When Islam was revealed well over 1400 years ago, women were given rights that were until then unheard of, especially in 7th century Arabia. Women were given the right to vote by being allowed to voice their opinions, they were given the right to inheritance, to choose who to marry, and were given certain rights from their husbands. Essentially, they were made humans, when before they were little more than property. These things were ground breaking progress 1400 years ago. But that was 1400 years ago.
What happened? Why have some Muslim countries and cultures, in particular Saudi Arabia, made little progress since then in regards to women’s rights? Why haven’t Muslims taken the initiative that began in the time of the Prophet Mohammed and allowed women to progress with the rest of society? There’s been progress in science, medicine, education, technology…but women? We’re still stuck in the 7th century over here.
In Saudi Arabia, women, regardless of age, are or marital status are required to have a male guardian. A woman cannot travel, cannot attend university, and cannot work, and cannot marry without her guardian’s permission. In some cases, although the law doesn’t support the practice, a woman cannot receive major medical treatment without the permission of her guardian.
In my personal experience, I needed The Mr’s permission to have a minor surgery, and according to my sister in law, an OBGYN at one of the city’s famous hospitals, she’s known of women to suffer and babies to die because guardians refused to give permission for pain medication or surgery. When I started a new job and The Mr. was out of the country, I had to have his brother’s permission and signature to work. Every time I want to travel, The Mr. has to obtain the exit and reentry permit and is present at the airport to make sure his permission is obvious to the passport control officer.
Some claim that the guardianship system is for women’s own good, that it is a protection for women, that a woman’s guardian knows what is best for her. I might agree to that if we were talking about girls, but we’re talking about women of all ages. I might also be more inclined to agree if a woman’s own son couldn’t eventually become her guardian. Can you imagine having to ask your son for permission to marry, to work, or to travel? Just because he’s a man? Give me a break.
Saudi Arabia remains the only country in the world where women are not allowed to drive. No matter what her age, no matter if she is a licensed driver in another country, no matter if there is an emergency…she’s forbidden to get behind the wheel of a car. Those who support this rule (it’s not really a law, more like an unwritten rule) claim that women driving would make them vulnerable, would encourage mixing with the opposite sex and strangers, and would eventually lead to a steep decline in morality and “provoke a surge in prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and divorce.” And one of my readers even asserted that the roads are not safe enough in Saudi Arabia for women to drive.
Where do I begin with that? Women are forced to mix with the opposite sex, made as vulnerable as I’ve ever felt in KSA, when they climb into a car with a taxi driver or their hired driver. There’s plenty of opportunity to be promiscuous here without driving, men are no doubt the leading employers of prostitutes, yet they’re allowed to drive. Pornography? Really? There’s plenty of that on the internet for those who are interested (also, the main consumers of porn are men). Homosexuality, whether the nature or nurture variety, is shockingly common and is even made easier by the fact that girls and women spend SO much time together and are kept away from men, and divorce is already just as high, if not higher, than Western nations where women are allowed to drive. Saudi Arabia is indeed a leader in the world for road fatalities, but guess what…women are dying in those accidents even without being behind the wheel. Next. Preventing women from driving boils down to one thing: control.
Women in Saudi Arabia are required, no matter what their religion, to wear the abaya. Muslim women, depending on what city they’re in and if religious police are present, can also be required to wear a headscarf and face veil. While a lot of women wear these things out of obligation to their culture, respect for family tradition, and some as a symbol of their faith, there are women who if given the choice would choose to forgo being swathed in all black in the extreme desert heat. Other than women being forced to wear the burqa in Taliban controlled Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia is the only country that I know of that enforces a religious uniform of sorts for women.
When a woman is divorced in Saudi Arabia, she returns to the home of her father. If her father is dead, she goes to a brother or an uncle, or maybe a grown son. There is no concept of a single, independent woman in Saudi Arabia. Upon divorce, she may or may not be granted custody of her children. If the children are over the age of 7, they will likely live with their father or his relatives. Even if her husband dies, a woman’s children are not hers to keep. Some Muslims will say that a man is more capable of providing for children than a woman is (financially speaking), but if you ask me…and most mothers out there…there is no one more capable of taking care of a child than its mother.
Saudi women cannot pass citizenship onto their children. If a Saudi woman marries a non Saudi man, her children will never be considered Saudi in the eyes of the law. This problem exists within my inlaw’s family, where children do not have passports, where university education has to be paid for out of pocket, and where women have to consider sponsoring their own sons as “workers” to allow them to remain in the country they were born in. There is talk of a points system that allows a woman to pass her citizenship onto her children when they reach adulthood, but as with all legal processes in Saudi Arabia, it isn’t easy…and so far the adult children in this family are 0 for 3. Not granted.
The injustices go on and on and on.
Bill Gates may have said it best. Regarding a visit to Saudi Arabia, this quote is often cited: Bill Gates recalls once being invited to speak in Saudi Arabia and finding himself facing a segregated audience. Four-fifths of the listeners were men, on the left. The remaining one-fifth were women, all covered in black cloaks and veils, on the right. A partition separated the two groups. Toward the end, in the question-and-answer session, a member of the audience noted that Saudi Arabia aimed to be one of the Top 10 countries in the world in technology by 2010 and asked if that was realistic. “Well, if you’re not fully utilizing half the talent in the country,” Gates said, “you’re not going to get too close to the Top 10.” The small group on the right erupted in wild cheering.
Women were indeed given rights that were unheard of in their time 1400 years ago. But we’re not living 1400 years ago, Saudi Arabia. Times change, society changes, people change, and you don’t seem to have much issue with changing along with it until it comes to the issue of women. Not only are you not utilizing your women, you’re refusing to acknowledge that they have little more value than baby making machines. Why? What are you afraid of?
I’ve often said that Saudi Arabia will not change until the people demand change. Afterall, the Quran says: Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves. King Abdullah has made progress for women, allotting 30 seats to women on the Shura Council, but there’s so much more that needs to be done. And it won’t happen if no one pushes for it. So get to it, Saudis. Stop settling for second rate, Saudi women, and stop allowing the less-than status to be forced on your women, Saudi men. Demand change, progress, and equality for women.
UTA:
Actually many civilizations gave women many rights including inheritance long before Islam. This is just propaganda by religious clerics. If you study ancient history you will find this out.
Here is an interesting view.
http://atheistfoundation.org.au/article/islam-and-womens-rights/
Ponder this statement:
Despite the exaltation of motherhood – Mohammed once told a follower that paradise is found at the feet of the mother – children are considered the property of the father with the mother being merely the caretaker. How is it possible for a Muslim man to respect his mother when immutable religious law proclaims women’s inferiority and inadequacy?
Actually you’re are incorrect to claim that Islamic law prohibits the mother from being the main caregivers in the case of a divorce. She actually has more rights than the father based on the hadith One of the key relevant hadith is the following: According to Amr Ibn Shu’aib, a woman came to the Prophet* and said: ‘Truly my belly served as a container for my son here, and my breast served as a skin-bag for him (to drink out of) and my bosom served as a refuge for him; and now his father has divorced me, and he (also) desires to take him away from me.’ The Prophet sallalahu Alaihe wasallam said: ‘You have a better right to have him, as long as you do not marry again. Hadith: Ibn Majah The mother is recognised as generally the fittest person to take care of the children, because of the instinctive love and tenderness she feels for them and her closer contact with them throughout pregnancy, nursing, and childhood. Now the Prophet stated that a mother has more rights to the child as long as she doesn’t remarry but once she remarries the rights is not taken away, simply the rights between the parents are equal and who should be the main caregivers now relies on external factors. Note, the prophet stated that a Mother has higher rights than the father..until she remarries but the prophet never said that once she remarries, she has no rights whatsoever. Simply the rights between both parents are now equal. What Saudi law mandates is a whole different story.
I never claimed that Islamic law prohibits the mother from being the main caregiver in the case of divorce. What I said is that in Saudi Arabia, If the children are over the age of 7, they will likely live with their father or his relatives. Even if her husband dies, a woman’s children are not hers to keep.
There are various hadith dealing with the issue of child custody, and Saudi Arabia has quite obviously decided to go with those that state the father has rights to his child. We need to use our modern day common sense, look into scientific studies regarding divorce and its effects on children, and take into consideration what is best for the child in TODAY’S world.
Umm Gamar:
You haven’t provided anything that takes away from the statement. The children are deemed property of the father and the mother is the caretaker. Islam claims women to have numerous inadequacies in addition to being an awrah.
Of course other civilizations gave rights to women way before Islam. Women even ruled as queens in other parts of the world and during other times. But there is no doubt that Islam gave women rights in Arabia that they didn’t have before. I am not contending that the rights given were the best, or the most that women would ever deserve, I’m wondering why certain societies have decided that since these are the rights that were mentioned by the Prophet, that these are all the rights women are entitled to. In regards to mothers taking children after divorce or death of their father, I can understand why fathers were give preference in a time where women were financially dependent on their husbands, but these things should change with the times, and determining where a child lives TODAY after divorce in the Muslim world should be done on a case by case basis as it is in the rest of the world.
Yes but there is the rub UTA, the Quran and hadith are for all time at least according to the books. Oh, I would have to disagree with your statement that women where just given these rights in Arabia after Muhammad put them in place. Allegedly his wife inherited a business and ran it , too bad it was defunct a few years after her death (could be Muhammad was not a businessman) and I believe another sect had women a degree above men and he/his followers had no liking for that. So sorry not buying the propaganda.
UTA:
I always enjoy how religion states it honors women.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Women
I think you really hit the nail on the head several times. but especially at the end, a lot of the problems are perpetuated by the significant portion of women who drink the cool-aid. it’s hard enough to change a society without being undermined by a significant portion of the disenfranchised minority you’re trying to help. but then again, all it takes is the right people to do the right things to make things happen. hopefully that’ll be sooner rather than later.
Excellent post – those who wish for change in society must first look at themselves to make a difference.
A VERY GOOD POST…All cheers (at UTA)and the Crowd grows wild yeehhhhh…..I remember Micheal Jackson’s Song one of my favorite to “MAN IN THE MIRROR”
Mandi, so sorry I was addressing my comment to Bigstick. You on the other hand are spot on!
My bad
I should have paid attention to the “in response to” part of the comment 
No harm done
Stay strong sister! I’m Umm Gamar and a rather new follower and am glued to your writings.
Bigstick you’re right that the Quran is relevant for all time and there is one thing about Islam that you just have to understand. Islam leaves a lot of things for the society to determine what is relevant, it takes the neutral course or in Islamic term it’s called ijtihad.You see, that is why Islam is relevant for all time, it leaves room for reasoning and using the norms of the society as a measurement tool. Things like eating pork is clearly haram but social norms such as slavery was left for the.society to decide. Obviously Islam is progressive, but the state of many Islamic countries is still semi feudal at best. Why you may ask? Look at Mandi’s article up there and you can find the.answers especially in her last paragraph.
I am most familar with Ijihad. Good luck on getting that pushed through. Next the only reasons Saudi Arabia banned slavery (at least in name) was due to outside pressure in 1962. In addition, Ijihad was a way in which caliphates created laws after the fact and used for political purposes to ensure control. In fact the employment of ijihad may have actually harmed women depending on your perspecitive. I can provide some sources if you like.
Now if you like my mind set on the matter then read this as it is in line with what I believe.
http://voicesofthefaceless.com/2013/01/13/some-interesting-points-made-in-the-book-the-hidden-origins-of-islam/
I think there’s no change without society itself. If the Saudis want a change, the’ll have a change. We can jump to the sky and push them, but for what? So I agree very much with the last paragraph.
I thought twice about writing this but I’m going to say it anyway. I have a real struggle with the world call for Saudi to progress in many ways especially regarding women. The country seems relative stable to me, and women appear safe as they go about their daily lives. Now, look at the
so-called progressive western countries where women seem to be at risk from all angles. In reality, they do not succeed in the corporate arena as men do. I’m all for leaving Saudi as is, and let it progress at its own pace, in its own time without interference from outsiders.
Salif:
Not sure where you are getting that women in western countries are at risk from all angles. This argument is one that tries to keep women in their place by treating them as children. Many women will go for a little risk verses imprisonment by lack of movement and choices and for the most part women are safe in the west. In addition more and more women are learning how to defend themselves in various ways should an assailant attack them including how to kill them if need be as a measure of self-defense. Keeping women from exploring the fullness, depth, abilities and experiences of their body and mind ensures that they will forever be victims at the hand of the protectors/abusers. The only way to protect someone is to arm them with self-confidence, education, skills, defensive tactics, experience, choices, and be allowed to be adults who are more than the sum of their genitals. Once a woman is conditioned in this matter it becomes far more difficult to control her or to take advantage of her.
Next even men like a little risk and even they face that in society. Should we all retreat into our homes for fear of risk? Then the question is what is the point of living? This in my assessment is existence. There is a difference, I assure you.
Why is there never any sense of urgency over the fact that women are basically property? That women are systematically denied being in control of their lives? You may fear what progress may bring. Why don’t you fear the actuality of what is wrong? Why don’t you fear Allah’s judgement for accepting such inhumanity?
Saif, when we say we want progress for the women in Saudi it doesn’t mean we are aiming to copy the Western standards. We are aiming for basic human rights, to be able to have dignity and self worth, to be dependant which is not a bad thing in Islam. A woman is the backbone of her family. Islam has never denied our rights. Mysoginist men did!
independent, I meant independent. But trust a zealot to jump at your throat before clarifying your statement or ask you to further elaborate on that without passing judgements. Religious zealots are the bad, atheist zealots are much worst.
Hey, I was only using your words. So if it is independent then I am glad to hear it.
Here’s the thing, Saif. No one is saying we should force anything on Saudi women, but that they should, at the very least, be given the CHOICE to have the same rights as men. No one will force women to drive or travel or go to work, but if they want to do those things, they shouldn’t have to ask ANYONE to do them. And the whole let the country develop at its own pace argument is played out. The society has no problem evolving in other areas, but if an issue pertains to women they won’t budge.
Salam Umm Gamar,I have not seen you comments before,I Would appreciate if you could go through the previous Blog that UTA wrote and look at my comments that i think was appropriate about people who don’t believe in Hadith.Would luv to see what do you think.
Salam Abdul Mujeeb. I haven’t commented before, was a silent reader. As a Muslim, the Quran and Hadith is of course the main source to refer to in life. Yet it doesn’t conflict with progressive Muslims, I don’t like labels but…after all Islam itself is progressive. Bigstick, slavery in Saudi may have been abolished in 1962 but I am sure you realized that it wasn’t until 1964 did the African Americans had any rights under the Civil Rights Act. Basically the same, it took a while for the African Americans to be considered as equals, they were essentially no more looked upon as than mere slaves before that. Women in Saudi Arabia are rather like the African Americans, well that is very harsh but there is hope..!!
Umm Gamar:
The civil rights act is not about giving rights as they were already in place. This act provided remedies against individuals who voilated anothers rights based upon sex, religion, gender, ethnicity, etc. In other words, if you are found discriminating based on these factors you could be subjected to penalities such as fines or imprisonment or both depending on the offense. Next no law on the books is consider to be divinely inspired such as the hated doctrines of Abrahamic religion.
i actually don’t know why I even bother to explain to someone who views themselves as a dependent and a child.
I think your analysis of the position of African American in the US is simplistic. In most of the country (ie: the North and West), African Americans had civil rights. They could vote, hold office etc. The lack of civil rights you point out was not nation-wide and even at its worst it was hardly the same as slavery.
Because I happen to disagree with you so that makes me a dependant and a child in your mind? Good luck on trying to enforce your totalitarian dogma on others who disagree with you. Cheers!
You must understand how this is puzzling however. Saudi Arabia is a country full of contradiction…
What happen if a women is a single child, her father is dead, she only has 2 young daughter and wants a divorce. Who is going to be her gardian? A remote uncle/cousin? What about gender segregation, a woman can’t drive due to fear of mixing yet she can be driven by a totally unknown man who happen to be a taxi driver. This doesn’t make sense either… Women are censored out of an ikea catalogue yet plenty of women with little to no clothes can easily be seen online from any computers with an internet connection (Unless saudi is censoring all the internet? Is that even remotely possible?).
Salma, there are actually adult orphans here. Women who do not have parents or other guardians who are raised in orphanages have only one way out, and that’s to get married. If that woman cannot get married, she remains a ward of the state, living in the orphanage no matter her age. She can work, she can attend school, but at the end of the day she returns to the orphanage. I can’t even imagine.
No doubt, this place is full of contradictions and paradoxes and unless a woman comes from a forward thinking family, she’ll always be at the mercy of a man.
No, your statement provided that, “to be dependant which is not a bad thing in Islam.”
If this is what you advocate, then I have no problems in giving you what you want.
The journey to the moon started with one small step at home UTA, when we ask for the society to change I think its important for us to look at the circle of influence we have (for ex – home) and try to bring about changes there which eventually over a period of time could lead to big time changes in society. Once again I hope I have not offended you by saying this.
I always wonder about that. Why Saudi don’t do things that are not allowed anyway? What is the worst possible thing that could happen if you do walk alone, drive, go without an abaya, don’t get a male signature to do something (why not just fake the signature?). Stupid rules are made to be broken. Go girls!
They do get broken in reality. These cultural norms and laws are not fatalism for people.
Salma – with what I have heard and read – they will be put behind bars is what I understand
In regards to driving and going without abaya, women can be arrested and there are even cases of lashings being handed out for driving. Not getting a male signiature to do something that requires that signiature means you can’t do whatever it is that you’re trying to do. I agree, some rules are made to be broken, it will just take enough women willing to face the consequences of breaking those rules to make it happen.
Saudi Arabia is a nation-state, and the goal of the nation-state is to reproduce their society (to compete on the global economic world stage). In doing so women are the main targets to be the reproducers of the society — thus, women are restricted). And anyone who believes it is only Muslim or Saudi women who are marginalized and restricted are very mislead — women in the West are no more in a state of elevated status (despite this false notion of ‘freedom.’)
In historical contexts (before the onset of nation-states) women in many Islamic societies enjoyed a heightened status. We must look at the origins of such matters. Global Economic Politics also explains why Saudi Arabia is cracking down on foreign marriages — to protect it’s national identity — so Saudis don’t lose their strength as a global competitor. It’s very tragic indeed, but the origin of such social problems stems not from Saudis themselves, but the ideology that precedes nation-states (imperialism).
They are having a crisis because of the huge baby boon coming of age that they were not prepared for in terms of education or infrastructure or social planning. They do not need breeders right now. And yes, women in the west are indeed in a more elevated status as anyone would know who has lived in as a woman in both places- particularly a woman who had need of legal protection from abuse or any other human rights situation. Saudi is not “cracking down” on foreign marriage. It has always been an issue. Furthermore, their social problems are not from “imperialism” but from their insistance on clinging to outmoded immoral patriarchal/tribal behaviors.
What do you mean “women in the West are no more in a state of elevated status”? Are you comparing the freedom of women in the West to women in Saudi Arabia? If not, please explain yourself. If you are, I’d say that is fairly ridiculous and is harmful to the plight of Saudi women’s rights. As a Western working woman with her own health care, car, apartment, and passport, I would completely and utterly disagree with you. There is still domestic abuse, horrifying rape statistics and pay discrepancy in the Western world but it is nowhere near the restrictive environment Saudi women have to live under.
CS Rosa Park was arrested too and now the president of the US is an African american. I am hopefull
Very appropriate example in this context, Salma – Rosa Park
Exactly my thought Salma.
The Koran was an innovation in that it codified women’s inheritance in one place. In the Roman Empire women may have had few named rights, but upper class women would exercise considerable power and influence. I would suggest anyone to read up on the wives of Roman emperors. What is wierd is that over time Muslim scholars seem to have ignored evidence that some early Muslim women exercised political freedom. One obvious example of women’s freedom to act in public is Aisha. Yet scholars in Modern Saudi Arabia seem to miss that.
I really like the way you write.
What I think is very important to remeber – women’s right did not happen over night in the west, and for sure will not happen over night in KSA or in generall in de ME.
What happened?
Power-clinging men happened.
Most people forget that the Koran was derived from the Bible, and before any Christians starts to argue that Christianity is ‘much better’ they are to be reminded that the Bible also says (paraphrased) women are the property of their husbands… and anyone who do not believe in the lord shall be killed.
And there are still a lot of Christians who, just like the Islamic extremists, that interpret these words literally.
Christianity went through a revolution that was blood and ugly. That was over a long time ago. It is unfortunately Islam’s turn, and to make things worse, media fuels the violence and struggle, because that’s what makes ‘viewing’ interesting (to them). Not to mention, human beings are naturally build to have enemies.
When it comes to women’s rights, we also forget that women wasn’t allowed a lot of things in the western society either!
Great post. I enjoyed reading it. No doubt it’ll fuel a few debates, but that’s what drives your website traffic
Just read your article and it sparks many debatable topics. It is not the first of its type, but it always bothers me because of similar questions rising in the mind. First of all, please note that all the hardships, rules, availability of CHOICE and limitation on being independent is not awarded to ‘WOMEN” only, it is equally true for ‘MEN’. What is the bottom line of segregating man and a woman? It is not that the women should ‘suffer’ and men should ‘enjoy the royalty. We men also face a big time being segregated from females, but all this is being done so that we can stay away from adultery and other forms of interactions that might bring instability in our family system. I totally disagree with the theme of your article.
And regarding homosexuality, please note that it is something that is present in every culture, take any western or Asian culture, you will find it. Wise and honest girls and women don’t follow the act of homosexuality just because they are spending too much time together.
You sound really naive, Shikra. Men and women being segregated does not lead to less vice between them. Adultery and instability in the family exist and are prevalent here in KSA as well. Segregation and forced religion makes people better at working the system and better at hiding their sins, that’s about it.
Yes, men do face inconvenience with segregation here, but it is no comparison to what a woman faces. The only way you’d know that would be if you were a woman.
Dear,
I might be naive, but surely I don’t want the ego in me to bias the conversation with you.
Regarding relationship between segregation and vice, you agree or not, it does have inverse relationship (the more segregation, the less vice), unless, you really change the meaning of ‘vice’ (like we have in western societies, adultery is not to be blamed too much).
I do agree from the bottom of my heart that inconvenience for women is far more than men due to many reasons, but you can’t simply say that the solution is to mix the sexes. We can move towards a situation in which women can enjoy the same liberty as men but keeping them separate (at a reasonable distance). Do you agree on this?
No, I’m sorry, I do not agree on gender separation or segregation as enforced and regulated by the government. Let’s agree to disagree on that.
Ok, Agreed but only if you are talking about the government regulations. But segregation has to be there up to some level to avoid the ‘mistakes’ that do happen in open societies, about which you are more aware than me.