A little hijack:
She still has to be driven to and from the airport by a Male driver, ironic isn’t it?
Based on what I’ve heard from my Saudi friends (women, educated abroad but living in KSA), the situation for women has changed significantly (though not necessarily through formal channels), primarily because of September 11th, but also due to less tolerance of religious police abuses in general. One of my friends walks around Jeddah with an open coat and scarf draped across her shoulders (just in case, but rarely used as a head covering), before she was forced to stay completely covered.
My impression is that religion has less to do with the position of women in MENA than cultural practices that often predate Islam’s emergence. Often, certain cultural observances are practiced by muslims and Xtians in the same region, which means religion isn’t the motivating force. Status of women can often be related to (a) access to education and (b) access to finance/job opportunities. Historically, Islam sought to elevate the status of women by entrenching inheritance/property rights in the Quran. By today’s standards, it’s not “equality”, but considering that the Quran also mandated that men should protect and care for women, it would make sense that they were allocated more resources to do so. Even so, all muslims are aware that the Prophet’s first wife, Khadija, was a successful businesswoman. Recognizing that the Quran’s historical/social context is vastly different from a modern western liberal society, it is still evident that women’s rights on the whole improved immediately after Islam’s emergence. But cultural traditions die hard, and Islam’s inclusive nature often made it easy to “justify” barbaric practices through a sura or hadith one way or another. Some Islamic sects are very progressive, but being culturally indistinguishable from other westerners hardly makes headlines.
In the case of KSA, the kingdom is hamstrung by its own religious establishment. Politically, it makes sense to bend to internal and external pressure by allowing women more rights, but for a monarchy whose legitimacy depends in part on support from a highly conservative religious elite, this can be difficult. Progress is being made, and American pressure has played a part.
To my perception that is a fine summary, Iridium except that I would note the influence of external pressures in MENA cultural and religious affairs is usually overstated, and, indeed, such pressure often results in the “clam effect” when it is overtly exogenous.
The Saudi Royals are, as you describe, stuck in a difficult position. The family contains a fair number of social and economic progressive thinkers, but they are frequently hampered by their own power base, which in many segments remains backwards, primitive, fanatic, misogynist, etc. (the alternative is alienating the fanatics and driving them into the arms of the Ikhwan’s ideological successors).
That is why I find the changes that are taking place encouraging. Small steps are less likely to result in a fatal stumble, but still take one forward.
We discussed the relevance to misogynistic practices of pre-existing culture rather than religion in this thread (link to page 3) as well as in this unofficial follow-up (page 2). Lots of hard (not to mention repetitive, given who the final main opposition was) work there, but essentially the same import you posted.
Very useful, thanks 
Yes and no. It is also caused by the incorporation in Islam of such traditions and practices. Or said otherwise: The development of Islam and its law system was influenced by traditions, practices and local common law systems.
Can you give an example of this?
There are also many men who don’t have acces to education, don’t have a job and are poor as well.
That is a commonly held view and the one that is defended by (most) Muslims. I certainly counts for pre-Islamic systems where women where no more then a property.
This is in line with the development of Islam as a social system in a troubled time where ancient (tribal founded) social structures were endangered and partially already had disappeared. Islam brought an answer to this yet at the same time seemed to have banned other practices and traditions. One can argue if this was always in favour of women. It is clear enough (when reading the ancient commentators and exegeses) that the religion developed itself from a patriarchal background and perspective.
See above. There is a clear contradiction in the pre- Islamic social status of a woman like Khadija (and later also Aisha, which is even more documented) and the role that was given to women in later comments/developments and many today’s societies.
Also a commonly held and defended view but not everyone agrees on the universalism of that.
Of course, the situation of women who previously lived in a system where they were seen as objects (and even part of a man’s heritage) was spectacularly bettered. The same counts for many other groups, like newborn girls, children orphans, slaves…
One can do that with every religion. It is enough to take one line or even a few words of the core text of a religion, like for example Al Qur’an or The Bible, and then find a way to “justify” your actions by using these few words. Islam is not unique in that.
Which sects did you have in mind?
Salaam. A
Agreed, I referred to this broadly by calling Islam “inclusive”. Specifically, part of its early success depended on making use of existing systems and belief sets (e.g. continuation of Abrahamic religion, money allocated through tribal channels, etc).
Honour killings in Jordan and other regions. I believe Abe’s earlier link has some discussion on this, how both Xtian and muslim tribes practice it, removing religion as the prime motivator.
Certainly. Poverty and lack of economic opportunity can restrict access to these things across the board, but I’m specifically referring to women’s lack of access due to a combination of cultural norms and pragmatism based on poverty (e.g. better to send male children to school, women can stay home and raise children, which doesn’t require formal education)
A product of its time, and shouldn’t be interpreted without regard for this context, yes.
Sure, radical interpretation is possible in all religions, though I like the notion of Quranic text as sacrosanct and inviolable. Prevents scripture alteration over time.
Off the top of my head? Shia Twelver variants, Nizari Ismailis and the like. Present in parts of the middle east, gulf, India, Africa and western countries. I’m sure there are others though. Aside from the varying degrees of adherence within major sects.
If you’ll excuse the hijack…
Lois McMaster Bujold’s Vorkosigan series has an underrunning current about female vs male power in a patriarchal society (lots of other currents around, ok, that is one but not “the theme” of the books at all). It’s always been there, but wasn’t really visible until the latest books. You may want to check out A Civil Campaign.
These books are some of the best writing I’ve ever encountered: fun, thoughtful, with great characters that you really want to learn more about, and great food for thought.
</hijack>