13 ms·
Saudi Arabia Agrees to Let Women Drive
- justboxing 9y ago> One cleric claimed — with no evidence — that driving harmed women’s ovaries. Wait. What?
- delecti 9y agoThere have been all sorts of totally bonkers beliefs held by uninformed and/or misogynistic people in the past. Little surprises me in that regard anymore.
- chiph 9y agoGiven men's anatomy, you would think the opposite.
- dmurray 9y agoIt would be surprising if someone hadn't made such a ridiculous claim. But in an article on gay marriage in the US, would the NY Times really have felt the need to observe that "one preacher even claimed - with no evidence - that homosexuality caused earthquakes"?
- drspacemonkey 9y agoIt depends on how much political influence that specific preacher wielded. In Saudi, clerics wield a LOT of political influence. They're not just religious advisers, they get to set and interpret law based on their understanding of the Quran and the Hadiths.
- interstitial 9y agoYou take away the false equivalency argument of an American like that. It's not right. He's probably got a lot of self-esteem built around it.
- smsm42 9y agoNo, mainly depends on how much outrage can be mined out of it. Influence is largely the byproduct of the press attention, at least in the scales we have in the US, and the press wants to have people engaged (clicks, views, ads) and also preferably show their political opponents are crazy evil idiots. Emphasizing outrageously stupid claims by some obscure personality serves both goals - people get outraged, share the links, ad impressions follow, discussion follows, etc. etc.
- drspacemonkey 9y ago>Influence is largely the byproduct of the press attention That's not how it works with clerics in Saudi. They have official standing with the government, have their own police force with the authority to enforce morality laws (the mutaween), and even get to decide who the next king will be.
- wahern 9y agoOf course. It may be ridiculous, but it's nonetheless the kind of myth that spreads quickly among certain conservative communities. I wouldn't be surprised if plenty of conservative Saudi Arabians believed such a myth. Just like plenty of American conservatives believed Todd Akin's infamous claim regarding "legitimate rape": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Akin#Controversial_comments_on_.22legitimate_rape.22_and_pregnancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Akin#Controversial_commen... If enough people are credulous, it's absolutely newsworthy, as it reflects how deeply wedded some people are to a particular perspective. Confirmation bias is a powerful thing.
- dleslie 9y agoI'm fairly certain I've read numerous articles to that effect; for instance, here's an oped discussing Lesbians being blamed for Irma.[0] It was a trivial to find. 0: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/did-lesbians-cause-hurricanes-irma-and-harvey-god-knows/2017/09/08/638efbca-94bf-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/did-lesbians-cause-h...
- smsm42 9y ago> in an article on gay marriage in the US, would the NY Times really have felt the need to observe that "one preacher even claimed - with no evidence - that homosexuality caused earthquakes"? From what I know about NYT - definitely yes. Probably not in every article on the topic, but at least in some. It is a sensational claim which generates outrage - bread and butter of modern journalism.
- goialoq 9y agoCan you find one example? I can't.
- smsm42 9y agoThere's an example right in this thread from WaPo and hurricanes. I don't have specific example about gay marriage (I must admit, I do not study NYT that closely to have cross-reference of every article years back, though I do occasionally read their articles) right now, but as a general principle, it is completely normal for their style to do something like that and the example of Saudi cleric is not something that is out of the normal modus operandi. I think that was the original point.
- Alex3917 9y ago> But in an article on gay marriage in the US, would the NY Times really have felt the need to observe that "one preacher even claimed - with no evidence - that homosexuality caused earthquakes"? https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anytimes.com+god+punish+homosexuality https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anytimes.com+god+punis...
- Aloha 9y agoThey have - often this is used to portray the other side as kooks, and delegitimize them (not that they were very legitimate to start out with).
- pjc50 9y agohttp://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121322&page=1 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121322&page=1 ; "Falwell Suggests Gays to Blame for Attacks" [on WTC] Pat Robertson was doing this 20 years ago, and I don't think he's really stopped: https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/tv-preacher-pat-robertson-expands-on-gay-days-comments https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/tv-preacher-pat-robe...
- xkcd-sucks 9y agoSo it should be okay after menopause anyway
- natch 9y agoWhy the surprise? Clerics are not known as rational thinkers.
- Osmium 9y ago> One cleric claimed — with no evidence — that driving harmed women’s ovaries. Cycling can cause sexual impotence in men, yet we don't see anyone claiming men should be banned from cycling. Arguments like this are toxic; even if true (which they obviously aren't), they expose an ugly underlying sexism with the implicit assumption that somehow it's okay for men to make these decisions for women as long as it's for a 'good reason.'
- fmihaila 9y agoThere are many such opinions, apparently, but there is push-back. [Saad al-Hijri, head of fatwas (legal opinions) in Saudi Arabia’s Assir governorate], who said women should not drive because their brains shrink to a quarter the size of a man’s when they go shopping has been banned from preaching. [...] In a video this week, Hijri asked what the traffic department would do it if it discovered a man with only half a brain. “Would it give him a licence or not? It would not. So how can it give it to a woman when she has only half?” he said. “If she goes to the market she loses another half. What is left? A quarter ... We demand the traffic department check because she is not suitable to drive and she has only a quarter.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/23/saudi-cleric-saad-al-hijri-banned-woman-driving-cars-quarter-brain https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/23/saudi-cleric-s...
- Waterluvian 9y agoI listen to Sawbones podcast and this reminds me of how primitive North American and European cultures were too. "Hysteria" being my favourite example of "I can't believe we thought that..."
- pbhjpbhj 9y agoYou can't believe that we thought some women had mood swings that relate to their having wombs ... I might have news for you! Sure they got the level wrong, but it was basically an early endocrine based explanation for human behavioural changes? My favourite "I can't believe" is probably homuncular theory, that ejaculate contained a tiny little man [men?], fully formed, who grew to be a baby. Presumably it was homuncula all the way down?? [Not sure of the historical verity of that theory.]
- Waterluvian 9y agoYes good point. I guess it's too easy to look at those before us and laugh. I'm applying my framework of existence and being to a fact from the past. This should throw a Type error but my interpreter simply coerced the types and returned valid looking garbage.
- return0 9y agoYou seem surprised
- aaron-lebo 9y agoWhat people say crazy stuff? Unrelated but ran across the following story: woman gets rare and slow developing cancer at 22, decides against surgery, gets on "Gerson therapy", runs lifestyle blog for years, credible (and credulous) media eat up claim she cured cancer. Mother gets breast cancer, uses Gerson therapy, dies in 2013 (horrible now removed blog posts where they discuss "flare ups" as symptoms of the therapy working, was actually symptoms of growing cancer). Down to her last days was hiding growing cancer and deceiving rabid fanbase, criticizing "bullies" who were pointing out her cancer was back. Of course after she died, her fans and Gerson therapy advocates now leave crazy comments about how she didn't do it right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Ainscough https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Ainscough http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/10/17/sharyn-ainscough-dies-tragically-because-she-followed-the-example-of-her-daughter-the-wellness-warrior/ http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/10/17/sharyn-ainscoug... Gerson therapy vids are all over YouTube even today with the implication it is effective. I mean people are basically committing suicide because YouTube is making money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvWlZ4-7Lo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvWlZ4-7Lo If that's possible in open and connected societies, what's unscientific bullshit but the norm? We all believe delusional stuff, the question is, what seemingly accepted and reasonable views in our own societies are are actually delusional and harmful?
- csomar 9y agoOh you missing lots of entertainment buddy. They even ruled that Mickey Mouse is "haram". These Clerics are fun to watch (except for the populace affected by its arbitrary decisions)
- edgecrafter 9y agoI've always thought the risk of too hot "balls" in the car was greater in that area of the world ...
- dang 9y agoI know it's oh so tempting, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN about stupid shit—especially not on inflammatory topics. There's no surer way to degrade an internet discussion, and we're trying for better than that here (trying and failing, no doubt, but we can always fail better). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- justboxing 9y agoSorry, didn't mean to offend you. My apologies.
- dang 9y agoNot at all, you're so far from having offended me that I'm sorry for having left you with that impression! But we can see from this subthread how quickly these comments grow like weeds and choke out more thoughtful conversation. It's not the starting comment itself, but what it precipitates, that we all need to guard against.
- Osmium 9y agoObviously a judgement call, but I thought there were some useful comments in reply to the OP (e.g. fmihaila's comment). While the OP's comment was unsubstantive, it highlighted an interesting quotation from the article to discuss, that a lot of people had opinions on and also wanted to discuss. Maybe the only appropriate response to a quotation like that is ridicule, which serves an important purpose in its own right. I do appreciate this is a very difficult topic to moderate however(!) To be honest, I'm surprised the article itself was even allowed on HN and wasn't flagged for being too political.
- pjc50 9y agoThis sort of thing is not unusual in misogyny. Similar arguments were used not just against women's sports but all sorts of things in the West over the past century.
- harisamin 9y agoThis is a REALLY big deal. I was born and raised there. Glad to see some progress.
- agumonkey 9y agois it the first time or, like lebannon or iran, there was a time when women could drive before ?
- ma1313 9y agoFirst time in Saudi. Women were never banned from driving in Lebanon, not sure about Iran, but I don't think so
- agumonkey 9y agoSorry I didn't mean driving per se, but in the 70s women had more freedom and it regressed since.
- dibujante 9y agoThat's not exactly true. People tout those photographs of "liberated" women in Iran in the 70's but that was a tiny slice of a female urban lifestyle restricted to a small number of elite women. That was not representative of the lives of the overwhelming majority of Iranian women.
- agumonkey 9y agoOh ok, thanks for the correction.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dmix 9y agoIran was still far more liberal in general before the cultural revolution, no? Women don't have to be in nice clothes in urban areas to not be repressed by clerical rule backed by state rule... There may have been societal pressure but it's significantly different when it's backed by government security services and religious police.
- irln 9y agoSimultaneously they are banning all non-autonomous cars.
- __Julia 9y agoIn 2017 ...
- ovulator 9y agoActually, 2018. June of next year.
- pmoriarty 9y agoBut do they have to be accompanied on that drive by a male relative?
- kogepathic 9y agoIt's not mentioned anywhere in the article that a male relative is required to be in the car. Also, it sounds like their police will need some training to interact with female drivers, as by my understanding Saudi women don't normally interact with people who aren't family members. The police will need to be trained to interact with women in a way that they rarely do in a society where men and women who are not related rarely interact.
- tyingq 9y agoI suppose that women driving alone would also extend new interactions with gas stations, shops, etc. Perhaps that won't open up all at once, but this does seem to open more than one door.
- kogepathic 9y ago> I suppose that women driving alone would also extend new interactions with gas stations, shops, etc. It could work out quite well for them if they're open to hiring women to work in businesses that support female drivers. e.g. female driving instructors, female gas station attendants, etc. Low oil prices have limited the government jobs that many Saudis have long relied on, and the kingdom is trying to push more citizens, including women, into gainful employment.
- simonh 9y agoTime to start recruiting female police officers!
- drcode 9y agoIt's pretty messed up how this mirrors similar questions that come up when discussing autonomous vehicles- While we in the West try to come to grips with the agency of computer systems, other places are still trying to come to grips with agency for adult humans.
- idoh 9y ago"Low oil prices have limited the government jobs that many Saudis have long relied on, and the kingdom is trying to push more citizens, including women, into gainful employment. But some working Saudi women say hiring private drivers to get them to and from work eats up much of their pay, diminishing the incentive to work." I'm guessing that this is the biggest driver - Saudi Arabia just cannot afford to not allow this anymore.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y agodenial of liberty is expensive.
- mtgx 9y agoAnd renewables/EVs are just getting started. It will be interesting to see what other freedoms Saudis will allow once EVs and renewables are a significant portion of the global market.
- ishi 9y agoPerhaps freedoms will be taken by force by the Saudi citizens... when the petrol money runs out, the economic situation will worsen while the ability of the ruling elite to use money to keep the regime's stability will be greatly reduced. Looks like Prince Mohammed bin Salman understands this, and that is why he's trying to reduce his country's reliance on petrol money.
- stale2002 9y agoUgg, unfortunately the problem is the opposite. If you look at what the average person believes in that area, you will see that "allowing women to drive" is a very progressive opinion that makes the Saudi government/royalty a shining beacon of liberty, when you compare them to the opinions of the average person there. In actuality, a populous democracy revolution would probably end the same way that the Iranian or MB Egyptian revolution ended.
- 9y ago
- quattrofan 9y agoI had to just check, yep it is the 21st century.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jandrese 9y agoNot in Saudi Arabia.
- randyrand 9y agoThe 21st century is not as homogeneous as you think. Not every country will have the same cultural timeline as the USA, and it's odd to me that comments like yours are so prevalent. The world is bigger than america. Comments like this just seem incredibly self-centered, and a bit culturally supremacist.
- bogomipz 9y agoWhy is the OP automatically deemed an American for expressing cynicism? Its amazing that you yourself see no hypocrisy in making such discriminatory remarks based on what you perceive another's nationality to be. The 21st century might not be homogenous but please name me one other place on the planet where women can't drive, where women can't open a banking account[1], or where women can't enter a Starbucks[2] or where there are public beheadings on Fridays[3] Actually name one other place that even comes close to that level of chauvinism and barbarism. That cynicism is not without merit. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/five-things-that-saudi-arabian-women-still-cannot-do-a6765666.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/five-thi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deera_Square https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deera_Square [3] https://www.eater.com/2016/2/1/10885722/saudi-arabia-starbucks-women-banned https://www.eater.com/2016/2/1/10885722/saudi-arabia-starbuc...
- randyrand 9y agoTo your first point, I could/should have replaced "America" with "western culture", but it originally made the sentence less clear. I noticed the hypocrisy =) To your second point, I was not talking about the specifics of Saudia Arabia, but rather the common idom of going "what centry is this" with respect to judging other cultures. People forget that western history is distinct from world history. And it feels a bit supremacist too - "Western culture is at X point, so everyone should be at X point"
- ericfrenkiel 9y ago::slow clap:: It is absolutely appalling that this type of backwardness is still a reality in the 21st century. The faster we can transition to clean, renewable energy, the better for everyone in the world.
- rconti 9y agoMy favorite example is the South Carolina law that was finally rescinded a few years back, where bars had to serve their mixed alcoholic drinks with liquor poured from single-serving 'airline' style bottles. A colossal waste of time and resources, but the kicker was the arguments against rescinding the law-- some folks arguing that DUI rates would go through the roof and The Children (TM) would all die, and others arguing that bartenders would rip off patrons with 'short pours'. All without a single thought to stop and consider the example of the other 49 states, not to mention other countries...
- Forbo 9y agoYou should take a look at Utah's liquor laws some time. Perfect example of what happens when people who don't drink decide to legislate alcohol.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- gamad 9y agoOh, they drink!
- knz 9y agoLaws related to firearms are often similar. The current example is the effort to make suppressors more available. Those opposed are already pushing tales of dramatically increasing crime rates and poaching instead of acknowledging that even suppressed firearms are still very loud or that many other OECD countries (which have more strict regulation) allow or even encourage the use of suppressors. The sad part about using fear to support or oppose change is that you rarely end up with solutions that actually solve the underlying societal problem via a sensible compromise.
- reaperducer 9y agoThe use of "Agrees" in the headline reveals societal bias. "Decides" would have been better.
- novia 9y agoWell, I believe that they were the last country in the world to prohibit it, so even if you look at it from a societal bias perspective, Saudi Arabia's policy is now in agreement with everyone else.
- KZeillmann 9y agoIs there something wrong with societal bias? Especially towards ideals like personal liberty?
- nebabyte 9y agoThe word "bias" probably should have tipped you off
- pwinnski 9y agoOr not? One can be biased toward life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, or any number of generally-agreeable things. I'm biased against death, and toward life. I don't generally feel a need to disclose that, since it's a widely-shared bias.
- kobeya 9y agoIn journalism, yes.
- dragonwriter 9y agoNo, the use of the word “agrees” conveys the fact that there was a party other than the one making the decision requesting the outcome, while “decides" is less specific. There is no “bias” revealed except one toward communicating facts. Now, if there was editorializing about the desirability of the decision, e.g., “finally agrees”, you'd have a point about bias (though the would be bias of those involved in the headline, not necessarily societal bias.) Of course, there is a widespread (though not universal) societal bias toward treating women at least as human beings with the basic right to participate indepebdently in society, and I don't have any problem with that. But nothing in the headline points to that bias.
- oh_sigh 9y agoI wonder to what extent private families/society at large will accept women driving?
- potlee 9y agoHow is this helpful if they cannot be outside alone without a male relative?
- friedbeef 9y agoIt is helpful because women can be outside alone without male relatives. You realize that most women go around with personal drivers rather than male relatives.
- awakeasleep 9y agoIsn't the male relative's guardianship considered to pass to the 'servant' that accompanies them?
- jayess 9y agoWhen do they stop executing gays?
- jimmy2020 9y agothat will never happen in any muslim country at all
- tripa 9y agoWhen do we stop tying religion to geography?
- jayess 9y agoProbably when geographic boundaries no longer determine whether one will be subjected to religious law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_system_of_Saudi_Arabia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_system_of_Saudi_Arabia
- viraptor 9y agoProbably the better question is when we stop tying it to politics. These two can be either related or not. But some countries are practically single-religion based, so it's fair to describe them in that context.
- tripa 9y agoIt's fair indeed. For now. What I'd like to know is how we can get the situation to evolve.
- kobeya 9y agoWay to make broad generalizations. Homosexuality is not illegal in Jordan or Bahrain, and socially tolerated in many other places.
- ams6110 9y agoThose countries are constitutional monarchies. Saudi Arabia is an Islamic monarchy. Very unlikely that an Islamic state will ever condone homosexuality.
- amelius 9y agoSerious question: how safe is it to drive with a burqa?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- probably_wrong 9y agoGermany has recently banned burqas while driving[1], but not because they were considered unsafe. Instead, the ban forbids having anything that makes you impossible to identify in camera. So my guess is that they are not really unsafe, or they would have been banned earlier for that specific reason. [1] http://www.dw.com/en/german-bundesrat-approves-burqa-ban-for-drivers-beefs-up-road-race-sanctions/a-40642060 http://www.dw.com/en/german-bundesrat-approves-burqa-ban-for...
- Mediterraneo10 9y agoBurqas are not terribly popular in Saudi Arabia. It is generally a niqab or chador country.
- jimmy2020 9y agoAnyway that doesn't mean they can actually drive in real life, i am sure there will be more strict regulations about this issue beside the masculine religious community opposition.
- lucb1e 9y agoJust today I had someone casually mention that he thought women should not be allowed to vote. This is the Netherlands, the person is Dutch, not muslim or some other culture that I might not be used to, we're master's students... nothing out of the ordinary. And the third person in the conversation apparently agreed, calling it bad to prohibit it in principle but "seeing the effects of allowing women to vote" he agreed. What the hell. Don't let women vote because they tend to vote "left" and "emotionally" (allegedly). What if the women of this planet decide that male votes are shit, what then? Are we just going to have to fight it out? (I didn't really get a response to that.) I just don't have words for this, it's so alien. Am I weird for rejecting the notion out of hand? Edit: two downvotes, please explain? I am honestly interested in opinions; I just found it very weird to hear someone say this.
- Tasboo 9y agoDown votes may be because your post is a bit tangential. That said, I think you were right to call them out on that. It's an idea that shouldn't even be entertained as an option.
- xupybd 9y agoYeah you're right that is weird especially that both agreed, are you sure they weren't trolling you? But I do agree with voting irrationally being a problem in democracy. I just don't think it's only women that do that. I'd love it if, in order to vote, you had to name one policy position that the party you are voting for holds. I know we want everyone to vote so we can say participation is high but I'd rather only those interested enough to know what's going on voted.
- woodman 9y agoLol, this is so incredible. You've essentially suggested the reintroduction of a voter literacy test... now consider the context of that suggestion.
- xupybd 9y agoTo be honest I'd never heard about voter literacy tests. I'm not in the states so the context is not something I'm aware of. I know it creates more problems than it solves, I just wish people would take the time and effort to have an informed opinion before voting. Even if that informed opinion is opposed to mine. To split hairs you don't have to be literate to name a policy.
- vonnik 9y agoI'm totally in support of this. Strangely, the second thought after "wow" that I had was: I wonder what the backlash will be. I think my big, pessimistic lesson from the Obama years was that moves that I see as progress will probably be met with an equal and opposite antithesis.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- vermontdevil 9y agoWould they still need permission of the male in their household to drive?
- anon-123 9y agoPosting as anon because I don't want to be condemned, honestly, you can't marginalize half of your population and be successful and you don't need a degree in econ to understand that. It's simple math.
- kobeya 9y agoBut a degree in history would show you that yes, indeed you can marginalize half your population and be quite successful for a very long time.
- vadym909 9y agoDon't know whether to be happy this happened or sad that it took so long!
- bluesnowmonkey 9y agoWelcome to the twentieth century, Saudi Arabia.
- huffmsa 9y agoYeah, someone needs to buy their oil.
- adam_seeliger 9y agoBiggest mistake Saudi Arabia has made in a while. Insurance companies must be happy though.