Saudi judge: It's OK to slap spendthrift wives

Saudi judge: It's OK to slap spendthrift wives

edition.cnn.com

Husbands are allowed to slap their wives if they spend lavishly, a Saudi judge said recently during a seminar on domestic violence, Saudi media reported Sunday.

Women in the audience immediately and loudly protested Al-Razine's statement, and were shocked to learn the remarks came from a judge, the newspaper reported.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Well then, another crazy ruling in that part of the world.

From the story he also states some very scary rhetoric that Domestic Violence is ok if...

Al-Razine "also pointed out that women's indecent behavior and use of offensive words against their husbands were some of the reasons for domestic violence in the country," it added.

Truly what is the world coming to when these countries refuse to give the basic human rights to our female counter parts. Understandably religion plays a role, however it very much saddens me.

~Keeper

edition.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

OK, your post set me off I have to admit.

Now think of my ideas here.

If guys want good sexual relationships with their wives, would they ever slap them?

If guys ever wanted a woman that cared and (took care of them) would they ever slap them?

You know what I mean.....

Now, Do you agree or disagree that the Saudi's have it all BACKWARDS.

I do think they have it ALL BACKWARDS. If you know what I mean.

To impress the female, is the most joyous thing in the world to a man like me.

At this time - I can only respond - "Thank You for the Information Age".

Women and minorities have suffered greatly because in the past abuse was hidden.

The more things are in the open - the more chance of attention to bring about change for equality.

It seems there is something from Saudi every day now, what is up with them? Crazy laws indeed.

I heard they banned roses because of valentines day LMAO
Some of their laws are like a joke haha.


[edit on 10-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

reply to post by wiredamerican


I ofcourse disagree with all of this treat women poorly thing they have going on.

There is nothing I would like more than to have equality and human rights the same for EVERY human being on the planet, but sadly it's not the times we live in.

To the above poster, yes, it's a huge step forward that we are able to see and follow these stories regardless of where they are coming out of.

Knowledge is power.

~Keeper

Originally posted by wiredamerican
I do think they have it ALL BACKWARDS. If you know what I mean.

To impress the female, is the most joyous thing in the world to a man like me.

Good for you.

However - in my experience - men want what men want - and there is always a woman who will give it to them.

Only Woman can stand strong for Woman. Its really really tough for women in cultures - especially religious/political cultures that give men all the power. Even in the face of death - - only women standing strong as a whole will affect change. Sadly - many women of these cultures support the religious/political law.

Thankfully now because of world awareness - women's groups are forming and gaining members.

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
It seems there is something from Saudi every day now, what is up with them? Crazy laws indeed.

I heard they banned roses because of valentines day LMAO
Some of their laws are like a joke haha.


[edit on 10-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

And we have sexuality & perfection shoved on us - almost every place we go anymore.

We are hardly out of the crazy zone.

Culture is culture - - its not a joke.

However - awareness of equality is something all cultures should strive for.



[edit on 10-5-2009 by Annee]

It doesn't surprise me a bit coming from a place that punishes THE WOMAN for being raped.
On the horizon, the wifes family pays for the husbands knee replacements when he wears them out from kicking her.

What about the flip side , can a women slap the man if he spends wildly ?

I too can't understand why a man would want to slap a women . Is it do to some need to feel powerful ? Is there a streak of insecurity in these men that hit women ?

I think it's obvious that any society or individual that has such a strong distaste for women's rights obviously has a great deal of repressed homosexual tendencies.

Originally posted by Max_TO
What about the flip side , can a women slap the man if he spends wildly ?

I too can't understand why a man would want to slap a women . Is it do to some need to feel powerful ? Is there a streak of insecurity in these men that hit women ?

It's all about power and control. If you want to know why men abuse women, read Lundy Bancroft's book Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Why are you more concerned with 'reporting' on domestic violence in Saudi Arabia, rather than fighting it in your own country?

Liberal policy on domestic violence ‘devastating’ for women in Canada

Shortly after they were elected in 2001, the Liberals cut support services for victims of domestic violence as part of a wide-ranging effort to reduce spending and lower taxes. In their second term in office they changed the focus of services, putting more money into programs such as counselling and less into groups demanding changes in the way the welfare system, the courts and the police respond to violence. This year they are spending almost twice as much as in 2001.

The Liberals can legitimately boast about their support for safe homes. But a room to escape violence is only a small part of a network of services with gaping holes that the Liberals have shown no interest in filling. Advocates for women’s rights say housing designated for women escaping violence is being used for the homeless. They fear the government in its third term may privatize the facilities, undermining the services.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Well for one these people still live in a Monarchy which is a whole lot different than here and you that I presuume.

Secondly regardless of the fact, women in Canada have many more avenues to find help an support than these women do.

I completely agree with your point that we should be doing something more here in Canada, but that whole "Let's take care of our own" mantra gets old very quick.

We can atleast try to get all nations into the basic understand that we are equal, regardless of the details.

~Keeper

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Hey TTTP this may (or may not) interest you, during my long nasty divorce I had a phone conversation with the local police force, I was on the phone for ages as no one seemed to be able to deal with my query, I will try to summarize as it was a very long call .

(Please bare in mind this was at a time that if I so much as looked at my child (or ex) the wrong way, I would be arrested on the spot in front of my kids just because I didn't have breasts)

MOOCOWMAN : Hi is it ok if my ex wife beats my child ?

COP: No that's assault, has she beat the child ?

MOO: Apparently yes, will you arrest her ?

COP : Well that depends on the circumstances, where she hits him and whether it was in chastisement or if she left any marks etc.

MOO: What do you mean ? She can beat him or not ?

COP: She can lawfully physically chastise the child.

MOO: So she can beat him if he does not comply ?

COP: She can physically chastise him if he does not comply, not beat him.

MOO: Can she hit him yes or no ?

COP: That's a tricky one, as long as she does not leave marks and is not around the face and is done to chastise the child.

MOO; OK, so she can beat the child as long as it is to make him comply to her wishes and is not to the face and does not leave a mark ?

COP: Well er um, yes as long as it reasonably chastisement.

MOO: How do you define reasonable chastisement ?

COP (stressed out): Well that would be a matter for a court to determine based on the circumstances.

MOO: Do parents need to go to a court to get instructions on what is a reasonable beating then ?

COP: Your being silly Mr Moo, Listen, has she assaulted your son or just slapped him ? I may not agree with it but parents are allowed to physically chastise their children for their own benefit in order to help them learn, as they are not so, um ah, mentally mature as an adult.

MOO: Well I don't actually know now whether it's assault or reasonable chastisement, you just said that's for a court to decide not me. Perhaps you better arrest her and let the court teach her how to beat a child properly.

COP: I think I'd better get someone to call you back.

MOO: Ok, Just one more thing if you don't mind. I'm thinking of getting a new wife, am I allowed to give her a slap ?

COP: Whaaaat ? Certainly not that's assault what on eath are you talking about? .

MOO: What if she doesn't comply and I need to chastise her then, am aloud to give her a slap to chastise her ?

COP: Of course not we'll arrest you and you could get a prison sentence.

MOO: What if I don't hit her around the face or leave any marks, surely that's ok just like my son ?

COP: That's different and you know it, a child needs educating and be taught how to behave.

MOO: By beating it ?

COP (very pissed off): By using reasonable physical chastisement.

MOO : But my future wife is not very bright and will need to be educated just like my children. Surely if she doesn't get a slap for non compliance then that would send the wrong message to my children?

COP: I know where you are going with this and all I can do is tell you what the law says can be done, I may not agree with it but I'm just telling you.

MOO: It seems you are saying that in law, it is ok to physically abuse some people to make them comply but not others depending on their age? The older they get the less you can beat them ?
Is this because at a certain age they may hit you back ? Or because they are old enough to know they are being assaulted ?

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Last I heard. Canada still had a queen.

The present monarch is Elizabeth II – officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada) – who has reigned since February 6, 1952.

I still think it's foolish to worry about someone else's house while your house is on fire. You should get your house in order first.

But, that doesn't really matter because we all know you and a lot of the others here don't give a flying **** about the Saudi women. You just see Saudi Arabia as a foe you need to defeat, no matter how pathetic that goal is. Especially seeing as a majority of you are supporters of the Iranian government and judicial system, which does exactly the same things, and a lot of times worse, to women.

reply to post by moocowman


Wow that does interest me friend, thanks for that story.

Kind of sounds like something I would have done.

It's insane how the law is set up. I don't believe in ever striking a child, I have 3 and never have, I don't think even once.

Not in any manner that would be considered chastising, my younger son gets a whack upside the head everynow and then in a playfull get out of here you goofy kid kind of way.

Other than that we have a strict no violence policy in my home.

I wonder, how did things work out with that? Given the circumstances and the biast court I am sure if it did go to court that they ruled in the favor of your wife?

~Keeper

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Last I heard. Canada still had a queen.

The present monarch is Elizabeth II – officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada) – who has reigned since February 6, 1952.

I still think it's foolish to worry about someone else's house while your house is on fire. You should get your house in order first.

But, that doesn't really matter because we all know you and a lot of the others here don't give a flying **** about the Saudi women. You just see Saudi Arabia as a foe you need to defeat, no matter how pathetic that goal is. Especially seeing as a majority of you are supporters of the Iranian government and judicial system, which does exactly the same things, and a lot of times worse, to women.

What, you...think that I don't give a damn...and you apparently know me? Hmm that's interesting. I don't see them as a foe, I see them as a country that has severe issues with human rights. I don't think any country is a foe, people make these things up with the imaginary lines in the sand.

And no it's not stupid to worry about people in countries who are less fortunate than us. If our house is on fire, than Saudi Arabia is burning to the ground.

And we do have a "queen" and it's more of a technicality. She doesn't govern us or make any rules what so ever, unless you need a pardon at which time you need to write her a letter, but that's besides the point.

Please don't assume that you know me, or know my views because as an intelligent human being my views are changed a little everyday by intelligent conversation and the exchange of ideas.

~Keeper

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Last I heard. Canada still had a queen.

The present monarch is Elizabeth II – officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada) – who has reigned since February 6, 1952.

I still think it's foolish to worry about someone else's house while your house is on fire. You should get your house in order first.

But, that doesn't really matter because we all know you and a lot of the others here don't give a flying **** about the Saudi women. You just see Saudi Arabia as a foe you need to defeat, no matter how pathetic that goal is. Especially seeing as a majority of you are supporters of the Iranian government and judicial system, which does exactly the same things, and a lot of times worse, to women.

What, you...think that I don't give a damn...and you apparently know me? Hmm that's interesting. I don't see them as a foe, I see them as a country that has severe issues with human rights. I don't think any country is a foe, people make these things up with the imaginary lines in the sand.

And no it's not stupid to worry about people in countries who are less fortunate than us. If our house is on fire, than Saudi Arabia is burning to the ground.

And we do have a "queen" and it's more of a technicality. She doesn't govern us or make any rules what so ever, unless you need a pardon at which time you need to write her a letter, but that's besides the point.

Please don't assume that you know me, or know my views because as an intelligent human being my views are changed a little everyday by intelligent conversation and the exchange of ideas.

~Keeper

reply to post by tothetenthpower


So, do you consider it a little bit hypocritical to support how women are treated in Iran, while complaining how they are treated in Saudi Arabia? I'd think with all your heart felt compassion towards Middle Eastern and all women worldwide, you'd be concerned about the treatment of Iranian women also, but I haven't been able to find one thread of yours condemning Iranian treatment of women.

I did find a post of yours commenting on human rights abuses in Iran.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Originally posted by FlyersFan
They stone to death homosexuals - simply for being born that way.
It's approved by the gov't. It's the law.

That right there is enough for me but you'll find more reasons
here A list of human rights abuses in Iran. Human Rights Watch has more reasons here .

Iran being culturally backwards doesn't make then Evil. The US won't allow people like me to get married, they discrinate against a huge population of people everyday. Does that make the US evil too?
(Besides everything else they do)

Funny how you give Iran a full pass, but condemn Saudi Arabia for what they're doing.