No women to Mecca?

[August1991]

Driving in Saudi Arabia, and not a Muslim, I was turned away from Mecca and Medina.

Officials are considering an unprecedented proposal to ban women from performing the five Muslim prayers in the immediate vicinity of Islam's most sacred shrine in Mecca. ...the religious authorities behind the proposal insist its real purpose is to lessen the chronic problem of overcrowding, which has led to deadly riots during pilgrimages at Mecca in the past.

CBS

Crowding? Of course. Exclude pious Islamic women.

----

I simply cannot understand why any "progressive" would defend such a viewpoint. No self-respecting woman, no feminist, should be associated in any way whatsoever with Islam, if this is Islam.

Am I wrong?

[August1991]

The issue has raised a storm of protest across the kingdom, with some women saying they fear the move is meant to restrict even further women's roles in Saudi society. But the religious authorities behind the proposal insist its real purpose is to lessen the chronic problem of overcrowding, which has led to deadly riots during pilgrimages at Mecca in the past.

It was unclear why the step is being considered now, but officials say they have growing concerns about overcrowding, particularly at Mecca's Grand Mosque. The mosque contains the Kaaba, a large stone structure that Muslims around the world face during their daily prayers.

Toronto Star

Even the Toronto Star reports that the real purpose is to reduce crowding. As its article carefully notes:

But Sheik Youssef Khzeim, deputy chief of the Presidency of the Two Holy Mosques, a Saudi government organization in charge of implementing the proposal, denied the reports, saying the old arrangements that allow women to pray in the Kaaba's vicinity are still in effect. He said if any woman was asked to move to the back "it's only to maintain order.

"This is still a study and nothing has been implemented,'' Khzeim said.

Huh?

Would the Toronto Star say the same if Catholic women were excluded from the Vatican because of crowding?

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Multiculturalism is one principle, but the State's equal treatment of sexes is another. For the Toronto Star, which principle is more important? Respect for other religions, or respect for women?

We can't "nuance" rights anymore - "political fudging" is no longer possible.

[Charles Anthony]

if this is Islam.

Am I wrong?

The Saudi Arabian officials may not be practicing true Islam with such a policy. I do not know.

I have a devout Muslim friend who left Saudi Arabia 20 years ago because he believed he was among hypocrites.

To deal with crowd control, I would it would be more honorable to see them charge an exorbitant admission fee. I wonder how the Toronto Star would respond to that.

[Liam]

I don't fault The Star for not expressing outrage in this piece. There's a difference between news reporting and editorializing and I think The Star did well enough at reporting the story. I'd be greatly disappointed if they didn't criticize the proposal on their editorial pages, much as they would -- as someone said -- if the Vatican decided to ban women on a similarly flimsy rationale. (Frankly, I'd rather have news organizations report the news, devoid of right-wing or left-wing spin and leave it to me to develop my own opinions/outrage.)

You can't help but read this and think that there is sexism at work here. Why women only? Why not control the crowds by instituting an odd-even visiting system (based on year of birth) or similar crowd-controlling measure?

[jbg]

Would the Toronto Star say the same if Catholic women were excluded from the Vatican because of crowding?

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Multiculturalism is one principle, but the State's equal treatment of sexes is another. For the Toronto Star, which principle is more important? Respect for other religions, or respect for women?

We can't "nuance" rights anymore - "political fudging" is no longer possible.

Ever notice that MSM does not believe in calling a spade a spade; this is pre-medieval nonesense.

In general, certain radical Muslims seem to have a pre-adolescent mentality. They don't like women, they prefer sex with boys 16 or under, they have no concept of mature, self-restrained behavior in crowds (thus the stampedes).

[kimmy]

Even the Toronto Star reports that the real purpose is to reduce crowding.

I would point out that the "Toronto Star" story is, in fact, the same A.P. story posted at CBS earlier in the thread.

I do not find the story makes undue effort to be an apologist for the Saudis. The reporter provides the Saudi official's explanation, as a balanced report ought to, but she also provides skepticism by noting the contradiction between al-Barr's statement and Khzeim's statement, and further mentioning the eyewitness reports of women being moved away from the Cube.

The chief of the King Fahd Institute for Hajj Research, which came up with the plan, said yesterday the new restrictions are already in place.

"The study was made for safety and technical reasons, and it doesn't have any religious dimensions," Osama al-Barr said.

There have been word-of-mouth reports of women recently being asked to pray at new locations away from the white-marbled area surrounding the Kaaba.

But Sheik Youssef Khzeim, deputy chief of the Presidency of the Two Holy Mosques Affairs, a Saudi government organization in charge of implementing the proposal, denied the reports, saying the old arrangements that allow women to pray in the Kaaba's vicinity are still in effect.

He said if any woman was asked to move to the back "it's only to maintain order.

"This is still a study and nothing has been implemented,'' Khzeim said.

Such discrepancies are not unusual in Saudi Arabia and could signal an attempt to introduce the controversial arrangements slowly.

At any rate, what do I care? It's their cube. They can do whatever they want with their cube. I think it's odd that a religion that strictly forbids worshiping idols mandates that you have to bow to a cube 5 times a day. There might be enlightened Muslims elsewhere, but unfortunately the sacred cube is in Saudi Arabia, which is still pretty much in the dark ages.

However... Mohammed allowed women to worship with men at the cube. But now, 1400 years later, the Prophet's practice is being altered because of... crowding concerns? Oh, come on.

If the idea is to reduce crowding, then they should find a better way. If the idea is to segregate the men from the women, then at least have the gonads to say as much. This idea of hiding behind the Mecca PD Bylaw Enforcement Division is an insult to everybody concerned.

-k

[myata]

Driving in Saudi Arabia, and not a Muslim, I was turned away from Mecca and Medina.

Officials are considering an unprecedented proposal to ban women from performing the five Muslim prayers in the immediate vicinity of Islam's most sacred shrine in Mecca. ...the religious authorities behind the proposal insist its real purpose is to lessen the chronic problem of overcrowding, which has led to deadly riots during pilgrimages at Mecca in the past.

CBS

Crowding? Of course. Exclude pious Islamic women.

----

I simply cannot understand why any "progressive" would defend such a viewpoint. No self-respecting woman, no feminist, should be associated in any way whatsoever with Islam, if this is Islam.

Am I wrong?

Wrong for three reasons:

1. You're generalizing comments of some specific officials in one particular place to somehow reflect on the entire religion, which as has already been pointed out multiple times, is far from monolithic and does not have single power hierarchy.

2. It's wrong to pick one particular religion. Top official of another (and well known) one as recently as yesterday made public comments, which to me at least, were a very fine match in backwardness, exclusion and arrogance.

3. Faith (including choice thereof) is a complex matter of which external "official" side is only one (and I'm not sure how important) part.

[August1991]

2. It's wrong to pick one particular religion. Top official of another (and well known) one as recently as yesterday made public comments, which to me at least, were a very fine match in backwardness, exclusion and arrogance.

The Catholic Church no longer controls the political or judicial system of any country, except the Vatican. Such Saudi bylaws, which Kimmy finds a source of humour, are enforced by roving older men who physically beat any transgressor.

Western intellectuals play a parlour game called compare Christian fundamentalism and Islamic fundamentalism. Anybody who has seen up front the two forms of religious fundamentalism understands how divorced from the real world western intellectuals can be.

I would point out that the "Toronto Star" story is, in fact, the same A.P. story posted at CBS earlier in the thread.

I do not find the story makes undue effort to be an apologist for the Saudis. The reporter provides the Saudi official's explanation, as a balanced report ought to, but she also provides skepticism by noting the contradiction between al-Barr's statement and Khzeim's statement, and further mentioning the eyewitness reports of women being moved away from the Cube.

Fair distinction.

I was wondering whether the Toronto Star would report a similar policy at the Vatican in a similar way.

In particular, I thought two post-modern (or just modern?) principles were clashing: the principle of multiculturalism and the principle of feminism.

[kimmy]

Such Saudi bylaws, which Kimmy finds a source of humour, are enforced by roving older men who physically beat any transgressor.

There isn't much about Islam, particularly the Saudi brand, which I find funny, August. I'll never set foot in a Muslim country, and I think you've seen enough of my messages on the subject to know how much affection I hold for the stricter branches of that faith.

But these two recent topics-- the banning of pets, and the new seating arrangements at the cube-- for some reason have indeed tickled my fancy.

The official state religion is the Wahhabi branch of Islam, and I was under the impression that one of the primary tenets of that branch was a firm belief that Mohammed's example should be followed, and that newer practices that contradict Mohammed's example should be dismissed.

And yet, here's two recent examples of new practices that contradict Mohammed's example, being snuck into the Kingdom as crowd-management and pet-patrol.

It seems like a backdoor way of making changes to the practice of the faith. Suppose the Vatican decided to do away with the Communion ritual, but rather than providing a theological justification for the practice, they just shrug their shoulders and say something about complying with food services inspection bylaws.

-k

[kimmy]

I was wondering whether the Toronto Star would report a similar policy at the Vatican in a similar way.

In particular, I thought two post-modern (or just modern?) principles were clashing: the principle of multiculturalism and the principle of feminism.

It's a fair question, but in this case I don't think the article takes an apologist stance on the Saudi policy. I think the fact that the Saudis (or other restrictive regimes in the 3rd world) aren't representatives of the faith as a whole, particularly as practiced in Canada, gives the paper some leeway in reporting on their practices without being seen as attacking the Islam in general.

-k

[myata]

The Catholic Church no longer controls the political or judicial system of any country, except the Vatican. Such Saudi bylaws, which Kimmy finds a source of humour, are enforced by roving older men who physically beat any transgressor.

Does it make the comments in question any less offensive to the affected minorities?

Now, as far as I understand, Mecca is a religious site so I wonder if political or judicial control has any relevance. If an (obvious) pair of same sex partners walked into Catholic church, would it be possible that they'd be forcibly removed (if refused to obey)? Remember, there was a case when two kids weren't allowed to go to prom in a Catholic school? Would that be a reason enough for any reasonable and so on?

[fellowtraveller]

Maybe they could reach a compromise and keep nearly everybody happy.

Muslim women would be allowed in Mecca on pilrimage, but only if they brough the testicles of an infidel with them.

[jbg]

Maybe they could reach a compromise and keep nearly everybody happy.

Muslim women would be allowed in Mecca on pilrimage, but only if they brough the testicles of an infidel with them.

Better yet, the head of a beheaded Muslim. Maybe, Sunnis bring Shi'ite heads, and vice versa.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Such Saudi bylaws, which Kimmy finds a source of humour, are enforced by roving older men who physically beat any transgressor.

There isn't much about Islam, particularly the Saudi brand, which I find funny, August. I'll never set foot in a Muslim country

Don't rule out all moslem places based on the strict ones in the middle east. I lived 3.5 years in Indonesia, and spent about 2 months in Malaysia, and both are very easy to live in for both men and women - and especially for foreign men and women. But then again, the Islam practiced in South East Asia is a very relaxed form of Islam (in most cases - not the terrorist schools in central Java), and the tolerant South-East Asian mindset seems to take precedence over whatever religion they are practicing.

[jbg]

Don't rule out all moslem places based on the strict ones in the middle east. I lived 3.5 years in Indonesia, and spent about 2 months in Malaysia, and both are very easy to live in for both men and women - and especially for foreign men and women. But then again, the Islam practiced in South East Asia is a very relaxed form of Islam (in most cases - not the terrorist schools in central Java), and the tolerant South-East Asian mindset seems to take precedence over whatever religion they are practicing.

My understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Indonesian and Malaysian versions of Islam are fast moving to the strict, murderous Wahabi variety.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

In Indonesia there are a large amount that are getting a bit stricter and certain municipalities adopting aspects of sharia law. Most of this is the result of all the disastors that have happened during the past 2 years - they are starting to ask themselves how they have angered God, and consequently have become more religious. Overall, Indonesians still practice a very lenient form of Islam. The vast majority are moderate with only a handful being of the extreme sort, and probably even more that don't even bother to pray 5x a day, don't bother to fast during rhamadhan, etc..

Malaysia, similar to Indonesia, may have produced a couple of militants lately, but it would be very difficult, in my opinion to elevate Islam to a much stricter degree there. Only about 60% of Malaysia's population is Moslem, as they have a large Chinese population that are Christian and Buddhist, and a large Indian population that are Hindi and Buddhist.

At the end of the day, the majority of Indonesians (also known as pribumi or original person), and the original Malaysians (orang asli - original man) are very similar to the people of Thailand, Vietnam, Phillipines, etc. in that they all have in them strong beliefs in and are somewhat animistic. They are very superstitious and believe strongly in the supernatural. Like most South East Asians, they smile a lot, are very kind to strangers, family is of utmost importance, and they are extremely generous. Riddled throughout their cultures are traditions and beliefs that are far older than their religious ties to Islam.

The last year and a half that I spent in Indonesia, which ended in May of this year, there were reports of Christianity growing at alarming rates throughout Indonesia. In the past 5 years I have heard from journalists that Islam has declined from about 90% in the 90's to 86% in the 2000 census, and is still declining. That might not sound like much... but 4% of a population of 222 million is quite significant. The one thing I noticed, however, is that a vast majority of the Christians that I ran into were the Evangelistic sort... the very lively and musical services where really drawing them in.

Thats my two cents.

[jbg]

The last year and a half that I spent in Indonesia, which ended in May of this year, there were reports of Christianity growing at alarming rates throughout Indonesia. In the past 5 years I have heard from journalists that Islam has declined from about 90% in the 90's to 86% in the 2000 census, and is still declining. That might not sound like much... but 4% of a population of 222 million is quite significant. The one thing I noticed, however, is that a vast majority of the Christians that I ran into were the Evangelistic sort... the very lively and musical services where really drawing them in.

Thats my two cents.

Weren't there some recent atrocities directed at Christians converting Indonesians?

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Possibly... I can't remember.

There are 2 or 3 catholics set to be executed... but they are accused of starting some christian/moslem battle in Sulawesi. There may have been something about some westerners being arrested and deported for trying to convert children.... I'm not too sure, but I do know a lot of people convert on their own accord.

[Borg]

If they bitch about being left out of the trip to Mecca - send them to the stadium and have them shot.

Or buried to the shoulders and stoned for being disobedient.

Borg