A View from Behind the Veil

[scribblet]

I thought this was worth a read, I almost felt as if I were in here shoes (or burkha) I felt her distress and never want to be in that situation.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...=la-home-center

In Saudi Arabia, a view from behind the veil

As a woman in the male-dominated kingdom, Times reporter Megan Stack quietly fumed beneath her abaya. Even beyond its borders, her experience taints her perception of the sexes.

By Megan K. Stack, Times Staff Writer

June 6, 2007

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — THE hem of my heavy Islamic cloak trailed over floors that glistened like ice. I walked faster, my eyes fixed on a familiar, green icon. I hadn't seen a Starbucks in months, but there it was, tucked into a corner of a fancy shopping mall in the Saudi capital. After all those bitter little cups of sludgy Arabic coffee, here at last was an improbable snippet of home — caffeinated, comforting, American.

I wandered into the shop, filling my lungs with the rich wafts of coffee. The man behind the counter gave me a bemused look; his eyes flickered. I asked for a latte. He shrugged, the milk steamer whined, and he handed over the brimming paper cup. I turned my back on his uneasy face.

Crossing the cafe, I felt the hard stares of Saudi men. A few of them stopped talking as I walked by and watched me pass. Them, too, I ignored. Finally, coffee in hand, I sank into the sumptuous lap of an overstuffed armchair.

"Excuse me," hissed the voice in my ear. "You can't sit here." The man from the counter had appeared at my elbow. He was glaring.

"Excuse me?" I blinked a few times.

"Emmm," he drew his discomfort into a long syllable, his brows knitted. "You cannot stay here."

"What? Uh … why?"

Then he said it: "Men only." cont....

[JerrySeinfeld]

I thought this was worth a read, I almost felt as if I were in here shoes (or burkha) I felt her distress and never want to be in that situation.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...=la-home-center

In Saudi Arabia, a view from behind the veil

As a woman in the male-dominated kingdom, Times reporter Megan Stack quietly fumed beneath her abaya. Even beyond its borders, her experience taints her perception of the sexes.

By Megan K. Stack, Times Staff Writer

June 6, 2007

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — THE hem of my heavy Islamic cloak trailed over floors that glistened like ice. I walked faster, my eyes fixed on a familiar, green icon. I hadn't seen a Starbucks in months, but there it was, tucked into a corner of a fancy shopping mall in the Saudi capital. After all those bitter little cups of sludgy Arabic coffee, here at last was an improbable snippet of home — caffeinated, comforting, American.

I wandered into the shop, filling my lungs with the rich wafts of coffee. The man behind the counter gave me a bemused look; his eyes flickered. I asked for a latte. He shrugged, the milk steamer whined, and he handed over the brimming paper cup. I turned my back on his uneasy face.

Crossing the cafe, I felt the hard stares of Saudi men. A few of them stopped talking as I walked by and watched me pass. Them, too, I ignored. Finally, coffee in hand, I sank into the sumptuous lap of an overstuffed armchair.

"Excuse me," hissed the voice in my ear. "You can't sit here." The man from the counter had appeared at my elbow. He was glaring.

"Excuse me?" I blinked a few times.

"Emmm," he drew his discomfort into a long syllable, his brows knitted. "You cannot stay here."

"What? Uh … why?"

Then he said it: "Men only." cont....

That's a vivid description. I asked an Islamic friend (woman) what happens if a woman dresses too provocatively - say in a dress or skirt. She said one word: "raped".

I can't wait to hear the left's weak attempt at comparisons to the evil west.

Lefties love to hate us, don't they?

[Drea]

who are you talking about Jerry?

Who is defending this?

Why are you jumping down people's throats when they have not even opened their mouths -- oh never mind you get it from your "leader" -- it's a PREEMPTIVE insult

[Drea]

I find it somewhat odd (therefore making the story suspect) that the man at the counter served her.

Although I do not doubt that this type of thing (and much much worse) happens all the time.

I speak to a young girl (rarely as of late) in Iran. She is quite progressive. She said to me "We are supposed to pray 5 times a day, but sometimes I don't pray, sometimes I just think." I thought that was just wonderful.

She is one of the lucky ones as her father, a young man in the 70's, is progressive. He said that life in Iran was much like here with Disco music, too tight jeans, western dress for both sexes, alcohol and everything. He liked it. LOL

It's a wonder how they ended up today. You would think that the "progressives" would have fought the religious takeover... I haven't asked because there's only so much I feel comfortable talking about over the internet with them -- I shudder to think something may happen to her family...

She's not allowed to ride a bicycle in public or drive a car. I haven't spoken directly to her since she moved to Tehran to attend university (just one letter, they take about 2 months -- really!)

I try to look at it this way -- So a young Iranian woman is able to access Yahoo Messenger and I am able to send her links, she gains knowledge and shares that knowledge with other students in her university. Pretty soon all the students are linking and gaining knowledge.

[August1991]

The link in the OP doesn't work.

This link to the LA Times article works.

She's not allowed to ride a bicycle in public or drive a car. I haven't spoken directly to her since she moved to Tehran to attend university (just one letter, they take about 2 months -- really!)

Women in Iran can drive cars. Women in Saudi Arabia cannot. (In Saudi, women cannot be in public unless accompanied with a male family member. That's not the case in Iran.)

I have spent time in both Iran and Saudi Arabia. It's a toss up which one is crazier. All things considered, I'd choose the Kingdom of the Two Holy Cities. Two Saudi anecdotes: In a Riyadh shop, a CD of The Sound of Music with a broad black magic marker stripe through Julie Andrew's leg. My "Christmas" coffee cup. A camel wearing holy and a green and red saddle. (Nothing in Saudi Arabia can portary in any way Christianity. Santa Claus is verboten.)

You would think that the "progressives" would have fought the religious takeover... I haven't asked because there's only so much I feel comfortable talking about over the internet with them -- I shudder to think something may happen to her family...

The naivety of your comment is frightening, Drea.

I think Jerry's point is that the so-called "progressives" of North America are really clueless about what liberty means and what is involved in defending it. (And make no mistake Drea, feminism and gay rights are ultimately about an individual's freedom to choose.)

The old Left's agenda sought equality and state (democratic) management of a country's major industries for the good of everyone. By old Left standards, Iran and Saudi are successful. Both redistribute the wealth of state-owned oil companies.

-----

For anyone interested, we have a thread here about Muslim Women.

And another thread about how young Saudis hook up.

[Drea]

"The naivety of your comment is frightening, Drea."

What on earth do you mean?

I am not going to put her family in jeopardy by discussing Bush's imminent attack. Nor am I going to tell her "muslims suck". My life is safe, I can say whatever I want so I cannot for the life of me figure out why you say my comment is "frightening". ??????????????

Do you think her internet usage is monitored? I do. Even her mail gets opened before she gets it.

She told me she could not drive a car so I said I'd teach her when she got over here. She is planning to come over and study here.

[JerrySeinfeld]

who are you talking about Jerry?

Who is defending this?

Why are you jumping down people's throats when they have not even opened their mouths -- oh never mind you get it from your "leader" -- it's a PREEMPTIVE insult

Well as an example:

Here is Higgly in response to a woman getting beaten in Iran:

"How about this? Gee, why doesn't everybody everywhere act the way we do, believe in the things we do, and just adopt our system of beliefs and prejudices and go watch Hollywood movies all the time just like we do? O Fudge!"

Or remiel:

"And, like, we never hear about police beating protesters for being uncooperative, in North Amerca, eh?"

And scriblett:

"You know, think about it - it's not even been 100 years since women got the vote here in the so-called morally superior 'west'.

Perhaps if the 'west' didn't mess with other's nations through various nefarious means women today in Iran would enjoy far more 'civilised' rights. I would bet, if we were to play the "what-if" game, that had we left Mossadeq to pursue his secular ideals Iran would be a very different country today. But so much for unintended consequences eh?"

Excuses and sidestepping the issue at hand.

[buffycat]

And scriblett:

"You know, think about it - it's not even been 100 years since women got the vote here in the so-called morally superior 'west'.

Perhaps if the 'west' didn't mess with other's nations through various nefarious means women today in Iran would enjoy far more 'civilised' rights. I would bet, if we were to play the "what-if" game, that had we left Mossadeq to pursue his secular ideals Iran would be a very different country today. But so much for unintended consequences eh?"

Excuses and sidestepping the issue at hand.

Uhhh, that wasn't Scriblett who said that, it was me.

It wasn't any kind of defense either - it was more of an observation wrt how not so long ago women here did not enjoy particular freedoms of expression, or other rights for that matter. This does not condone in any way the forced (by law) wearing of the 'veil'. Rather it looks at the situation existing today in Iran and relates it to her history and the meddling which the west has imposed, both overtly and covertly - hence the reference to Mossadeq.

It is common knowledge that both the US and UK funded fundamentalist rebels in order to overthrow Mossadeq for oil interests (among other things). Mossadeq was a secular nationalist, who had he been left in power would have steered Iran clearly towards a more secular, less religiously extreme society. So in essence - the WEST is partly responsible for the eventual fundamentalist overthrow of their own tryannical puppet the Shah. Like I said: Unintended consequenses.

Same as Iraq and women's loss of their rights there under the current US occupation. Unintended consequences. But, hey since Saudi's are America's buddies I guess it's fine the way they treat women huh?

As for the OP here, I kinda wonder too why the man even served her in the first place - so it does warrant questioning. Do things like that happen? No doubt. Is that fair wrt women? No, it's not.

So, you go ahead and misquote and misconstrue away.

You will still find NO votes of condoning - whether it is the beating the Iranian women recieved by the police for not wearing the viel - or this woman in Saudi Arabia who was told she couldn't have coffee. (the two not really being comparable either).

[scribblet]

And scriblett:

"You know, think about it - it's not even been 100 years since women got the vote here in the so-called morally superior 'west'.

I didn't say that.... there is not comparison to the west, women are going backward in time, not forward, I don't see them gaining any ground at all.

[ScottSA]

It is common knowledge that both the US and UK funded fundamentalist rebels in order to overthrow Mossadeq for oil interests (among other things). Mossadeq was a secular nationalist, who had he been left in power would have steered Iran clearly towards a more secular, less religiously extreme society. So in essence - the WEST is partly responsible for the eventual fundamentalist overthrow of their own tryannical puppet the Shah. Like I said: Unintended consequenses.

Lets apply this logic to...let's say...Europe.

France is responsible for Nazism, and here's why: Once upon a time, when men had giant mustaches, big guts, and lots of braids on their uniforms, and a guy named Alois Schicklgruber was running around Austria, France declared war on Prussia. Needless to say, France lost and Prussian Hussars soon stood watch on the walls of gay Paree. France of course embarked on another of its interminable cycles of revolution, but the Prussians went home and used the glow of victory to unite all of Germany.

Because France declared war on Prussia and lost, Bismark was able to unify Germany. Because Germany was unified, it became a major European power. Because Germany became a major European power, its backing of Austria in a power gambit in the Balkans led to Germany's loss in WW I. Because of Germany's loss in WW I, the Versailles Treaty created hyper-inflation and widespread un-employment across germany in the 1920s, allowing an itsy bitsy political party led by a superlative speaker to create a democratically driven springboard from which it was able to launch to national prominence in the mid 1930s. But perhaps the biggest effect France had, way back when, was that the Prussian victory over France spurred Alois Schicklgruber to change his last name prior to birthing a son. After all, who in their right mind would have voted for a party led by a fellow named Adolf Schicklgruber? Law of unintended consequences, doncha know? It's all France's fault.

Mind you, then there were the Romans, and that German chieftan named Arminius...I suppose the Romans share some blame for world war II as well...

[August1991]

"The naivety of your comment is frightening, Drea."

What on earth do you mean?

Drea, you stated:

You would think that the "progressives" would have fought the religious takeover... I haven't asked because there's only so much I feel comfortable talking about over the internet with them -- I shudder to think something may happen to her family...

It was the so-called "progressive" forces of Iran that overthrew the Shah in 1979. At the time, the Shah was viewed as an ally of the Great Satan (the USA) and the Iranian revolution was perceived as a popular uprising against a corrupt, fascistic regime that concentrated power and wealth in the hands of a few.

The Islamic Republic was supposed to usher in an era of equality, freedom and empowerment for all and the end of oppression.

So, I find frightening the naivety of your comment that "progressives would have fought the religious takeover... " when it was "progressives" who were responsible for its occurrence.

[ScottSA]

The Islamic Republic was supposed to usher in an era of equality, freedom and empowerment for all and the end of oppression.

So, I find frightening the naivety of your comment that "progressives would have fought the religious takeover... " when it was "progressives" who were responsible for its occurrence.

I think she was refering to progressives of the sort commonly seen today in pink t-shirts yowling at the white house. You know, the kind who holler and bellyache about the 'fascists' running their country, the kind who want to shut everybody else the hell up in the name of freedom of expression, the kind who always wonder what went wrong when the utopian revolution they all can't wait for comes and they find themselves up against a wall staring at the business end of a carbine...

[Guest chilipeppers]

A very thought provoking commentary, how terrible to have to live like that never mind it being a temporary situation for a visitor.

[Drea]

There is nothing "progressive" about religion -- ever. So no, I was not speaking of what you folks have labeled "Iran's progressives in 1979", I was speaking of my friends father (obviously a liberal -- I'll use that term as to not confuse you folks) and why did folks like him not fight the religious takeover. If there were a religious takeover here you bet your ass I'd fight it to the death.

So here you two guys are running around this thread insulting me because of my "frightening" comment and you didn't even know what the damn comment was regarding.

What the fuck does a disco going, tightjeans wearing popluation in Iran 40 years ago have to do with protestors at the white house last week, btw?

You probably believe it was a good thing those religies took over Iran -- gives you an enemy to hate...

[scribblet]

There is nothing "progressive" about religion -- ever. So no, I was not speaking of what you folks have labeled "Iran's progressives in 1979", I was speaking of my friends father (obviously a liberal -- I'll use that term as to not confuse you folks) and why did folks like him not fight the religious takeover. If there were a religious takeover here you bet your ass I'd fight it to the death.

So here you two guys are running around this thread insulting me because of my "frightening" comment and you didn't even know what the damn comment was regarding.

What the fuck does a disco going, tightjeans wearing popluation in Iran 40 years ago have to do with protestors at the white house last week, btw?

You probably believe it was a good thing those religies took over Iran -- gives you an enemy to hate...

nice language - not

[Drea]

OOOOooooOOOoooooo -- how "frightening" LOL

Any words to say on the actual topic -- a women not being allowed to have a coffee...

big friggin' deal, with all the stories of real violence, real enslavement of women, the author is all bent out of shape over a cuppa joe.

I think the story is completely fake and written by some bored broad in some apt in some insignificant small town.

yes there is extreme inequality in Iran -- complaining about not getting a cup of coffee is like complaining that the furnace is turned up too high when your house is burning down.

[sharkman]

Woman today in Iran and other Islamic countries are treated as bad if not worse than Blacks had it in the U.S., and women might have it worse because they are treated the same in the whole country, not just the south. It sickens me to think that in today's world, people are treated like that for any reason whatsoever. It is the thing in Pandora's box let loose.

When that honor killing occurred in India, (Pakistan?) some on the left here were going on about how we should respect the customs and culture of other countries and not force our Western values on the issue.

Edit: Drea, you were leading the charge on the India thing, perhaps you should read the quote at the bottom of my posts.

[Drea]

Women are being stoned to death and Scriblett is all in a twitter over the words "ass" and "fuck".

Any words on the topic there Scriblett?

IMO, individual human rights should always trump "religious" rights, regardless of country or religion. That being said, I do not have the "right" to go to Iran and run around in short shorts.

All human beings regardless of age, gender, race or creed should be afforded rights -- the right to live and prosper. After all that's really all any of us want.

[BC_chick]

It is common knowledge that both the US and UK funded fundamentalist rebels in order to overthrow Mossadeq for oil interests (among other things). Mossadeq was a secular nationalist, who had he been left in power would have steered Iran clearly towards a more secular, less religiously extreme society. So in essence - the WEST is partly responsible for the eventual fundamentalist overthrow of their own tryannical puppet the Shah. Like I said: Unintended consequenses.

Same as Iraq and women's loss of their rights there under the current US occupation. Unintended consequences.

I'm not sure about unintended part. Robert Baer's "See No Evil" is as close as we get to what's going on behind the scenes, and it doesn't seem to point in that direction.

[scribblet]

Women are being stoned to death and Scriblett is all in a twitter over the words "ass" and "fuck".

Any words on the topic there Scriblett?

Considering I started this thread I guess I did have some words on it. I object in particular to the F word, its not necessary and is rude.