Are Saudi women surprised by the decision on the vote ban? How could they be? Look at the picture below; women in these Arab countries dress worse than circus clowns, and this is mandated by their male counterparts (who rule every aspect of society). Why a woman who is forced to wear these cloth bags would expect to have the freedom to vote is beyond me.
Era of change? Not for women, they remain slaves to their masters. TGO
Refer to story below. Source: Associated Press
DUBAI (AFP) – Activists for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia said its decision on Monday to keep a voting ban in place was “outrageous” at a time that Arab governments are taking steps to avert pro-democracy revolts.
The head of the electoral committee charged with preparing for next month’s municipal polls said the kingdom was not ready to allow women to vote.
“We are not ready for the participation of women in these municipal elections,” said Abdulrahman al-Dahmash, while at the same time renewing promises that authorities would allow women to take part “in the next ballot.”
At a time of pro-democracy uprisings across the Arab world, Saudi Arabia, an absolute monarchy, announced last week that it is to hold municipal elections for only the second time, kicking off on April 23 from region to region.
Monday’s announcement, however, was “an outrageous mistake that the kingdom is committing. It’s just repeating the same mistake of 2005,” said Hatoon al-Fassi, a history lecturer at King Saud University in Riyadh.
The oil-rich Gulf state held its first men-only municipal polls in 2005, when Saudis elected half the members of 178 municipal councils across the previously elections-free kingdom.
The government in May 2009 extended the mandate of the councils by two years, postponing a second vote expected to have taken place that year.
Women in the conservative Muslim state were not allowed to run as candidates or to vote in the 2005 polls, a first for the highly-centralised monarchy where all government posts are appointed.
Women’s rights activists have long campaigned to lift the many bans which deprive women in Saudi Arabia of what are considered basic freedoms in most parts of the world.
Saudi women are banned from driving and cannot travel without authorisation from their husband or a related male guardian. They have also to cover from head to toe in public.
“Banning women participation only perpetuates the stereotype of the kingdom being a state that oppresses women and constrains their freedom. A state that does not care about its female citizens,” Fassi told AFP.
Fassi, a longtime leading women’s rights activist in the kingdom, said the decision was “negative” at a time of uprisings in the Arab world demanding a wider political role for ordinary people.
“Changes surround us, but we face them with such a negative position… Burying our head in the sand is fruitless,” she said.
King Abdullah has announced unprecedented economic benefits worth nearly $100 billion and warned against any attempt to undermine security in the country, largely spared by the Arab uprisings.
In late February, he already ordered social benefits worth an estimated $36 billion, mostly aimed at youth, civil servants and the unemployed.
However, Saudi activist Wajiha al-Hwaidar on Monday appeared to have resigned herself to the “oppression of women” in her country.
“I have grown used to the (attitude of) Saudi officials and women’s oppression. All their decisions are disappointing,” she told AFP, accusing the authorities of being out of touch with modern life.
“I know these mentalities that despise women… These men who run society still live in the pre-globalisation and pre-modernity times,” she said.
But she said that women in Saudi Arabia were also to blame for their situation because they had failed to establish a strong movement to demand rights from the male-run government.
“Men are not going to voice women’s demands on their behalf. There should be a real women’s rights movement in the kingdom,” she said, noting Western women had had to battle their way to equality.
Hwaidar, active in demanding the right to drive in the only country where women are not allow to sit behind the wheel, said that women had to act on the street and not just on the Internet.
“Women have to take to the street, or organise sit-ins. Otherwise, they will remain like cattle, herded” by men, she said.
Fassi said women activists would form their own “shadow councils” in response to the Saudi government’s marginalisation of women and monitor the performance of male-only councils.
AH HA, So, you are a white man! The most dangerous, cunning, and ruthless of all the races of Homo Sapiens.
I don’t understand why this would be a white man’s concern if not because of jealousy – you are a white man, are you not, TGO? You read right, jealousy. It’s been less than a handful of generations that white women have been able to vote, to wear pants, to drive, to smoke, to have sexual intercourse with whom, and when they choose. As a matter of fact, it’s only been in recent times that a white man could be criminally charged with raping his wife. My parents left Cuba in 1955 and whether it was a part of a Cuban man’s insecurities and feelings of superiority over women all along, or if my father tried to mimic his white man, but my mother never drove, wore pants, or did a number of other things that my father did. I think many white men would still like to have women slaves and many a time have I heard them put down other men with the cliché, “He’s pussy whipped,” if you know what I mean, and I think you do.
You Go Girls!
Jealousy; on my part, why? And what does me being white have to do with having a “concern” over this issue?
The point of my commentary was that Muslim women should not have been surprised by the fact that they are still unable to vote; not that they shouldn’t be able to. Muslim women living in Muslim countries are probably one of the most oppressed women in the entire world. Proof of this is that they actually wear these degrading, ridiculous outfits (burqas) because they are forced to do so by their male counterparts, although some will argue that it’s by choice – yeah right! By the way, as far I’m concerned, in terms of how a woman dresses – the skimpier the better. The reason Muslim men force their female counterparts to wear these cloth-bags is strictly religious. Islam, just as Christianity, is based to a large extent on avoiding temptation and therefore avoiding sin. Obviously suicide bombers who murder innocent people and pedophile priests who sexually abuse innocent children prove just how hypocritical these religious people are.
I believe that women should have the same rights as men; period. While it is true that men are generally better-equipped at certain jobs because of their superior physical strength, this has nothing to do with being discriminatory against women or women’s rights.
And yes, there is no doubt that throughout the ages women have been oppressed, although I completely disagree with you that this is solely a “white man’s thing,” as evidenced by Muslim men who are not technically white (Caucasian). The reason women have been oppressed has to do with what I stated earlier; man’s superior physical strength. This is also quite evident in our closest relatives; apes. The Alpha-male always dominates the female (s). Therefore, as is plain to see, it is purely a physical thing. As long as men are the stronger, more aggressive gender, they will always dominate (and control) women to some extent; that’s just the nature of things. And the more “closed” the society the more power they will exert over women. In “open” societies such as ours, they will exert less power.
My definition of a man being “pussy-whipped” is of course, subjective. For instance, a man who is not allowed to have drinks with friends at a bar is in my opinion “pussy-whipped.” A man who cannot watch football on Sundays because the wife or girlfriend doesn’t like football and they “need” to do things together on the weekend is in my opinion “pussy-whipped.” I could give countless examples, but you get my point. In other words, I define a man who is “pussy-whipped” as a man who cannot or will not do something because the woman in his life dominates his actions.
Quite simply, in my opinion, neither gender should dominate the other; instead men and women should live a peaceful and symbiotic existence.