Addie Davis
Sept. 11, 2009
SOC 202
Women risked flogging in Khartoum, a Christian district in the Muslim capital, to boycott against anti-feminist theories including wearing pants. The punishment for this “indecent exposure” is a maximum of 40 lashes and a large fine. Last year nearly 43,000 women were detained for clothing violations influencing Lubna Hussein, a journalist and former UN worker who was arrested after refusing to pay a fine for wearing pants, to take action against the public law. During the trail, the judge tried to determine if Hussein’s pants were too tight and one officer reportedly commented on Hussein being among the worst dressed of the arrested. Though frequently harassed, Hussein continues to fight against the ridiculous law and encourages other Sudanese women to challenge the legislation. “I’m ready for anything to happen. I’m absolutely not afraid of the verdict,” she stated as she entered the court wearing the same pants she was arrested in.”
I believe that this is a violation of human rights because everyone, no matter what their religious affiliation is, should be able to wear what they want. It is not fair that just because these women live in an Islamic nation that they cannot have their own choice of fashion. As long as they’re not indecently exposed, I do not see why Sudanese women are punished for such an extraneous crime. All women should have the right to wear pants, it is not fair that men can wear whatever they please yet women cannot.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hLN4HglzKldI9rhegZ-jouFfFmLw
4 comments:
Although I agree that women should be able to wear pants, to them wearing pants is indecent exposure. Also, most women probably do want to wear pants, but are too afraid because of the harsh consequences.
Though it is looked at as indecent exposure in their society, we have to look at who is trying to enforce it? This article gives the impression that it is the men who say it is indecent exposure, and the women who want to be free to wear pants. It is a law that is imposed on a group of people(women) by another group of people(men). To me, that is a form of oppression.
I think it's interesting that this issue is getting so much attention. I don't mean that it's not worthy of attention - it certainly is - but I just noticed multiple articles on the same thing. Maybe all the news people are conspiring.
I think there are a few really interesting areas to this whole thing. Mostly in the relationship between religion and human rights. Obviously, when two differing religions confront, there will inevitably result some irreconcilable detail in regards to "human rights," based on either religion's concept of humanity's relation to the divine (i.e., the absolute, that which is capable of making human rights "right"). As to the issue of legal abuse, I don't know that that is necessarily a religious issue, although it is certainly related, if one has any sort of faith in any sort of absolute.
Sometimes I wonder how much we confuse certain religions with mere individuality-driven modern thought.
I understand that we should not judge them by our own perspectives of how our society should be, but if so many women are rising up and risking severe punishment for this, then something needs to change there. I also found it hard to believe that there are countries that still flog and lash people for things like this.
Post a Comment