Friday, December 28, 2007

The idea: women invite victimization if they do not adhere to strict social rules. A variation on the age-old "if a woman walks late at night in the street in a mini-skirt and is sexually assaulted, she is at least partially responsible for the attack."

Sometimes - almost by accident - I look at the CNN website. I'm quite skeptical about it's Middle East blog, run by Hala Gorani, an American whose parents happen to be Syrian. Still, the above paragraph was interesting in that she managed to peel past stereotypes of Saudi Arabia and Islam to what the issue really was about. I'm quite impressed.


Golaniya said...

i am sorry i am confused, not sure how the above paragraph managed to "peel past stereotypes" of KSA, i thought this one was:

"Many observers say the King's decision is only the result of international pressure and worldwide outrage surrounding the case. Some argue that this may lead to a change in the way women are treated in Saudi Arabia's justice system."

Dania said...

By the way, even if she went into street naked late at night, no one has at least right or excuse to sexually assaulting her.
Simply…. Humans are not animals, men are not animals… stop trying to make excuses to sick jackasses who are so sick by blaming women even partially…
And Saudi’s law is not gonna change for better, they only made that pardon thing to reduce the international pressure about this unfair treatment to the rape victim.

Wassim said...

Thanks for your comments. The reason I quoted this paragraph is because it pointed to the root cause of the problem, not that Saudi Arabia claims to be Islamic, but that it occurred as a result of a chauvinistic attitude which is universal and not specific to just the kingdom. That is why she calls it a "variation" of the age-old phrase, implying that it is wide spread and has been used as an excuse often. Most political commentators and non-muslims would use this to argue that Islam is fundamentally sexist and unjust. That someone from CNN would not seize this opportunity was mildly refreshing.

To say you two missed the point is an understatement, but thanks for stopping by.

Golaniya said...

If it is "understatement" to say that "we've missed the point", why saying it at all?
I think this statement was unnecessary. My comment was a sincere question and not a criticism, assuming criticism is provoking of such statements.

I am not sure if the italic paragraph is part of her argument to be quoted, she was providing her readers with cultural perspective to such incident in KSA, hence it was written in italic, whereas the rest of her paragraph was actually her own argument hence quotable and reflective of the any point we want to make out of it.

In fact, the only line that might points to the "root" of the problem is the line you've mentioned: "variation" of the age-old". Plz highlight some more if you've find another.

The thing is, I don’t think there's "one" point the post makes to be missed, while you can argue that I missed the "universal" idea which reflects your own reading to it, I can say you've missed my own reading to it. at the end my friend, I was hoping to have a discussion on this, well, maybe next time.

Happy holidays,

Wassim said...

I just reread your earlier comment, sorry the last statement was aimed at Dania who seemed to think I was justifying the statement. So missing the point was in reference to why I thought it relevant to comment on.

Anyhow, I hope my explanation of why I made my comment on that section was clear enough. Still open for that discussion if you're interested.

Dania said...

Lol... I wasn't attacking your ideas, I just wanted to comment on that "The idea" no less.. no more
anyway, so correct me if I am wrong but your point is that give them credit for not attacking Islam while they got the chance in that post?

Wassim said...

:D lovely! this was all just a misunderstanding. Yes you're right too and I guess I misunderstood both your comments. I can be a bit blonde sometimes.