For mediaeval Christians Islamic sex was only a symptom of broader laxity.

Evidence

Within this general theme a variety of different emphases is met. In this context sex has its place only as the chief among several symptoms of an underlying laxity. Peter the Venerable spoke of Islamic institutions as “‘prudentes secundum carnem’ — judicious in a fleshly way, we might almost say — as if to speak so were to make a significant concession to Islamic feeling. By comparison the summula was harsh to refer to loosening the restraints of gluttony and desire. Mark of Toledo described how Muhammad saw that the Arabs would not tolerate Christianity, because it was the religion of humility, and also of chastity and fasting. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 856

Categorization

• XREF: Refines the vault cluster: ‘lubricity’ was rubricized as one node of a wider indulgence-construction rather than standalone obsession—modestly complicates Aziz/Razack framings where sexualized threat does the sole constitutive work.