Music, dancing ban on Saudi women denies basic human rights

BACK in the day when I was a daring but responsible young girl I was assigned to cover a fashion show at the Italian Cultural Club in Jeddah.

The show was entertaining and a number of young women and men performed on the catwalk wearing modest outfits. It was a pleasant show that might have put people to sleep if held anywhere else but Saudi Arabia.

Towards the end of show, the Hay’a and police showed up and began questioning us as we left the building as to whether there was a show going on inside. It was no major drama but it reminded me that social events usually get closer scrutiny from the people charged with monitoring our morals.

I recalled the incident when I heard that the Ministry of Social Affairs decided it’s inappropriate for charitable groups to stage events that include entertainment. You remember the Ministry of Social Affairs. Those are the people who feel that Saudi women have it so good they don’t need an organized support group to help them if things get a little tough.

It seems the Ministry prefers that Saudi Arabia be the designated No-Fun Zone in the Middle East. Ministry officials issued a decree that bans music, dancing, singing and fashion shows at events held by women’s charitable organizations. Saudi Arabia reportedly has 500 groups and charities which make up about 16 percent of them.

The Ministry has determined that entertainment “contradicts” the customs and traditions of Saudis. And if there really needs to be a fashion show, then mannequins will do just fine as models. While I don’t know all the details of the decree, the ruling begs the question of just where the ministry draws the line.

Does the decree ban Islamic singing? Does it affect the modeling of abayas and the Jalabiyyah? If mannequins are used for modeling will they be religiously appropriate with no heads or legs?

We don’t want to disrespect our customs and traditions, but perhaps the public is better served by the ministry if it sought out and aided the poor in desperate need but have too much pride to seek help at the ministry offices.

Yet it has the staff in the 13 provinces to investigate whether the charities carry out the ban.
Most of these female charities hold events just for women. So what exactly is the problem of women dancing, singing and playing music, especially if it follows Islamic regulations? We do it anyway at wedding parties and other private functions.

Charity events are staged to raise money and to raise awareness of their cause. Any novice party organizer will tell you that entertainment is the key to a successful fund raising effort. Who will attend such an event if we are expected to sit around an empty room whispering to each other about the latest episode of Turkish soap operas? Are we to sit around all night eating food. That may be awkward if the charity is raising funds to combat obesity.

If the ministry is serious about not contradicting our customs and traditions with music and dancing, perhaps it should consider curbing the Saudi ardhah at the Jendryyah, the annual cultural event in Riyadh, or place limits on the music played by young people to express their patriotism on National Day.

If it hopes to engage young people of being active in charitable causes then consideration should be given on how to attract their participation. The fact is many young people are not interested in attending social events where there is no entertainment.

These charity events are semi-private events and the government is demonstrating that it sees nothing wrong with intruding on our private lives and telling us what is appropriate behavior, although there is nothing really wrong with women modeling clothes for each other or properly dancing to music. Anybody can pull up a YouTube video and see far worse at a Saudi wedding party.

As women become bolder in asserting their rights in obtaining an education, the right to fair treatment in the judiciary and equitable treatment in marriage, there is a creeping tendency by some government officials to put the squeeze on us. It seems at times there is a gradual repeal of the basic human right to go about our business without intrusion.

It’s curious that after decades of public service and staged events to raise awareness of various issues, that the ministry seems fit to issue instructions now with a ban that far exceeds common sense.

Intellectually lazy jihadists betray Muslims worldwide

The arrests of Pakistani university students in Manchester last week have sparked an unprecedented flurry of calls from the media and some British government officials to tighten immigration controls of foreigners entering the United Kingdom on student visas.

Although there are very few details about these 12 alleged militants, 11 of whom are Pakistani, the impact of their arrests on international students could be life-altering. I have no idea whether any of these young men are linked to Al Qaeda or that they had serious intentions of doing harm to Britons. These big arrests have a tendency to lead to small results. One of the 11 Pakistanis, an unidentified 18-year-old, has reportedly been released and waiting to be deported.

For the complete article see Sabria's column at Arabisto.com.

Govt seems to think Saudi women doing just fine

Could it be that no one is interested in establishing a women’s support group in Saudi Arabia? Is it possible that women have all the support they need to find jobs, get an education and achieve that ultimate dream of zipping around Jeddah in a BMW Z28?

Apparently the Saudi Ministry of Social Affairs thinks so. And I, for one, appreciate their confidence that Saudi women can go it alone and not need the help of organized groups.

I don’t know Sulaiman Al-Salman, the guy who thought up Ansar Al-Ma’rah, which translates to Supporters of Women, and what exactly are his goals. He says he has about two dozen people ready to help him launch the support group as the first official organization to fight for Saudi women’s rights.

The Ministry of Social Affairs said “no” or just pretty much ignored him, which seems par for the course for the government when they just rather have things go away. The National Human Rights Society and the Saudi Human Rights Commission can pretty much attest to the fact that that in some circles they rather not be seen or heard by the government, especially after the groups see report after report tossed in the circular file for further non-action.

According to media reports, Al-Salman said he wanted to start the organization to improve the lives of Saudi women. But he complained the Ministry said it was not authorized to approve the organization. Yet many other humanitarian groups received approval, he said.

Part of Al-Salman’s problem may be of the chicken before the egg nature. He says he is getting plenty of support from individuals and businesses, but no financial support. And if I am reading his concerns correctly, not a lot of people are standing up publicly to be counted as supporting the group. It seems that most people are taking a wait-and-see attitude. If the government approves Ansar Al-Ma’rah, then all is well and good and let the work begin. But the prevailing wisdom is why stick one’s neck out if there is no official support? Without people putting their name publicly to the project it’s doomed to failure.

If there ever is a need for a women’s rights group, then Saudi Arabia is fertile ground for one. One only has to look our judicial system to see the scales of justice tilted toward customs and traditions instead of well-reasoned laws that protect women in domestic cases. The list of judicial transgressions against Saudi women is long and growing longer.

Saudi woman, it seems, are reduced to theatrics to get the government’s attention. We have one activist driving a car on some dusty desert road in the middle of nowhere, then posting her “protest” on YouTube to publicize our right to drive a car. Another has started an Internet petition drive to gain support to allow women to work in lingerie shops. And for those ladies with a temper, they just storm the Hiy'a’s office in Madinah and throw around furniture, and shout and flail their arms about at the bewildered muttaween.

All of it doesn’t amount to much. And it would be wonderful if an organized women’s rights group, with the backing of Saudi intellectuals and business leaders, was given a voice by the government to air grievances and find solutions to help give women more opportunities to be a part of Saudi society. But such a group will only be as effective as the government allows. The two human rights groups now operating in Saudi Arabia haven’t made much progress since their foundings.

If a women’s right organization wants recognition from the government then it must begin with people who have influence. That is, the founding membership must be civic leaders with the gravitas to get things done and are willing to commit their time and resources to the project before authorization is requested from the government. If leading businessmen and women from Jeddah, Riyadh and Madinah are willing to explore issues affecting women, and then stick with the plan by working with the government toward reform, then there is a chance for success.

A single man, or woman, on a mission with the half-hearted backing of shadow supporters will not get the job done. But people willing to stand up and be counted, and even willing to take some grief from their neighbors, just might pull it off.

Govt seems to think Saudi women doing just fine

Could it be that no one is interested in establishing a women’s support group in Saudi Arabia? Is it possible that women have all the support they need to find jobs, get an education and achieve that ultimate dream of zipping around Jeddah in a BMW Z28?

Apparently the Saudi Ministry of Social Affairs thinks so. And I, for one, appreciate their confidence that Saudi women can go it alone and not need the help of organized groups.

I don’t know Sulaiman Al-Salman, the guy who thought up Ansar Al-Ma’rah, which translates to Supporters of Women, and what exactly are his goals. He says he has about two dozen people ready to help him launch the support group as the first official organization to fight for Saudi women’s rights.

The Ministry of Social Affairs said “no” or just pretty much ignored him, which seems par for the course for the government when they just rather have things go away. The National Human Rights Society and the Saudi Human Rights Commission can pretty much attest to the fact that that in some circles they rather not be seen or heard by the government, especially after the groups see report after report tossed in the circular file for further non-action.

According to media reports, Al-Salman said he wanted to start the organization to improve the lives of Saudi women. But he complained the Ministry said it was not authorized to approve the organization. Yet many other humanitarian groups received approval, he said.

Part of Al-Salman’s problem may be of the chicken before the egg nature. He says he is getting plenty of support from individuals and businesses, but no financial support. And if I am reading his concerns correctly, not a lot of people are standing up publicly to be counted as supporting the group. It seems that most people are taking a wait-and-see attitude. If the government approves Ansar Al-Ma’rah, then all is well and good and let the work begin. But the prevailing wisdom is why stick one’s neck out if there is no official support? Without people putting their name publicly to the project it’s doomed to failure.

If there ever is a need for a women’s rights group, then Saudi Arabia is fertile ground for one. One only has to look our judicial system to see the scales of justice tilted toward customs and traditions instead of well-reasoned laws that protect women in domestic cases. The list of judicial transgressions against Saudi women is long and growing longer.

Saudi woman, it seems, are reduced to theatrics to get the government’s attention. We have one activist driving a car on some dusty desert road in the middle of nowhere, then posting her “protest” on YouTube to publicize our right to drive a car. Another has started an Internet petition drive to gain support to allow women to work in lingerie shops. And for those ladies with a temper, they just storm the Hi’ya’s office in Madinah and throw around furniture, and shout and flail their arms about at the bewildered muttaween.

All of it doesn’t amount to much. And it would be wonderful if an organized women’s rights group, with the backing of Saudi intellectuals and business leaders, was given a voice by the government to air grievances and find solutions to help give women more opportunities to be a part of Saudi society. But such a group will only be as effective as the government allows. The two human rights groups now operating in Saudi Arabia haven’t made much progress since their foundings.

If a women’s right organization wants recognition from the government then it must begin with people who have influence. That is, the founding membership must be civic leaders with the gravitas to get things done and are willing to commit their time and resources to the project before authorization is requested from the government. If leading businessmen and women from Jeddah, Riyadh and Madinah are willing to explore issues affecting women, and then stick with the plan by working with the government toward reform, then there is a chance for success.

A single man, or woman, on a mission with the half-hearted backing of shadow supporters will not get the job done. But people willing to stand up and be counted, and even willing to take some grief from their neighbors, just might pull it off.

Calls to ban Saudi women from television disrespect female achievements

This article was originally published by Arabisto.com.

It seems that the more progress Saudi women make in employment, education and the arts the more conservatives want to keep them in their place, which, I gather, is home where she is supposed to be a good wife and mother.

Some conservatives are complaining about the “well-rooted perversity” in the Saudi Ministry of Information and Culture because it allows female presenters on television. One statement issued said, "No Saudi women should appear on TV, no matter what the reason. No images of women should appear in Saudi newspapers and magazines."

These women wear the hijab and are dressed appropriately as they would at any shopping mall or restaurant. Yet, according to the logic of some people, it’s different on television. I suppose if a man is not permitted to gaze at women on the street, he can do it in the privacy of his own home. That must be the perversity the opponents of women television presenters are thinking.

These are the same people, by the way, who liken some television station owners to drug dealers whose only motives are to corrupt families into watching shows of questionable moral value. It’s as if we are children who don’t know the difference.

Then, of course, we have the fellow who manages to help Saudi Arabia move backward on the road towards progress by issuing a fatwa that some television station owners should be killed.

These outrageous statements not only sadden me as a Saudi but it does nothing to further the cause of Islam or Saudi Arabia.

The conservatives appear to have forgotten their history. Saudi television has a long and rich history of women television news presenters, show hosts and journalists.

When I was a child growing up in Madinah I watched Mama Dunia’s children’s show regularly. Dunia Younis and her sisters, Sanaa and Waafa, are well-known television personalities to my generation. Salwa Shaker was another presenter for different programs and had established the women’s administration at the Riyadh television center.

These women are pioneers in Saudi television in addition to Saudi women print journalists who are foreign correspondents.

While these women should serve as role models for today’s women television presenters, sadly they don’t. And there lies the conflict between the values of conservatives and women wanting their place as media professionals.

I recently saw one Saudi woman who started her television career on Saudi television. She has since moved to the Lebanese station New where she recently spoke about the demands to ban women from Saudi television. She was defending the right of women appearing on television, but her appearance defeated the very argument she was making.

She was not wearing the hijab, her makeup was heavy and her blouse tight. It many parts of the world this means nothing, but for Saudis it means everything. If a Saudi woman is making an argument advocating that her sisters be allowed to appear on television she should not appear as anything less than respectful of Saudi values. At the very least a Muslim woman should cover her hair and neck. By ignoring this, this Saudi was actually supporting the conservatives’ position.

Don’t misunderstand me, how a Muslim woman appears or behaves is not for me to judge. She will answer for her deeds before God. But as a Saudi woman this television presenter does not represent me nor do I want her to advocate on my behalf.

If a Saudi woman wants to represent Saudi women on television – and I am not speaking about women in other Muslim countries – then she should be closer to Saudi women’s values. In the Arab world beauty is defined by the hair and neck. By displaying it, it only undercuts the message and adds strength to the conservatives’ position.

A female colleague of mind covers the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Diplomatic Quarter in Riyadh. She often appears on Saudi television at news conferences. Certainly her presence is noted by the authorities but not once in her years of coverage did anyone ever complain or suggest that her appearance is inappropriate. Of course, she wears the full abaya, hijab and niqab, but it allows her to in effect neutralize herself as a woman in men’s eyes and perform her job solely as a journalist. Some people may consider the niqab extreme, but most of my female colleagues do not wear one and still do their job with professionalism and not bring attention to themselves. To bring attention to ourselves in ways deemed socially unacceptable only encourages the conservative element in our society to ban us from television appearances.

I’m not setting myself or my colleagues as shining examples of journalism in its purest form, but I rather have presenters like Dunia Younis lead by example instead of Saudis who prefer to send their message from Lebanon.

Calls to ban Saudi women from television disrespect female achievements

Note: This article was originally published by Arabisto.com

It seems that the more progress Saudi women make in employment, education and the arts the more conservatives want to keep them in their place, which, I gather, is home where she is supposed to be a good wife and mother.

Some conservatives are complaining about the “well-rooted perversity” in the Saudi Ministry of Information and Culture because it allows female presenters on television. One statement issued said, "No Saudi women should appear on TV, no matter what the reason. No images of women should appear in Saudi newspapers and magazines."

These women wear the hijab and are dressed appropriately as they would at any shopping mall or restaurant. Yet, according to the logic of some people, it’s different on television. I suppose if a man is not permitted to gaze at women on the street, he can do it in the privacy of his own home. That must be the perversity the opponents of women television presenters are thinking.

These are the same people, by the way, who liken some television station owners to drug dealers whose only motives are to corrupt families into watching shows of questionable moral value. It’s as if we are children who don’t know the difference

Then, of course, we have the fellow who manages to help Saudi Arabia move backward on the road towards progress by issuing a fatwa that some television station owners should be killed.

These outrageous statements not only sadden me as a Saudi but it does nothing to further the cause of Islam or Saudi Arabia.

The conservatives appear to have forgotten their history. Saudi television has a long and rich history of women television news presenters, show hosts and journalists.

When I was a child growing up in Madinah I watched Mama Dunia’s children’s show regularly. Dunia Younis and her sisters, Sanaa and Waafa, are well-known television personalities to my generation. Salwa Shaker was another presenter for different programs and had established the women’s administration at the Riyadh television center.

These women are pioneers in Saudi television in addition to Saudi women print journalists who are foreign correspondents.

While these women should serve as role models for today’s women television presenters, sadly they don’t. And there lies the conflict between the values of conservatives and women wanting their place as media professionals.

I recently saw one Saudi woman who started her television career on Saudi television. She has since moved to the Lebanese station New where she recently spoke about the demands to ban women from Saudi television. She was defending the right of women appearing on television, but her appearance defeated the very argument she was making.

She was not wearing the hijab, her makeup was heavy and her blouse tight. It many parts of the world this means nothing, but for Saudis it means everything. If a Saudi woman is making an argument advocating that her sisters be allowed to appear on television she should not appear as anything less than respectful of Saudi values. At the very least a Muslim woman should cover her hair and neck. By ignoring this, this Saudi was actually supporting the conservatives’ position.

Don’t misunderstand me, how a Muslim woman appears or behaves is not for me to judge. She will answer for her deeds before God. But as a Saudi woman this television presenter does not represent me nor do I want her to advocate on my behalf.

If a Saudi woman wants to represent Saudi women on television – and I am not speaking about women in other Muslim countries – then she should be closer to Saudi women’s values. In the Arab world beauty is defined by the hair and neck. By displaying it, it only undercuts the message and adds strength to the conservatives’ position.

A female colleague of mind covers the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Diplomatic Quarter in Riyadh. She often appears on Saudi television at news conferences. Certainly her presence is noted by the authorities but not once in her years of coverage did anyone ever complain or suggest that her appearance is inappropriate. Of course, she wears the full abaya, hijab and niqab, but it allows her to in effect neutralize herself as a woman in men’s eyes and perform her job solely as a journalist. Some people may consider the niqab extreme, but most of my female colleagues do not wear one and still do their job with professionalism and not bring attention to themselves. To bring attention to ourselves in ways deemed socially unacceptable only encourages the conservative element in our society to ban us from television appearances.

I’m not setting myself or my colleagues as shining examples of journalism in its purest form, but I rather have presenters like Dunia Younis lead by example instead of Saudis who prefer to send their message from Lebanon.

Calls to ban Saudi women from television disrespect female achievements

This article was originally published by Arabisto.com

Announcement

Hello everybody,

I wanted to pass along some news about my future columns. I have been named a columnist for Arabisto.com and will begin posting next week original columns for that website. For those who have been following my writing, you know that my current work is first published in the Saudi Gazette and later posted on my blog and at Arabisto.com. As an Arabisto columnist I will now write original columns that are unrelated to my Saudi Gazette writing. My Gazette columns will still appear on my blog and at Arabisto, but you also will be able to read new and different work published exclusively by Arabisto. For those unfamiliar with the website, please visit it at www.arabisto.com. I look forward to your comments and feedback as always.Best,Sabria

Will British program alienate Muslims in UK?

IN Britain a program that claims to help root out extremism has garnered considerable publicity.

The Association of Chief Police Officers announced this week that its “Channel Project” has successfully intervened in cases involving about 200 children considered to be at risk of extremist behavior or susceptible of being “groomed” by radicals.

I was initially encouraged when I heard about an intervention program to rescue kids from extremism, thinking naively that the police were concerned about all forms of extremism, from gang activity to curbing neo-Nazi activity.

I quickly discovered that the police, at least in the confines of this program, were not interested in saving young children from gangs and racist behavior. Rather, they were apparently only interested in curbing the West’s greatest fear: Radical Islam.The project originally began in Lancashire in 2007 and was extended last year to West Yorkshire, the Midlands, Bedfordshire and South Wales.

There are now plans to expand the program to the rest of the country.Its scheme works like this: Authorities train parents, teachers and youth workers to recognize signs of radicalism in children, then report those concerns to the police. A community panel then decides on what action to take with the most serious cases referred to social services.

This kind of plan is fraught with so many danger signs it’s beyond comprehension. First, the program clearly targets the Muslim community. By focusing on a single group of people with a 1984 mindset reduces our neighbors, friends and co-workers to informants and spies. This will only damage the inherent trust that we have for the people we know.

Secondly, authorities do not explain how the program trains teachers to identify a 13-year-old “potential terrorist.”Can a teacher’s hidden biases and prejudices be identified to prevent someone from carrying out a hidden agenda to harm a child of a specific ethnic background? Even if a teacher is well-intentioned does that person possess the skills and judgment to make a proper identification?

Does a young boy’s fascination with war, guns and adventure mean he is a potential militant or that he is a typical boy who likes his Xbox too much? Does a young girl’s thoughtful essay on Muslim anger in our post 9/11 world rise to the level of extremist ideology or is it her exercise in freedom of expression?Singling out a specific group of people based on their ethnicity or religion only heightens the fear of people who believe that where there is smoke there is fire.

Painting a group with a broad brush is counter-productive and only further isolates that community.Once a child is identified as being susceptible to “radical Islam” he or she could be stigmatized in the community. There are few secrets in a classroom and if a child is receiving special attention for whatever reason, others will know about or fill in the gaps to rumor and innuendo.

Being labeled a radical under any circumstances and having a police file opened on a child could have lifelong consequences.Sir Norman Bettison, the chief constable of West Yorkshire Police and the senior officer in charge of terror prevention, noted that one of the July 7, 2005, bombers of the London tube was a good student, well-adjusted and well-integrated into British society.

But his classroom writings praising Al-Qaeda did not prompt any special attention from school officials, who were aware of his sympathy for the terrorists. Certainly, we now recognize that intervention is critical in such instances, but what is lacking is the threshold of probable cause to inform the police of what constitutes potential radical ideology.

History has taught us that government attempts to make informants out of our friends and neighbors have backfired more times than has been successful. Americans learned the hard away when hundreds, if not thousands, of people were blacklisted in the 1950s and lost their jobs and often their families for their leftist leanings or that countless lives were lost in Europe during World War II when neighbors routinely turned in their friends to authorities on the slightest infraction.

Fear begets fear and soon we are sliding down a slippery slope to where a scenario similar to the movie “Children of Men” is not so farfetched. For many it’s easier to turn in a student or friend to authorities on the slightest provocation rather than to be thought of as soft on terrorism or unpatriotic.

Common sense often takes a backseat in these cases.We need to be vigilant to identify young people caught up on extremism but we shouldn’t be vigilantes. That is why if the Channel Project is to succeed then a transparent and thorough training program must be in place to establish what defines probable cause to identify a person as a potential extremist.Without specific rules and guidelines we are condemned to become informers and spies without a conscience.