Women's Rights in the Middle East

[cipher6]

I believe it is human nature to strive for your basic human rights.

I believe that every culture can, and eventually will, move towards giving those basic human rights.

First, this is an interesting proposal. Your basically saying, democracy, equality and western ideas of "human rights." are man's natural state, and everyone will eventually move towards this natural state.

I don't agree... I don't think humanity has a natural state. Humans, unlike animals have to construct their world. A dog is instinctively born into a dog world, their social reality is born into them. I don't think humans are born with this natural social reality, they have to construct it themselves. Which creates religion, culture, morality etc.

I'm a firm believer in the social construction of reality, pioneered by Peter Berger.

The central concept of The Social Construction of Reality is that persons and groups interacting together in a social system form, over time, concepts or mental representations of each other's actions, and that these concepts eventually become habituated into reciprocal roles played by the actors in relation to each other. When these roles are made available to other members of society to enter into and play out, the reciprocal interactions are said to be institutionalised. In the process of this institutionalisation, meaning is embedded in society. Knowledge and people's conception (and belief) of what reality is becomes embedded in the institutional fabric of society. Social reality is therefore said to be socially constructed.

The Social Construction of Reality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Social constructs are generally understood to be the by-products of countless human choices rather than laws resulting from divine will or nature. This is not usually taken to imply a radical anti-determinism, however. Social constructionism is usually opposed to essentialism, which instead defines specific phenomena in terms of inherent and transhistorical essences independent of conscious beings that determine the categorical structure of reality.

Social constructionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Amazon.com: The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (9780385058988): Peter L. Berger, Thomas Luckmann: Books

I don't think you can honestly call that a Western Culture of equality, or that Equality is a western value.

Where did the idea of "Human rights" come from? The idea that every human has inalienably rights is relatively modern in the course of human history.

Studies show that it's the feeling of hopelessness that causes it.

What studies?

The same is true of Christianity.

To some extent yes, but there are fundamental theological differences. Christianity has a long tradition of maintaining a logical view of their theology. For example Christian interpretation of their holy texts. They don't think the bible is the word for word dictation of God. Its a collection of stories that imparts a wisdom inspired by God. Christian theology is a long tradition of trying to extract the logic of God from such things.

Christian theology believes the world is bound by logic, because God is bound by his love for man therefore wouldn't put us in a world that didn't make sense. Islamic theology says Allah creates the world a new ever second, he could make up become down if he felt. Allah is not bound by a love for man, he can do what ever he wants when ever he wants.


Also, the idea of human rights flows from this Christian understand of God's love for all men, no matter what.

I think it is the very concept that they HAVE nothing to lose that creates their violence.

But how do they come to that realization? Sure some of it is material, no jobs, can't afford food, oppressive governments, but that doesn't explain the religious aspects. I think there is also the cultural/religious factor. That their traditional way of life, their traditional ordering of society, that many derive a sense of identity from, is being eroded by modern values. Its similar to traditional/conservative Christians complaining about the Godless liberals destroying society. But I think thats been the story of the West for a very long time. Our Christian traditions have grown up, for hundreds of years, side by side with that march to liberal modern equality, and many times, helped inspire it. Christianity has developed the mechanisms to deal with such changes in their world view. Islam and the Middle East was insulated from that for many years, but within the last 50 -75 years, the modern world has been encroaching on that traditional Islamic life fast. I think its a system shock to many, their entire way of life being altered by this march of modern values.

To them, its just, moral and right, to protect women by keeping them excluded from the messy dangerous outside world. To open women up to education, and short skirts is an abomination.





If you can't tell, history, society, culture, religion etc, are all very interesting to me, and this is an enjoyable discussion.

 

[byteware]

First, this is an interesting proposal. Your basically saying, democracy, equality and western ideas of "human rights." are man's natural state, and everyone will eventually move towards this natural state.

Think of it this way... it is the natural state of people to want to not be treated cruelly.

It is the natural state of people to want to not be treated unfairly.

It is the natural state of people to want a better life. These things lead to the ideas of Human rights.

Where did the idea of "Human rights" come from? The idea that every human has inalienably rights is relatively modern in the course of human history.

Where did any idea come from? What you have to understand is ideas, EVERY ONE OF THEM, starts somewhere. The only idea that I think has been around forever... procreation. Beyond that, every other idea started at some point in time.

What studies?

I actually looked, but Google favors the recent.

To some extent yes, but there are fundamental theological differences. Christianity has a long tradition of maintaining a logical view of their theology. For example Christian interpretation of their holy texts. They don't think the bible is the word for word dictation of God. Its a collection of stories that imparts a wisdom inspired by God. Christian theology is a long tradition of trying to extract the logic of God from such things.

I think you have a limited experience with Christians. They run the gammit of believing that every single word in the Bible is true, to believing it's a general guide.

I know people who don't consider the literal interpretation of Genesis, the only TRUE interpretation, and anyone who disagrees isn't a true Christian.

Christianity doesn't have a long history of being logical about anything (Intelligent Design is a good example).

Christian theology believes the world is bound by logic, because God is bound by his love for man therefore wouldn't put us in a world that didn't make sense.

I've been exposed to many different views on Christianity throughout my life... and never once did anyone mention the world being bound by logic.

Islamic theology says Allah creates the world a new ever second, he could make up become down if he felt. Allah is not bound by a love for man, he can do what ever he wants when ever he wants.

I've never heard this interpretation of Allah either.

Also, the idea of human rights flows from this Christian understand of God's love for all men, no matter what.

I completely disagree.

Sure some of it is material, no jobs, can't afford food, oppressive governments, but that doesn't explain the religious aspects. I think there is also the cultural/religious factor.

Again, I read a study last year (I think) that stated that most of the grunts who do suicide bombings aren't terribly religious. I searched for the study, but couldn't get past a billion articles on "Jihad Jane" not being religious.

To them, its just, moral and right, to protect women by keeping them excluded from the messy dangerous outside world. To open women up to education, and short skirts is an abomination.

This is opinion, and not one I agree with.

If you can't tell, history, society, culture, religion etc, are all very interesting to me, and this is an enjoyable discussion.

Absolutely. We see people in different lights. I don't think we are going to get past our fundamental differences to reach an agreement, but the discussion is interesting in it's own right.

 

[cipher6]

Think of it this way... it is the natural state of people to want to not be treated cruelly.

It is the natural state of people to want to not be treated unfairly.

Right, but a cultures idea of what constitutes "cruel" or "unfair" are extremely varied.

Of course everyone wants to be treated "right" and act "morally," but how a culture defines whats "right" and "moral" is different for all.

Where did any idea come from? What you have to understand is ideas, EVERY ONE OF THEM, starts somewhere. The only idea that I think has been around forever... procreation. Beyond that, every other idea started at some point in time.

I think form time to time there is an original formulation, but most the time, ideas develop over time, adding to and modifying previously held beliefs. I mean, you don't expect ancient Spartan society to, out of nothing, create and implement the idea of democracy. But for Athenian society, it was kinda a logical progression of ideas held by their culture.

I think you have a limited experience with Christians. They run the gammit of believing that every single word in the Bible is true, to believing it's a general guide.

Well, I have lots of experience with Christan, and yes, they believe many things. But I'm not basing my ideas off limited anecdotal experiences, but on an understanding of their theology and how it has evolved over time.

I know people who don't consider the literal interpretation of Genesis, the only TRUE interpretation, and anyone who disagrees isn't a true Christian.

Yes, the reform religions broke away from traditional Catholic theology about biblical interpretation, and some take a more literal view than others. But strict literal interpretations are a minority, and relatively recent in the history of Christian theology.

Christianity doesn't have a long history of being logical about anything (Intelligent Design is a good example).

I think your showing your limited knowledge of theology here.

John 1:1, In the beginning was the logos.

In Christology, the conception that the Christ is the Logos (λ

 

[Slug]

Once again, please include appropriate attributions for any quoted text included in responses by using the "Quote" button. Not only does this make it easier to work out who said what, it also allows readers to jump back to the original post containing the quote if context is required.

 

[Frisco]

Your basically saying, democracy, equality and western ideas of "human rights." are man's natural state, and everyone will eventually move towards this natural state.

I don't agree...

Neither do I, but for different reasons than you express.

But, as for women's rights, it took hundreds of years for women to gain the vote in the U.S. Sometimes I think it took that long because the majority of women didn't necessarily want the vote until after the industrial revolution, around 1900 or so. They eventually got it by demanding it as an American right.

The cry for women's rights in a lot of the Islamic world seems to come from a deeper place in the heart than what American women went through because the Islamic world is not a free world and because Islam has been suppressing women for about 1400 years now. I find that to be astounding and tragic beyond words.

These women wanting freedom are expressing a basic human right, not a right based on a document drawn up by founding fathers declaring and guaranteeing political and religious freedom for citizens of a brand new country.

They will win. You might as well get used to that right now. It will be a long struggle, but they've got at least 51% of the human race behind them, not including men everywhere who cringe at the thought of their mothers, sisters or daughters having to live their lives as if they are not fit to be policy makers and leaders.

 

[cipher6]

These women wanting freedom are expressing a basic human right, not a right based on a document drawn up by founding fathers declaring and guaranteeing political and religious freedom for citizens of a brand new country.

But the idea of "Basic Human Rights," is a western idea. These women want "basic human rights" as defined by the UN and western society, (and accepted by some other parts of the world.)


Under traditional Muslim society, they are protecting women from the evils of the world by keeping them at home. They keep their girls "pure" by FGM. The Muslim Brotherhood and other conservative elements of Egyptian politics, opposed the FGM laws in Egypt precisely because it was "foreign" values being imposed on Egyptians.


Universal Human rights are far from universal.

They will win. You might as well get used to that right now.

I hope they do. But my desire to see that happen doesn't blind me to the differing values and morals held by other cultures.

There very well might be a large enough segment of Egyptian population that wants "human rights" as defined by the West and the UN, and they might have enough influence to make it happen.

But its also possible, they do not, that the traditional/conservative elements are larger and hold more sway.

I'd like to see specifics, that indicate the possibility of the former. The small turnout for the women's rights rally, and the reception they got though points to the latter.

 

[Frisco]

Coming from a standpoint of some sort of scientific analysis, one where we seek out and present data, to prove the concept of basic human rights, will have us talking around in circles and getting nowhere.

If there is something "western" or American about human rights, it's only that it's written down on the Declaration of Independence, an American document that led up to the Constitution of the United States. The basic concepts therein, however, are not "western" or American, they are to be found in every society everywhere on Earth where some class of people are beneath some other class of people for no fault of their own.

Freedom is so simple a concept, so basic that it seems absurd to have to explain it, let alone fight for it. Unfortunately, there are exploitive people in all societies, and therefor there are people who don't want to be exploited, enslaved, suppressed, etc so over time we have debate and then rebellion.

 

[cipher6]

Coming from a standpoint of some sort of scientific analysis, one where we seek out and present data, to prove the concept of basic human rights, will have us talking around in circles and getting nowhere.

Yes, exactly! There is no mathematical equation, no scientific formula to prove one morality or value system is correct while another is wrong. In the end only faith can "prove" our moral system is correct.

The basic concepts therein, however, are not "western" or American, they are to be found in every society everywhere on Earth where some class of people are beneath some other class of people for no fault of their own.

I highly disagree. For example, not all Muslim women want to be liberated from the traditional ordering of society, ie. the man runs the house and protects the women. Many times, its the mothers carrying out FGM on their daughters.

Freedom is so simple a concept, so basic that it seems absurd to have to explain it, let alone fight for it.

A traditional Muslim will say the same thing about his beliefs/values/morality. Its a system they grew up with, its what they know and hold dear, it helps define who they are and give them a since of identity. Same with you and your beliefs of universal human rights. Thats an idea you (I assume) and I have grown up with, and simply take for granted. Its hard to wrap your head around the fact some wouldn't accept it, but thats the case.

Again, an example is FGM in Egypt. The laws barring it are unpopular, and it was opposed on the grounds of foreign values being forced on Egyptians. If what you say is true, "universal rights" and dignity are the natural state of man, why didn't every women in Egypt come out in favor of banning these practices?

Unfortunately, there are exploitive people in all societies, and therefor there are people who don't want to be exploited, enslaved, suppressed, etc so over time we have debate and then rebellion.

I don't think every value system held by every individual that runs counter to our ideas of universal rights, is imposed by force. I believe many actually believe their understanding of morality is correct.

Some quotes from Bin Ladin on why he hates america:

You are a nation that permits acts of immorality, and you consider them to be pillars of personal freedom.

You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. The companies practice this as well, resulting in the investments becoming active and the criminals becoming rich.

You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.

You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are established on this, under the name of art, entertainment, tourism and freedom, and other deceptive names you attribute to it.

Another example, is the Islamic argument, that different roles and laws doesn't mean men and women are unequal.


Its not like everyone secretly desires the values you hold but is being forcefully subjugated. There are actually various ideas of right and wrong throughout the worlds cultures.

I don't know why this is so hard for many to accept.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Plenty if women voted yesterday in Eygpts constitutional referendum Cipher...

At least in the cities where the filming took place, they did not look frightened nor scared

As far as I know, most Arab countries allow women to vote for what passes as their Parliaments


sure, many in these countries feel a women's place is in the home, and they should not be allowed work
in Ireland, the marriage bar (working for government was impossible after marriage) was only lifted three decades ago (and this was forced on us)

I wish the Egyptians the best on their path to democracy
It will be tough, they will have to learn to deal with broken promises, hung Parliaments, exposure of corruption
but at least, every four/five years, they can hold their rulers to account
Radicals like the Muslim Brotherhood will gain seats due in the elections after the first ones due to the publics overly high expectations
it always happens, in every country
look at the US (tea party), Ireland (Sinn F

 

[cipher6]

Plenty if women voted yesterday in Eygpts constitutional referendum Cipher...

Yes, and the more liberal parties, that were a major force in started the revolution wanted to see the referendums defeated. The Muslim Brotherhood wanted them passed, and they passed, something like 75% to 25%

As far as I know, most Arab countries allow women to vote for what passes as their Parliaments

This isn't necessarily about the right to vote, but equality under the law. In Egypt if you kill your daughter for talking to boys, many judges and cops will help you play it off as a suicide or no big deal.

Yeah, they have the right to vote, but when women rally for equal rights, their attacked with rocks.

Remember the female journalist sexually assaulted by the "good guys" after Mubarak left?

Egypt and the Middle East in general have serious womens rights issues... is it a sign of a deep cultural difference between western equal rights that underlies our democracy? Thats the question I'm asking in this thread.

sure, many in these countries feel a women's place is in the home, and they should not be allowed work
in Ireland, the marriage bar (working for government was impossible after marriage) was only lifted three decades ago (and this was forced on us)

I agree, many countries in the past, especially the US, have moved past this inequalities to make things fairer. Sometimes violently.


But is there some other cultural differences that would allow one country to move one way and another country to take a different path? Or is equality, as we understand it in the west, the natural state of man, and everyone is just catching up?

 

[cipher6]

Some Updates on Egypt:

The Egyptian military, which is currently running the country, and rewriting the constitution, is baning protesting.

The Egyptian cabinet approved yesterday a decree-law that criminalises strikes, protests, demonstrations and sit-ins that interrupt private or state owned businesses or affect the economy in any way.
The decree-law also assigns severe punishment to those who call for or incite action, with the maximum sentence one year in prison and fines of up to half a million pounds.
The new law, which still needs to be approved by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, will be in force as long as the emergency law is still in force.

Since former president Hosni Mubarak stepped down on 11 February, Egypt has witnessed escalating nationwide labour strikes and political protests. Amongst those protesting have been university students, political activists, railway workers, doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, journalists, pensioners and the police force.

Still can't find it if got approved and took effect or not.

Army aims to restore Egypt normalcy - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

Egypt military bans protesting

And the MB is calling for a morality police:

Officials of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's leading Islamic group, have called for the establishment of a Saudi-style modesty police to combat "immoral" behavior in public areas in what observers say in another sign of a growing Islamic self-confidence in the post-Mubarak era.

In the political sphere, the Brotherhood led a successful drive to get voters to approve a package of constitutional amendments. On the street level, at least 20 attacks were perpetrated against the tombs of Muslim mystics (suffis), who are the subject of popular veneration but disparaged by Islamic fundamentalists, or salafis. After some initial hesitation, Islamic leaders have publicly praised the revolution.

Muslim Brotherhood advocates Egyptian modesty police

 

[Dark Jedi]

SO the military isnt running the country no different than the former president did. I wonder if the military will give up the power of rulling or will a general seize control and become Egypt next dictator? Sounds like egypt is on the teeter totter for its political future.

So much for freedom of speech for them.

 

[cipher6]

SO the military isnt running the country no different than the former president did. I wonder if the military will give up the power of rulling or will a general seize control and become Egypt next dictator? Sounds like egypt is on the teeter totter for its political future.

So much for freedom of speech for them.

Thats one perspective, the other is, everyone is protesting and things can't get done.

I think this is more alarming:

ElBaradei: We'll fight back if Israel attacks Gaza
In interview with Arab newspaper, former IAEA chief says if elected as Egypt's next president he will open Rafah crossing in case of an Israeli attack

Former International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who had previously announced his intetions to run for the presidency of Egypt, said Monday that

 

[ElasticNinja]

If Israel attacks Gaza again, they probably deserve to be attacked.

 

[cipher6]

Leave your personal views of Israel/Palestine politics out... what would that do to regional stability?

 

[ElasticNinja]

It would be shit for it obviously, Israel already lost Turkey (own fault), now Egypt (partially own fault), they have no friends apart from the US now

 

[cipher6]

Israel lost Egypt because Mubarak is gone... the majority of the population, I think, has always wanted war with Israel... peace was forced on them.


And I don't think I would support descending the region into chaos out of some "they deserve it" mentality.

 

[ElasticNinja]

why do you think they want war with Israel?

 

[cipher6]

Can't get over age old grievances... basically racism and religious garbage.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Can't get over age old grievances... basically racism and religious garbage.

not land?

 

[cipher6]

not land?

Land in that some think their religion tells them they are entitled to all of it.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Land in that some think their religion tells them they are entitled to all of it.

yeah, but they are there now, but they can just keep expanding their borders
they are trying to take Jerusalem now

 

[cipher6]

yeah, but they are there now, but they can just keep expanding their borders
they are trying to take Jerusalem now

errr... poorly worded, don't know exactly what your getting at?

Israel expanded its boarders to create a strategic buffer, to prevent being over run by Arab states, which they've tried a few times.

 

[embuchho]

Leave your personal views of Israel/Palestine politics out...

Thanks for posting that.

what would that do to regional stability?

Short Term - lots of volatility as countries re-form themselves. Skyrocketing oil prices due to the instability.

Medium Term - Probably another attempt at pan-Arabism (recall the 1950s-1960s when Syria, Egypt, and Iraq were working on forming one country). Arab countries could either start fighting each other for leadership or turn against Israel, the US, UK, and France as a common enemy to unite against. They'll keep making oil money from China and India and other up and coming economies in the stage where they are consuming lots of oil. This means we (USA) won't be able to influence the region much economically as they will have other customers/partners.

Long Term - Israel is probably toast. I wouldn't be surprised if they defend themselves with nuclear weapons. Their only friend is the US and we're loosing influence. What they have been doing to the Palestinians is public news in pretty much every country except the USA already, so I don't think they can count on much sympathy.

The OPEC countries will have new friends in China, India, etc., who have no cultural interest in Zionism and who will just want a stable source of oil.

I hope we (the US) can absorb a big chunk of their population as they're generally really hard-working squared-away people and we will really need another influx of such people.

Anyway, those are my predictions (as a former Middle-East specialist who used to speak Hebrew, married a Muslim, and is a Christian).

 

[ElasticNinja]

errr... poorly worded, don't know exactly what your getting at?

Israel expanded its boarders to create a strategic buffer, to prevent being over run by Arab states, which they've tried a few times.

yet Israel would easily beat these countries... Jerusalem, West Bank colonies are not buffers, they are adgotators