"Driving by women leads to evil"
Did I get your attention?
Well, don't blame me, blame someone named Munir al-Shahrani, who wrote that in response to a proposal by a member of Saudi Arabia's Consultative Council, Mohammad al-Zulfa, who recently proposed granting limited driving rights to women. Actually, according to the Toronto Star, all al-Zulfa proposed was "a study of the issue," suggesting that "only women over age 35 or 40 be allowed to drive -- unchaperoned on city streets but accompanied by a male guardian on highways". Hardly revolutionary...
...unless you're in Saudi Arabia, where "[t]here have been calls to kick al-Zulfa off the Consultative Council, the all-male legislative arm appointed by the king, and even to strip him of Saudi citizenship. His cellphone constantly rings with furious calls accusing him of encouraging women to commit the double sins of discarding their veils and mixing with men. A phone text message prays Allah will freeze his blood. Chat rooms bristle with accusations that al-Zulfa is 'driven by carnal instincts'." Nice, huh? Let me go on: "Conservatives, who believe women should be shielded from strange men, say women in the driver's seat will be free to leave home alone and go when and where they please; to unduly expose their eyes while driving; to interact with strange men such as traffic cops and mechanics." Oh, how awful.
Thankfully, there are liberal voices for reform even in that desert tyranny, and they're fighting the good fight (if, at present, a losing one) against such discrimination. One such voice is Nadine al-Budair, a columnist for the Al-Watan newspaper (the one that published al-Shahrani's letter to the editor), who wrote: "How long will women remain shrouded in the sad colour of black and hiding in back seats like devils, while the men are covered angel-like in happy, pure white clothes that guarantee them the front seat?"
Don't hold your breath.
Well, don't blame me, blame someone named Munir al-Shahrani, who wrote that in response to a proposal by a member of Saudi Arabia's Consultative Council, Mohammad al-Zulfa, who recently proposed granting limited driving rights to women. Actually, according to the Toronto Star, all al-Zulfa proposed was "a study of the issue," suggesting that "only women over age 35 or 40 be allowed to drive -- unchaperoned on city streets but accompanied by a male guardian on highways". Hardly revolutionary...
...unless you're in Saudi Arabia, where "[t]here have been calls to kick al-Zulfa off the Consultative Council, the all-male legislative arm appointed by the king, and even to strip him of Saudi citizenship. His cellphone constantly rings with furious calls accusing him of encouraging women to commit the double sins of discarding their veils and mixing with men. A phone text message prays Allah will freeze his blood. Chat rooms bristle with accusations that al-Zulfa is 'driven by carnal instincts'." Nice, huh? Let me go on: "Conservatives, who believe women should be shielded from strange men, say women in the driver's seat will be free to leave home alone and go when and where they please; to unduly expose their eyes while driving; to interact with strange men such as traffic cops and mechanics." Oh, how awful.
Thankfully, there are liberal voices for reform even in that desert tyranny, and they're fighting the good fight (if, at present, a losing one) against such discrimination. One such voice is Nadine al-Budair, a columnist for the Al-Watan newspaper (the one that published al-Shahrani's letter to the editor), who wrote: "How long will women remain shrouded in the sad colour of black and hiding in back seats like devils, while the men are covered angel-like in happy, pure white clothes that guarantee them the front seat?"
Don't hold your breath.
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
10:56 PM
1 Comments:
This is a little off the specific point, but there is an issue here with respect to whether we are more concerned with liberalism or democracy and I think that is a problem that we are having pushing democracy in the Middle East.
When we in the West talk about democracy, we are really talking about a form of liberal constitutionalism that, in fact, limits the effect of democracy. Our Bill of Rights places limits on the democratic will of the people. But in most parts of the world, it seems to me, they think of democracy as full-scale democracy, ie, if we win the election, we can do anything we want. So this issue of womens' rights becomes problematic in places where we are trying to promote a more representative political system. In Iraq (a unique situation to be sure), we have caught flak for promoting a constitution that insures rights and representation to various groups and, to some degree, frustrates, the will of the majority. So, the question remains, are we concerned with democracy or with liberalism. Fareed Zakaria has written about the spread of illiberal democracies as a danger; but should we try to force liberal values in other places at the expense of democracy? I don't; I'm just raising the point.
By
Anonymous, at 10:41 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home