18
Nov
07

Is Saudi Arabia Victimizing a Rape Victim?

 Rape Victim in Saudi Arabia

Rape is always a tragedy. Unconsented and forcibly acquired sex breeds deep psychological wounds in anyone, whether young or old, whether Christian or Muslim, whatever race a person is. It is not surprising then that some countries have imposed stiff penalties for convicted rapists, ranging from several years of imprisonment to death.

 While the accountability of rapists has long been established, questions have arisen as to the role that victims play in the act of rape. It may be politically incorrect to say this, but some cultures maintain that the rape victim may also be to blame for exposing himself/herself to rape, for inducing sexualized feelings in the rapist-to-be, or, in simpler terms, for “asking for it.” I highly doubt that anyone asks to be raped, for that wouldn’t be rape, by definition (although resistance to sex is a fetish for some).

Must the rape victim be held accountable for not providing self-protection?

Let’s analyze accountability first. Accountability is a social precept materialized in the legal system. It is created to achieve justice in the eyes of society. This definition of accountability allows us to accept the differing burdens of proof for rape in various societies (see case studies of the UK, India, and Iran). It also accounts for the gradations in the severity of the punishment meted out to rapists. It is this spectrum of societal reactions to rape that has allowed Saudi Arabia to inflict 200 lashes and apply a six-month prison sentence onto a gang-rape victim. Was this justified in the context of Saudi Arabian perceptions of accountability?

The person in question is a 19-year old woman gang-raped by the companions of a man she met to retrieve some photographs. She was convicted for violating a law that prohibits women from meeting with an unrelated man. The reason for this law is to prevent unfaithfulness among married women, as well as premarital sex for unmarried women. The burden also of sexual inhibition is placed largely on women, who have to dress modestly (understatement?) in order not to induce sexual feelings in men who observe these women.

Saudi Arabia is deeply IslamicWomen in Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia and the Catholic Church

Saudi Arabian conservatives may feel then that the punishment was justified. Reformists though have cried out for justice. The comparison between the physical punishment and detention of the rape victim and her rapists is something worth noting. Her rapists received a sentence ranging from 2 years to 9 years. This woman, upon appeal, had her own sentence increased to the 200 lashes, from a previous number of 90, for “going to the media”, and “trying to influence the court”.

A rape is a rape

Considering all of these factors, I feel that Saudi Arabia has aggravated the victimization of this woman. Knowing the intense psychological (and physical) pain that this woman underwent, and considering the life-long discrimination she will face in her community, punishing her and giving relatively light sentences to her rapists is an insult to human dignity. Punishing her for the association with men is punishing the inevitable, and requires obedience to a highly isolationist and disempowering regulation that binds Saudi Arabian women only to the home. Increasing her punishment after “going to the media” for fear of influencing the court’s decisions speaks more of the susceptibility of the judiciary to public pressure than of her obstruction of justice. Which makes us argue: 1) Why shouldn’t the public be able to influence the court, which is acting to preserve social justice anyway?, and 2) Why should the court prevent women from publicizing their plight to the public?

Malaysia as an Islamic countryIslam in Indonesia

The past events have spat in the face of the reforms of the ruling King to liberate women from the shackles that bind them. When Islamic countries like Malaysia and Indonesia have been able to foster women’s rights without expending religion, we can’t help but wonder: Is patriarchy in other Islamic countries really due to Islam, or due to fear of the empowered woman?

Maybe Saudi Arabians should stand up and challenge the patriarchy. Maybe Muslims should re-examine how they practice Islam, and ask whether it is God who legislates injustice, rather than man. I believe Islam protects the dignity of women. I believe Islam does not disabuse its believers of their humanity.


23 Responses to “Is Saudi Arabia Victimizing a Rape Victim?”


  1. November 18, 2007 at 5:17 pm

    ‘I beleive Islam protects the dignity of Women’

    This should be the case but it has not happened here. In appealing against the sentence, this female surely was advised of the conseqences, but by bringing Media attention to it, commences a discussion.

    I come from the west and do not fully understand all customs but do not believe than the Koran and Islam hand out such a punishment to a Victim.

  2. November 18, 2007 at 5:48 pm

    Hear hear. I agree that it has something to do with interpretations rather than actual instructions…

  3. 3 Nico
    November 18, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    Is patriarchy in other Islamic countries really due to Islam, or due to fear of the empowered woman?

    But what is Islam? And what is religion for that matter? And who is to say what the practice of a religion must or must not entail?

    There is no one Islam. Just like there is no one Christianity. Who is to say which sect is more right than another? In the end, it all boils down to faith, which is a deeply personal, uncompromising thing. In the end, everyone believes that they are only doing what God Himself told them to do.

    Reason is beside the point. And any justice, fairness or decency derived from reason is irrelevant.

    For as long as we place faith over reason, humankind will be unreasonable. And for as long as we place divinity over humanity, humankind will be inhumane.

  4. November 19, 2007 at 12:38 am

    In fairness, I didn’t deal with the post-modern post-faith point of view (although a lot of post-modernist concepts are essentially articles of faith in themselves).

    I doubt that faith is something uncompromisable. The fact that many religions, even monolithic and organized ones, have opened up to changing standards in society proves that faith is something negotiable. It’s like contending that human beings in themselves are static, when their psyches, their values and their personal belief systems change.

    Secondly, I can argue against the individualistic/relativist nature of faith. While many in secular society go for the “I-have-a-personal-savior” and “It’s-okay-to-just-do-good” spirituality, others (in fact the vast majority) still count themselves into an organized religion. Thus, they are influenced, even dictated upon, by the sum total of codified or traditionalized beliefs and practices of that religion. The decision is personal, but their conformity is organizational. Still, it doesn’t discount the fact that religion as a whole is dynamic, bringing its followers beliefs also into that flux of belief-thought.

    I wouldn’t touch the last statement. I’ll just make a mental note that Nico actually has a religion. In that religion, Reason is God. Not bad for a self-professed atheist (as I recall?).

    🙂

  5. November 19, 2007 at 12:50 am

    All of your points are well taken, but I’m curious about why almost everyone leaves out of this story the fact that the man in the car was also gang raped by these savages. He was given the same sentence as the woman for meeting alone with an unrelated person of the opposite gender, but apparently he didn’t go public.

  6. November 19, 2007 at 7:25 am

    Thanks for pointing that out. The same contention on justice also applies. Why double burden the victim?

  7. 7 Nico
    November 19, 2007 at 3:06 pm

    Aids, again. If reason is to be my religion, so be it.=P

    (And, for the record, I’m agnostic. I don’t believe that positivist standards for evidence are the end-alll and be-all of truth. Hence, it would be dishonest for me to conclude that God does not exist simply because we have no evidence of him existing.)

    My pointing out the personal dimension of faith is not inconsistent with your own analysis of the organizational nature of faith. People generally organize themselves in groups of kindred believers. They will be influenced by the organization only to an extent. After a tipping point, they will reorganize based again on personal beliefs. My only point is that faith ultimately escapes standardization. Just because followers of a particular brand of Islam do not believe in punishing women in this way does not, according to the standards of faith and religion, de-legitimize other brands of Islam that do believe in this.

    But on the broader question of whether faith is reasonable, on what basis will faith “compromise”? It will not do so because of reason. The basis will be on some vague new revelation about “what God really wants”.

    The point here is that changes towards a more humane, reasonable and just society are made against the tide of organized faiths. Change, by nature, is against a status quo that has entrenched and privileged the establishment (read: religious establishment). Change towards a more humane, reasonable and just society will be resisted by the establishment and their basis will be divine revelation. How can you argue against that? Religion, by its very nature, is the foot-dragging party in our attempt to make the world a better place.

    I concede that there is some apparent inconsistency in what I’m saying. On the one hand, I point out that religion is deeply personal and cannot be standardized. That’s why one interpretation of Islam cannot necessarily be branded as more correct than another simply on the merits of faith. On the other hand, religion is so standardized that it has kept persons in line and prevented them from forming a more humane society. But I want to point out that these are separate pieces of analysis dwelling on separate levels of the phenomenon.

    So-called “divine will” that is unaccountable to reason will never be disciplined. Its interpretations will always be ambiguous and conflicting and there will be no end to the chaos of human existence. Reason is a common ground. Without religion to muddle up the picture, life would be a hell of a lot easier.

    As Salman Rushdie said, “Imagine there’s no heaven, and at once the skies the limit.”

  8. November 21, 2007 at 11:23 pm

    Brilliant response. Thank you – I am too enraged to post anything articulate.

  9. November 22, 2007 at 4:55 pm

    wow, people actually read this. Kudos, Aids!

  10. November 22, 2007 at 10:22 pm

    I guess Rushdie has problems with homonyms like myself. haha

  11. November 25, 2007 at 6:29 am

    Nico, I am interested in your line……

    Reason is a common ground. Without religion to muddle up the picture, life would be a hell of a lot easier.

    …….

    But would it mean people are happier and what will happen when we die?

  12. November 27, 2007 at 8:13 am

    I guess lack of semantic comprehension has neurological implications on lack of divine comprehension… hahaha

  13. 13 kim
    January 2, 2008 at 11:24 pm

    It is unfair to punish the victim and the criminal alike. the girl is a human being and has her own emotions and feelings and its her right to love and to find someone to talk to specially in the enclosed socities where the do not give any attention to their girls or wives. So what if she does not go to the court and complain. this case will let crime spread because if the victim complains he or she might face the same punishment.Anyhow there are many families who allow their car -driver to go with them shopping or driving them to the public schools .

  14. 15 Anonymous
    February 26, 2008 at 3:46 pm

    CVXVVGBGF

  15. 16 amit
    August 13, 2009 at 1:02 am

    hi,
    i would like to say that we should kill the cause of rape, rather blaming any kind of reason. we have to make people educated about feelings, sex, and how the anxiety of sex can be reduce. and these things should be teached in schools itself.
    we should tell kids how pure relations are to be made and maintained.
    we can’t do whatis in present, but i am sure we can protect our tommorow….

  16. September 13, 2009 at 3:37 am

    Hey Amit… Right Mate.. That’s what is needed.
    Thanks

  17. November 23, 2010 at 5:22 pm

    !!
    I’ve got an account here.
    I really love the everything here. Sweet work by the administrator and mods and everyone .
    I found some information about erectile drugs in it, till today I was sometimes taking the well known viagra, but recently I feel bad with it, should I try something different?
    http://healthsite.yumor.az/blogs/

    Whats up folks

  18. May 17, 2012 at 3:56 pm

    我们提供 精力剤, 媚薬, 勃起薬, 精力増強, ペニス増大, 早漏対策,威哥王, イカオウ, 催淫剤, 漢方精力剤.

  19. April 13, 2013 at 7:04 am

    I visited several blogs but the audio feature for audio songs existing at this web
    site is truly wonderful.


Leave a comment


Sympathizers

  • 37,459 joined the revolution

Associates

State of Being

born in 1984. practices Medicine. loves racket sports. fan of Chelsea FC. cherishes conversation. nurtures cyberlife. debates. reads much. is sunny. talks loud. was an optimist. now a realist. aspires to be liberal. forever UP. studied in Cherished Moments School. plays stupid well. advocates meritocracy. hates stupidity and its schools (of thought). hard to beat at Chess and Scrabble. searches for the provocative. believes in God. has faith in love. master of Tekken. aspires to be a photographer

Spatial references

Wormhole