IN OUR COUNTRY | JESSIE SEIGEL

In our country, when a boy reaches the age of puberty, he is blindfolded so that he will not be tempted by the sight of women. This law is neither unreasonable nor unduly onerous in its requirements. Boys and men are permitted to go without eye-covering amongst family members and within the confines of the family house and its courtyard—so long as the walls surrounding the family enclosure stand at a regulation ten-feet, sufficiently elevated to prevent the sight of any female passing in the street beyond the enclosure.

Following logically from this law is the requirement that such boys and men may not leave the confines of the home unless they are accompanied by a mother, a sister, or a wife. Any rational person should see the sense of this. For if a male left home blindfolded, who knows what ill might befall him? Surely, he would walk into a brick wall or a lamp post and injure himself. Or God forbid, he might step into the street and be struck by some unsuspecting motorist’s automobile. If he should survive these dangers, boy or man, he would still be vulnerable to pickpockets or robbers, or find himself irretrievably lost in our cities’ maze-like streets, and unable to do other than cry out for someone to help him—thus advertising his vulnerable position to the world. Thus, for the blindfolded male’s safety, he must be accompanied in public by someone who is sighted.

To eliminate the blindfold requirement is, of course, out of the question. As we all know, men have urges they cannot control. It is their biological nature. The sight of a woman with a low neckline or a short skirt can send them into a sexual frenzy. If a male were permitted to drive an automobile with eyes open, a glimpse of stocking could so distract him as to cause a crash. (And, since it goes without saying that no-one can safely drive with eyes covered or closed, men are, of course, not permitted to drive.)

Our laws are not, however, ill-liberal. Men are permitted to work outside the home and some do. Their women deliver them to the work place. There, they may remove their blindfolds, replacing them with blinkers like those worn by horses, so that they can better focus on whatever task is before them.

Penalties for disobeying these laws are firm but fair. There is no mandatory sentence for a first offense. Rather, upon the first violation, our sight police, who carry blindfolds with them, give the violator a blindfold and require him to cover up—cover his eyes, that is—while the police watch to ensure compliance. If there is a second violation, the police place a secure hood over the violator’s head, locked with a key that is then given to the wife or, if he is unmarried, to the mother of the miscreant, this in order to keep his vision safe.

Upon a third violation, the violator’s eyelids are sewn shut, ensuring absolute future compliance. This penalty may sound harsh to a foreigner, but I assure you that the matter, completed in a hospital with appropriate hygiene and anesthesia, is far more humane than a thousand lashes with a whip, or a public stoning.