The New Humanist Blog draws our attention to the report on Saudi Arabia produced by the UN’s Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. The report contains the responses from a Saudi delegation to various questions posed by the Committee. I notice that apparently Saudi Arabian women are not allowed to study geology at university, it does seem rather an odd thing to prohibit. There are some lovely bits of deadpan reporting. For example, why women are forbidden to drive in Saudi Arabia:
"With regards to the issue of driving, in the early stages of Islam, there were no cars, and women rode camels or donkeys, and participated in all walks of life. This was history, and could not be forgotten. The matter was not related to Sharia. However, the problem was not related to the laws of the State, it was a matter for society. When people and the mentality were ready, then women would be allowed to drive cars. Once there was a need for women to drive, then it would be permitted. The Government was worried about women, and this was why those who were responsible were against the idea of women driving cars."
Even the act of a woman going out is hedged about with some suspicious verbiage:
"Saudi society was different in terms of its inter-dependence – the family was very tight, and mothers were considered to be the guardians of their children. The best proof was that if any woman wished to go out and needed permission from her husband, then this was for her own protection, and not to constrain or restrict her movements."
Then we have the independence of women when it comes to health issues:
"Regarding health, there was a misconception that a woman could not sign a consent document agreeing to a surgical procedure, and this was entirely wrong. An adult, mentally-sound woman could consent to procedures on her body, except if the procedure related to reproduction or infertility, in which case the consent of the male guardian was required. A mother could also give consent to medical procedures performed on her children."
I do love the sound of that phrase: "the male guardian". It rather undermines the whole impression that they try to give of equality between the sexes. But the concluding remarks of the delegation’s chairman (yes, of course it was a man, what did you think?) should put all our minds at rest:
"Saudi Arabia would like to emphasise the fact that it respected women, and protected their rights, and stood against anyone violating these rights. The concept of human rights in a society like that of Saudi Arabia was a concept that could be relatively new, but in reality, all the values of human rights which were encompassed in conventions, with the exception of some reservations such as homosexual marriage, which was not accepted, were accepted by Saudi Arabia.
Well, it’s clearly all hunky-dory, then.
Geoff Coupe's Blog 