That's irrelevant.

The real issue is that the folks making the movie put the child actors at risk. They knew this was a sensitive issue. They were not honest with the parents about how it would be played. The producers and director behaved irresponsibly, and the kids --- yanked from their friends, extended family, and culture --- are paying the price.

Should the boys and their families not have known perhaps better than Paramount what kind of reaction could have been expected?

It appears that the kids and their parents were happy to take the money and then blame Paramount when the expected reaction took place.

The more we accept this kind of reaction the more often it will happen.

Responding to Usama:

You make absolutely no sense.
The rape scene is not there just for "drama and a metaphor." (sic) It is central to the plot. It is the single event in the main character's life that informs his motives throughout the rest of the book. Without the rape scene, there would be no justification for all that follows.

Also, many of your sentences need extensive revision. For example, "In the hidden pages of a book, it may be ignored given its relative obscurity, but on the wide screen for every ignorant or malacious fool to gain dark inspiration?"....
You don't even finish your thought, assuming there was thought there to begin with.

You write,"Americans want to believe themselves culturally and morally superior to justify conceit, imperiousness, arrogance; AND to obviscate accountability and responsibility." What do you mean by "obviscate"? I suspect the word you're desperately trying to work into your illiterate blog is "obfuscate," which means "to purposely confuse, to make dim." which is in fact what I suspect you to be guilty of.

Finally, a point of punctuation. You write, "I sincerely question the columnists' writing..." There is only one columnist to whom you allude; therefore the apostrophe should appear before the final "s", not after it.

While I do agree that "any selfrespecting (sic) human being would consider the rape of a child a terrible, unconscionable act," to condemn an individual for recounting such an act is akin to condemning an individual for being its victim. This is what recently happened in another Muslim country, and the West was understandably shocked. So long as Islam and its adherents justify repression and hypocrisy in the name of Allah, the West will continue to reject Islamic tradition as a legitimate way of life.

Farid

Has anybody actually the movie? The rape does not appear onscreen at all, in no way, shape, form, or fashion. It is merely alluded to on the soundtrack, through cries and shouts, et cetera.

My,my you people do not know what you are doing. I have never written a review to an article of yours and you come back to me saying you can not acept my review because I've written to many at one time. You people call the Afghans hypocrites because they are 3,000 miles away? The Kite Runner protrays nothing new in this world with its portrail of homsexual rape, is nothing new in this world. Here is another point, that 90% of all the major relegions in this world practice homosexuality. So the Afgans are not the only hypocites in this world. You are right in that that the movie makers should have realized the danger of the actors and went acordingly.

My,my you people do not know what you are doing. I have never written a review to an article of yours and you come back to me saying you can not acept my review because I've written to many at one time. You people call the Afghans hypocrites because they are 3,000 miles away? The Kite Runner protrays nothing new in this world with its portrail of homsexual rape, is nothing new in this world. Here is another point, that 90% of all the major relegions in this world practice homosexuality. So the Afgans are not the only hypocites in this world. You are right in that that the movie makers should have realized the danger of the actors and went acordingly.

Heard about Muslim suicide bombers promised 7 year old boys in heaven along with 72 virgins etc.
So I am surprised the author only mentioned Afghanistan. It is prevalent in all Muslim nations including the land of prophet- Saudi Arabia.

Homosexuality is not cultural, but it's reaction to it is. Rape is not a sexual desire, but an act of aggression. Including such shocking human acts of evil in film is a fine line between pure "shock value" or exposing a social issue that is in need of addressing. I believe this film's intent is for the latter. It is the same ignorant labeling of something you don't want to deal with (call it Islam, liberalism,or your local priest) that creates a culture of hostility. Not dissimilar in it's origin to the roots of hostility in this film. Not until you begin to care and take care of, will these sad stories ever end. Paramount or any other company that profits from these stories should start acting responsibly in what they do with their profits. Had the film ended with some call to action or the proceeds go to helping the problem, I would have more respect for them. Just because Paramount hasn't stepped up, doesn't mean individuals shouldn't. You were willing to spend ten bucks for the film...would you donate ten dollars to help those actors?

Homosexuality is not cultural, but it's reaction to it is. Rape is not a sexual desire, but an act of aggression. Including such shocking human acts of evil in film is a fine line between pure "shock value" or exposing a social issue that is in need of addressing. I believe this film's intent is for the latter. It is the same ignorant labeling of something you don't want to deal with (call it Islam, liberalism,or your local priest) that creates a culture of hostility. Not dissimilar in it's origin to the roots of hostility in this film. Not until you begin to care and take care of, will these sad stories ever end. Paramount or any other company that profits from these stories should start acting responsibly in what they do with their profits. Had the film ended with some call to action or the proceeds go to helping the problem, I would have more respect for them. Just because Paramount hasn't stepped up, doesn't mean individuals shouldn't. You were willing to spend ten bucks for the film...would you donate ten dollars to help those actors?

In the abouve article you make mention of Christian fundamentalism and homsexeuality. This fact is not Christiaity but but the Bible's teaching that homosexuality is not to be parcticed in any form, see 1 Cor. 6:9 and many other areas. This also goes for any sexuality that is parcticed out side of marrage. Perhaps because of the mention of the Talaban and its seemingly righteous society they have to put on a puriton act for the rest of the world that they are, after all, very righteous. The Islumic relegion is riff with sexual immorality and it is not supprising that homosexuality is practidced under the covers. Homosexuality is practiced thoughout most of the major relegions of the world. But your right, the actors should have been protected.

All Islam is sexually repressed.

Your not allowed even to talk to a female if your not married to her.

I've been to web sites where literally thousands of Muslim men are begging just to talk to a female online.

Homosexuality is prevalent in Islam because of Isalm.

Walk down the sreet of any Muslim country and you will see men groping each other.

Homosexual rape abounds in this culture.

But noone is allowed to speak of it because it would show Islam as the sick cult it is.

Yes, the boys should have been protected and Paramount should be ashamed they haven't protected them or payed them fairly.

the fact that Jacko moved to a Middle East country tells all

Usama is right the rape is of a boy on a boy, but the rapist later as an adult joins the Taliban and in effect becomes quite powerful in the regional sense, this is when Hassan's (the victim) son, (much later) who is named Sorab, is bought by the rapist from an orphanage, (the orphanage owner having to 'sell' one boy per month as a servant to manage running the place through the times of hardship). Amir's torment is that Hassan asks him to rescue his son and hence he returns to Afghanistan from America to bring Sorab back. I leave the rest for the viewers of the movie to decide.

I am not advocating a view that homosexuality is right or wrong, I am merely stating a fact that homosexuality and rape of men has been around for centuries. Yet when exposed such societies becomes defensive, and I also am saying that the movie makers should have known what will happen to these male actors. The hypocrisy is that actors are being targeted of a portrayal of a role. How intolerant is that, and yet how silly that the movie producers didn't know this would happen.

it all comes down to money doesn't it? so according to you some no body in a 4th or 5th rate country should be paid as if they were living in los angeles or ny city. he got 18k and was darn happy he got it.

First, did the columnist see the movie or read the script? Slate published the movie screenplay and the rape scene was an older boy raping a younger boy. The older boy may have been "Taliban", but the screenplay did not present such a political slant as the author alleges. There is no "homosexual love" scene.

Second, when did homosexuality deserve to be protected when it involves a male child is raped by another male child? The abomination of the scene is that a child is raped for dramatic value. It is unconscionable in today's world to welcome or tolerate this for artistry. I completely understand art and intepretative aesthetic beauty and truth (are you following me?), but they are NOT greater than the DEFINITIVE value of the innocence of a child. Kite Runner used the rape for drama and a metaphor. In the hidden pages of a book, it may be ignored given its relative obscurity, but on the wide screen for every ignorant or malacious fool to gain dark inspiration?

Third, I sincerely question the columnists' writing. Nearly half of his writing is asserting the prevalence of homosexuality in Afghan society- to what end? To make proponents of homosexuality at ease with Kite Runner? Afghanistan has been a destroyed, wartorn nation for nearly 20 years. All infrastructure has been reduced to nothiing. For many years, boys with guns controlled basic safe passage. Illiteracy is in the majority and the uneducated and ignorant rule. Crime too has been widespread for years. Is such a society conducive to controversial 'alternative' sexuality promoted by Western powers?

Fourth, Americans want to believe themselves culturally and morally superior to justify conceit, imperiousness, arrogance; AND to obviscate accountability and responsibility. Those filmmakers exploited the boys and the decimated Afghan people by including the rape scene.
Quite frankly, any selfrespecting human being would consider the rape of a child a terrible, unconscionable act EVEN IF COMMITTED BY A BOY ON A BOY. It cannot be acceptable for public artistic display- not by upright and conscientious human beings.

Anwer, this is indeed a balanced view. Hatred and bigotry exist everywhere, not just in Afghanistan and we know that we Americans like to point fingers. I often wish that we would work on our own society's bigots before we spend time being outraged by other's behavior.

America has its own "Christian" Taliban who, if they followed their instincts and were not restrained by law, would not be acting any differently.

Homosexuality in Arab and |Muslim countries is very high, just like drugs but nobody wants to talk about it. In the GCC countries homosexuality , and bisexuality is very high, but everything goes under the table. Maye the Pathan man from Dubai should talk about it. He knows better that place where everything goes from money laundering to prostitution to child abuse, youname it.

Very enlightening Mr. Sher. I don't know very much about Afghan society, and I thank you for this balanced explanation.

It is interesting to note that only five other comments were made regarding this whole issue that
The Post has gone to the trouble of putting up on their site. It seems there is virtually no interest in this or many other of The Post's discussions. Perhaps The Post should review its methods of bringing topics to hand.

Yeah ---- look what LIBERAL HOLLYWOOD IS DOING NOW. Liberalism and Islam are gonna have fun soon.

By the way Steven Weinberg, what means of measurement do you use to judge what is "good" and what is "evil".....

I thought it was all "opinion". I thought one man's freedom fighter was the other man's terrorist...

Since when did "good" and "evil" show up in secular discourse?

One problem that most Americans cannot seem to correct is their attitude and behavior towards other cultures. Most Americans seem to be so surprised and offended and judgmental when their culture/attitudes clashs with those that are different.
When I read this book, my thoughts were that it would NEVER be made into a movie without American children as the child actors. The story itself would lead any thoughtful person to conclude that it would be dangerous for any Middle Eastern child. One doesn't have to be a genius to know that homosexuality in the Middle East is considered a crime against both religion and society. My lord, look at the bigotry and hatred that some sections of a more 'enlightened' society has presented.
Putting these children and their families into harm's way is a moral failure on the part of the movie makers. And I hope that they have done everything possible to correct the harm they have done to these people.

Anyone who read T. E. Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom, and read between the lines; or who saw the motion picture Lawrence of Arabia, especially the uncut version, wouldn't be at all surprised by any of this.

But then the Wily Pathan gets his nose under your tent...."

Yeah. There's a history here: cf. Michael Hordern's rant about the "wily Pathan" in "How I won the War," for example. The problem is, that it's a history that nobody has examined, or particularly cares about. So we are all condemned to repeat it.

And it's really not all that interesting.

But it's history.

Thank you for a balanced and thoughtful response.

“With or without [religion] you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.” Steven Weinberg

“With or without [religion] you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.” Steven Weinberg