Whitewashed Walls
The article "Veiled ambition" by Pakinam Amer in page T14 of Startwo, The Star, Tuesday, 5th June 2007 touches upon the difficulties Saudi women face in their community.
In Saudi society, "mixing" is not allowed, i.e a strict separation between men and women is observed.
It is written that - and I quote - "a group of Islamic scholars issued a fatwa (Islamic mandate) denouncing jobs in which women communicated with male strangers."
It goes on to say that women suffered from occasional harassment by clients who tried to flirt. "Some male callers step out of line when they hear a woman's voice on the other end," says a female call center employee. (The italicized parts indicate direct excerpt from article).
So, okay, let me test my understanding (italicized parts also excerpts from the article):
1) Women are oppressed socio-economically. They are discouraged from working in any other fields except medicine, nursing, and teaching in segregated environments. They are banned from driving. Girls get their education in isolated classes across most high schools and universities, but the number of approved subjects is restricted.
2) Men are free to flirt with women they come across. I can't help but wonder if it's because they think that the women they encounter are "unsupervised" and therefore (for the lack of a better term) "loose"?
If they want so much to protect women, why not issue a fatwa that men aren't allowed to flirt? Why not decree that men should learn to respect women? Because from what's written, it is obvious that the men are treating the women condescendingly and disrespectfully.
Can external rules and regulations really help much in curbing crime and sin, when a person's thoughts and attitude remain corrupted and disrespectful, when he is not taught to control his own desires?
Making rules is only a way of denying and suppressing needs and root issues, not dealing with them, which ultimately won't solve anything.
In Saudi society, "mixing" is not allowed, i.e a strict separation between men and women is observed.
It is written that - and I quote - "a group of Islamic scholars issued a fatwa (Islamic mandate) denouncing jobs in which women communicated with male strangers."
It goes on to say that women suffered from occasional harassment by clients who tried to flirt. "Some male callers step out of line when they hear a woman's voice on the other end," says a female call center employee. (The italicized parts indicate direct excerpt from article).
So, okay, let me test my understanding (italicized parts also excerpts from the article):
1) Women are oppressed socio-economically. They are discouraged from working in any other fields except medicine, nursing, and teaching in segregated environments. They are banned from driving. Girls get their education in isolated classes across most high schools and universities, but the number of approved subjects is restricted.
2) Men are free to flirt with women they come across. I can't help but wonder if it's because they think that the women they encounter are "unsupervised" and therefore (for the lack of a better term) "loose"?
If they want so much to protect women, why not issue a fatwa that men aren't allowed to flirt? Why not decree that men should learn to respect women? Because from what's written, it is obvious that the men are treating the women condescendingly and disrespectfully.
Can external rules and regulations really help much in curbing crime and sin, when a person's thoughts and attitude remain corrupted and disrespectful, when he is not taught to control his own desires?
Making rules is only a way of denying and suppressing needs and root issues, not dealing with them, which ultimately won't solve anything.
posted by sleepypurplepiglet at 10:13 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home