"Saudi Arabia, the experience of being a woman there, would stick to me, follow me home on the plane and shadow me through my days . . .

. . . tainting the way I perceived men and women everywhere."  L.A. Times staff writer Megan Stack comes home irrevocably changed:

I'm leaving the Middle East now, closing up years spent covering the fighting and fallout that have swept the region since Sept. 11. Of all the strange, scary and joyful experiences of the past years, my time covering Saudi Arabia remains among the most jarring.

I spent my days in Saudi Arabia struggling unhappily between a lifetime of being taught to respect foreign cultures and the realization that this culture judged me a lesser being. I tried to draw parallels: If I went to South Africa during apartheid, would I feel compelled to be polite?

I would find that I still saw scraps of Saudi Arabia everywhere I went. Back home in Cairo, the usual cacophony of whistles and lewd coos on the streets sent me into blind rage. I slammed doors in the faces of deliverymen; cursed at Egyptian soldiers in a language they didn't speak; kept a resentful mental tally of the Western men, especially fellow reporters, who seemed to condone, even relish, the relegation of women in the Arab world.

What particularly enraged Stack was the way the U.S. government and companies opportunistically enable Saudi Arabia's gender apartheid:

The same U.S. government that heightened public outrage against the Taliban by decrying the mistreatment of Afghan women [...] even offers wan praise for Saudi elections in which women are banned from voting. All U.S. fast-food franchises operating here, not just Starbucks, make women stand in separate lines. U.S.-owned hotels don't let women check in without a letter from a company vouching for her ability to pay; women checking into hotels alone have long been regarded as prostitutes.

But Saudi women don't mind, the Saudis and the cultural relativists will say.  True, many don't.  It is remarkable, the restrictions on your freedom that you can get used to and even dependent on.  "Long-term prisoners do not willingly quit their cells," wrote Theodor Herzl.  Sometimes it takes a short-term prisoner to be freshly shocked at the confinement and the indignity.

The length of [the abaya] always felt foreign, at first. But it never took long to work its alchemy, to plant the insecurity. After a day or two, the notion of appearing without the robe felt shocking. Stripped of the layers of curve-smothering cloth, my ordinary clothes suddenly felt revealing, even garish. To me, the abaya implied that a woman's body is a distraction and an interruption, a thing that must be hidden from view lest it haul the society into vice and disarray. The simple act of wearing the robe implanted that self-consciousness by osmosis.

In the depths of the robe, my posture suffered. I'd draw myself in and bumble along like those adolescent girls who seem to think they can roll their breasts back into their bodies if they curve their spines far enough. That was why, it hit me one day, I always seemed to come back from Saudi Arabia with a backache.

The kingdom made me slouch. [...]

[When I get on the airplane] I take the abaya off, expecting to feel liberated. But somehow, it always feels like defeat.

A reporter takes off the concealing black cloak of objectivity -- which leaves free only the eyes -- and writes a personal, troubled, angry essay.

Comments

[Sissy Willis]

Fascinating and revealing -- pun intended.

Encouraging to see a crack in the wall of a politically correct, feeling-good-about-oneself "lifetime of being taught to respect foreign cultures."

Let the light of common sense and self-preservation shine through.

[Dan]

"I spent my days in Saudi Arabia struggling unhappily between a lifetime of being taught to respect foreign cultures and the realization that this culture judged me a lesser being."

Why would it be disrespectful to engage another culture on the issue of what is right and what is wrong? It's not disrespectful at all. On the contrary, to suppose that one must not engage in cross-cultural dialogue is patronizing and, worse, promotes conflict by supposing that we cannot communicate.

Of course, the dialogue should be just that, a dialgoue -- not a lecture. To engage Islam, we must understand where Muslims are coming from and this in turn requires us to understand and, yes, respect, their religious motivations. Western liberals are poor candidates for this task because they tend to be tone deaf when it comes to religion.

A philosophy that champions tolerance without regard to truth is a philosophy that is destined to become mired in incoherence. "Tolerance" is not a necessarily a good thing -- it depends on what is being tolerated and to know this requires a judgment about what is true and what is fale, what is good and what is evil. So many today seem incapable of understanding this, even when confronted with evil and injustice.

[Ruth Anne]

Not too long ago, The Anchoress was writing about the continuum between the bikini and burkha. Modesty lies somewhere in the middle--not in completely revealing the body nor completely covering it--but in celebrating the body beautiful in an appropriate context.

[Ruth Anne]

Dan: Did you see this episode of "South Park" where they dissembled the concept of tolerance?

[amba]

Ruth Anne: my way of putting that is, "They brown-bag their women, we shrink-wrap ours" ... both reduce women to nothing but their bodies and their sexuality -- really, to men's sexuality, men's sexual response to them. It is totally a primitive man's-eye view, either way.

[Dan]

"But Saudi women don't mind, the Saudis and the cultural relativists will say. True, many don't. It is remarkable, the restrictions on your freedom that you can get used to and even dependent on."

I am no cultural relativist, but isn't it relevant what Muslim women want? Why is the burka a restriction on their freedom if they choose it? I have read that some women consider the burka to be a liberation from the lust of men. Obviously it is a different issue to the extent the burka is required by law, as it is, I understand, in Iran.

Speaking of cross-cultural comparisons, which is worse, the burka or this:

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=373ed690-d213-4bc1-bf9f-d84f53220e75

[Dan]

The last link was too long to post correctly. It's an article about the truly horrific violence against women in movies such as Saw and Hostel.

[wj]

There is some evidence that demanding that women be totally covered is a matter of control more than anything else. Consider: in Saudi Arabia,
- Saudi women are required to be totally covered, leaving at most a thin slit at the eyes.
- Non-Saudi Muslim women are required to have the hair totally covered, but may leave their face bare.
- Non-Muslim women still have to wear the long-sleeved, floor-length coat, but may leave their heads bare. That is the way the law reads, and I can attest from personal observation that that is the way it is enforced. Which is to say, I have seen (Western, blonde) women in Riyadh walking bare-headed -- even into the Ministry of the Interior building.

Control. Not morality.

[Azure]

Hello from Riyadh where I'm setting now in a coffee shop called Dr.cafe in the 'men section' and I hear women almost shouting in their section.

Interesting article, and great replies. Sissy Willis, amba and others had a nice neutral opinions.

I went to New Zealand with my sister. We were worried about discrimination in airports and in the country itself because I have a beard (typical terrorist: Saudi & a beard), and my sis is covering her face like in the picture but not with black.
I told her "Listen, the idea of covering is not to be harrased or hurt in any way, so if the case will be the opposite here, then dont u think it's better if u make it normal veil?" She disagreed and insisted on covering the face.
Long story short, we had an exciting month there, with weird looks toward her and scared looks toward me! but they were such nice kiwis! since treatment doesn't change, i've no problems with the looks. It needs widely open mind to understand how did we define the good & bad, the correct & the incorrect; and how people defined it; and to what extent do we have the right to "tag" people "terrorist", "free", "kewl"..!

cheers,
Az.