This is how our good friend and ally treats women. Shall we invade them next?
Saudi Women as Prisoners
11:42 Nov 12, '04 / 28 Cheshvan 5765
Two recent articles in the Saudi Arabian English-language newspaper Arab News described the oppressive conditions of Saudi women. However, the very fact that the articles have appeared may indicate a shift, however slight, towards recognition of the plight of women in the oil kingdom.
A report from inside the women's wing of the Riyadh jail printed last month illustrated the powerlessness and abuse women are subject to in Saudi Arabia. One woman interviewed by journalist Halah Al-Nasser of Sayidaty, a sister publication of Arab News, explained that she was in prison because her husband "ruined my reputation." She was sentenced to 10 months in prison and 400 lashes after being arrested by members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice for "immoral conduct". The system would have released her after 20 days, "but my husband refused to receive me and accused me of being a no-good, disobedient wife, so I was sentenced," she told the reporter. Her husband, in the meantime, divorced her, but still holds what is called in the kingdom the "family card", which belongs to a man and lists his wives and children. By refusing to turn that over, he can make her release difficult, if not impossible.
Al-Nasser also met with four foreign women who had been sentenced for immoral conduct. One of them, who was employed as a maid, said that "the abuse of her sponsor's wife got her into prison." When she ran away from her employer/abuser, she "took a ride with a stranger. He took me home, where I was arrested."
In an article printed earlier this month in Arab News, columnist Abeer Mishkas indirectly described the submissive position of the average Saudi woman, while noting that in neighboring Gulf states women "are allowed to vote and are also serving as government ministers."
"Before the introduction of ID cards for women, Saudi women were identified only on the IDs of their male guardians," Mishkas wrote. However, even since the introduction of personal ID cards, "a clause... makes optional the issuing of a card to a woman. ...[Male] guardians have used this, plus the fact that their approval is required for the issuance of a card to pressure women and prevent them from getting their own personal ID."
Warning of the potential for criminals to exploit the lack of identification for women, the columnist wrote: "There is, in other words, a legal way of confirming a woman's identity in every country in the world except Saudi Arabia."
Aside from the crime concerns, Mikhmas explained, the lack of an ID is disempowering. "One reason given for not allowing women to participate in the upcoming municipal elections is that many do not have IDs. How can election officials be sure who the women really are and if they have already voted or not? Not having an ID is preventing women from being fully involved in their country's development."
In favor of the personal ID, the writer went on to describe what it means to have one - and what it means to be deprived of one - in Saudi Arabia:
"To some liberals, the idea of a person having an ID is unnecessary and takes away an element of personal freedom. In our society, however, where women's personal freedom is restricted, having an ID would make a real difference. Women would have a symbol of their own independence; they would not be under the thumb, so to speak, of a male guardian. Having a male guardian is not the solution to all the problems of a woman and for many men, having these obligations and duties is an unnecessary burden. In such cases, an ID for women would be welcome for both sexes; women would be as independent as men and they could carry out their own business without male help, agreement or supervision.
"To look at the matter from still another perspective, some men, as we know, abuse their power over women for no other reason than that they have the power. They must approve anything the woman wants to do involving official paperwork and documents. That in itself is a source of power and is often misused and abused by men.
"In one of our papers there was an article about male guardians refusing to approve ID cards for their women relatives because they did not want their 'women' to have a public identity since that would reflect adversely on tribal feelings of pride and honor. Women belong to the tribe but they are kept in the background, never named in public or openly consulted. The report also told of men who use the family card as a weapon to exercise authority over women.
"The man holds the family card, which has the names of his immediate female relatives, his wife and daughters. In one case, a woman wanted to apply for a job and she needed the family card as proof of her identity but her brothers refused to give it her because of a dispute over an inheritance. Another woman complained that she could not move her children from one school to another because her former husband refused to give the family card to her and thus she was unable to prove that she was the mother of her children. One would normally expect the law to help these women. A lawyer interviewed by the newspaper said that it was indeed wrong for men to use their authority to harass women but that, to be honest, he saw no legal way out of the situation. All he could do was suggest that the family seek help and guidance from family elders and friends."
