Feminism is the only analytical lens which conveys the depth of female oppression under the essentially patriarchal society in Saudi Arabia. Both the public and private spheres within Saudi Arabia inherently uphold male dominance through the strict observation of the Islamic authoritarian state. Therefore, because all power is intrinsically gendered, represented, for example, through all state power encapsulated within men, power can be directly correlated to domination over women. The growing movement of Saudi women publically walking alone without a male guardian (in defiance of the law) since December 2016 is significant of ‘Saudi women actively…challeng[ing] their society… to allow them entry into the precincts of modernity’, but more importantly, the realm of equality with their male counterparts (Al-Rasheed, 2013, p.283). This essay will first justify its use of radical feminism as the most fruitful analytical framework to fully understand the embeddedness of patriarchy within Saudi Arabian culture and society, whilst progressing towards a solution to patriarchal dominance. The latter half of the essay will then explain how liberal feminist analysis of Saudi women’s subordination is shallow and does not provide suitable resolutions for combating the patriarchy within the epicentre of fundamentalist Islamic culture.
Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service
Radical feminism is the only feminist strand which digs deep within society to uncover its patriarchal roots, and how it stems from the private sphere. Radical accounts are fruitful in explaining political phenomena as they adopt a more holistic conception of the political. This can be understood as politics being a ‘process’ manifest throughout society. To understand how a radical feminist analysis is most utilitarian in understanding the oppression of women in Saudi Arabia, ‘patriarchy’ must be examined and defined as a concept. Patriarchy is a systematic, institutionalized and pervasive process of male dominance over women, rooted beyond the institution of the family and the household structure. Such a principle has a physical form within Saudi Arabia, and that is the King, who has long absorbed all branches of government, simultaneously embracing the role of a moral leader (of course, morality being relative to the culture Saudi Arabia is embedded in, and one that systematically disadvantages women in accordance with a strict set of fundamentalist Islamic beliefs). When dissecting the roots of the word ‘patriarchy’, the father figure lies behind the meaning, providing a linguistic reasoning behind male dominance. Within Sexual Politics, Millett (1970) suggests patriarchy is a ‘social constant’, found in all institutions. From early in life, conditioning takes place to encourage children to conform to gender roles. Therefore, she suggests patriarchy is a hierarchical institution, as she relates the government to a ‘patriarchal government’. Traditionally, men are the head of the household and the breadwinners, whereas women are reduced to their reproductive roles. A link can be drawn from Millett to a more radical feminist thinker, who suggests women are conditioned to a passive, sexual role (Greer, 1970). Within The Female Eunuch, Greer argues women have been rendered sexless objects by a cultural stereotype. More so, within Patriarchal Attitudes, Figes (1970) also portrays women as inferior and subordinate to men, perpetuating a stereotype of ‘femininity’. However, with relation to women’s rights in Saudi Arabia, this is far too shallow an explanation. Though evident through practices of female genital mutilation within Saudi Arabia, and purely through the fact that women are domesticated and have not been assimilated into the public sphere, such an explanation falls short of understanding the history of authoritarian and fundamentalist Islam embedded within Saudi Arabia. Rather than cultural stereotypes as the main perpetrator of male dominance (as is the case in Western society), it is the institutionalized oppression of women as doctrine through fundamentalist Islam and the authoritarian state which entirely impedes women’s entry into the public sphere, whilst legitimizing female subordination within the private sphere. Thus, women’s oppression is rooted in male dominance within the home and legitimized by society’s fundamentalist doctrines, and this idea is encapsulated with ‘the personal is political’. This slogan highlights the view that gender roles and relations in the home cumulatively hold significant influence for gender outcomes in society.
Moreover, radical feminists incorporate not only the private sphere but
the public sphere within their analysis and critique of the status quo. An attempt is made to draw
attention to all aspects of life and the patriarchal values that pervade
society. The very nature of what is ‘political’ must be redefined. For
instance, sexual inequality is preserved because of the sexual division of
labour, which is considered natural and based off traditional views of woman
and man’s respective roles both in society and in the household. These views
are substantiated only by socially-constructed stereotypes of how people should
behave traditionally (caring for a woman and competitive for a man),
perpetuating social conditioning throughout society as a whole entity. Radical
feminists would approach this issue with a solution drastically different than
that of liberal feminists, not only accomplishing shallow achievements within
the public sphere, but targeting the core of female oppression at the home.
Millett (1970) proposes conscious-raising to be the solution to patriarchy
society. One could argue how this appears to be a liberal solution, concerning
the improvement of education, or representation in the public sphere, or even
protests raising awareness of women’s subordination. However, Millett’s
proposal is a perfect counter-balance resolution for Saudi Arabia. One must
understand how this issue is located at the cradle of Islamic culture, one that
follows the religion’s doctrines fundamentally. It is futile and
counter-intuitive to suggest a sexual revolution, as most radical feminists do,
would bear successful fruit in Saudi Arabia, due to the fact that a sexual
revolution would warp the very foundations of society, which are embedded in
culture, history and religion. More so, shallow attempts at equality in the
public sphere have been made, including women’s suffrage being awarded in 2015.
However, to what extent is this a true representation of the culture finally
being tolerant to the idea of female equality in the public sphere? If men are
indeed seen to be the head of their household, within a state that legitimizes
behaviour to ensure this view become instantiated, what is to stop a man
forcing his wife to vote a certain way, if at all? The idea of a sexual
revolution being the vehicle for female emancipation is too drastic for life in
Saudi Arabia. Millett’s conscious raising to overthrow patriarchal society and
form a more cohesive, equal entity seems not only practical considering the
environment, but occurring already. Thus, radical feminism reveals the
gendered and unequal character of social political power more effectively than
liberal feminism by incorporating its critique beyond the public sphere, and
focus in on the core issue of patriarchy rooted within culture and the
household.
Liberal feminism is far too shallow in scope, meaning the solutions it
ascribes to a problem within the public realm does not address the crucial
issue of patriarchy rooted within Saudi Arabia’s culture and underpinned by the
law. Liberal feminists believe patriarchy is used to describe the unequal
distribution of rights and entitlements between men and women, as well as the
under-representation of women in the public sphere. More so, liberal feminists
champion legal and political equality with men, which would mean equity with
regards to the public sphere. However, as analysed previously, radical feminists
have clearly demonstrated how women’s oppression by men in Saudi Arabia is sown
within a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam by the state, sustaining this
dominance by awarding men with full control over the public sphere and legal or
moral laws upholding their dominance in the household. Liberals do not address
the private sphere, which is the bedrock of societal patriarchy, and the
birthplace of male dominance in the public sphere. Because of the reformist
limits liberal feminists adopt, there is not much emphasis on the sexual
division of labour or the power distribution within the family, which is
reflected in society. This may be because liberal feminists have accepted to a
slight degree that women have natural impulses towards family and domestic
life, which is evident through Friedan’s attempt to reconcile ‘personhood’ with
family life in The Feminist Mystique
(Friedan, 1963).
Moreover, Saudi women gained the right to vote in 2015. There are
cultural and social implications as to how this particular example of suffrage
is not genuine progress. Culturally, it is accepted that because the man is the
head of the household, and for other religious reasons, he is in control of his
family, even physically. There is no mechanism instantiated within the law to
limit the control of the man over the woman. Thus, in a society where man is
dominant and his actions within the family are sheltered by law, he can easily
coerce his wife to either vote one way or not vote at all. Patriarchy within
the private sphere still lies at the heart of Saudi women’s struggle for true
emancipation from male oppression, and this seemingly illusionary attempt at
suffrage does not target the true issue at hand. With regards to how this
attempt at suffrage is failing Saudi women in the public sphere, one must not
forget that society is still utterly male dominated, with a King as executor
for all branches of power, as well as a moral force to enforce fundamentalist
Islam. The King as an entity wholly encapsulates patriarchy and should be
regarded as a symbol of male suppression of women for the reasons listed above,
as well as the persistence of nepotism favouring males. Additionally, liberal
feminists strive for a liberal democratic system, falsely believing that the
solution to patriarchy is to assist women through anti-discrimination laws to
compete on the same basis as men in the liberal democratic system. However such
a hope is not feasible within Saudi Arabia. Working within the state is
impossible as women are almost entirely isolated from political participation. Liberal
feminists provide a shallow, politically structural approach, but simply
allowing women to compete for power will not solve the fundamental, deep-seated
issues of patriarchal dominance. On a final note, linking into this idealist
model for liberal feminists, one could argue that such a concept is
Western-oriented. This model fails to account for the environment it would be
implemented in. A complete reversal within the political, social, cultural,
judicial, and religious relations of Saudi Arabia to fit a Western model of
democracy and freedom would only invoke chaos on a society that has only
understood society through its own Islamic, authoritarian lens. The liberal
principle of ‘add women and stir’ is implausible for numerous reasons. One
reason, which has not already been highlighted, is employment rates for women
with relation to the foreign workforce. Roughly 10 million of Saudi Arabia’s
workforce are foreigners, which is staggering when compared to Saudi women’s 13%
of Saudi Arabia’s workforce, as of 2015. Despite being 51% of all Saudi
university graduates, women are still oppressed from the inherent injustice
within patriarchal society which inhibits their attempts at replacing the
foreign workforce and inching towards true emancipation through economic
independence as a possible step forward.
Bibliography
Al-Rasheed, M. (2013) “Conclusion”. In A Most Masculine State: Gender, Politics and Religion in Saudi Arabia. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 280-295Arab News (2017) 35,000 Saudi women studying abroad on government scholarships. Arab News [online], Tuesday 11th April. Available from: http://www.arabnews.com/node/1082551/saudi-arabia Arabian Business (2017) Saudi Arabia urged to probe death of transgender woman. Arabian Business [online], Monday 17th April. Available from: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/saudi-arabia-urged-probe-death-of-transgender-woman-671160.html Brooks-Pollock, T. (2015) Anger after Saudi Arabia ‘chosen to head key UN human rights panel’. The Independent [online], Sunday 20th September. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/anger-after-saudi-arabia-chosen-to-head-key-un-human-rights-panel-10509716.html Embury-Dennis, T. (2016) Saudi social media users defend woman who faced death threats after being pictured not wearing a hijab or abaya. The Independent [online], Thursday 1st December. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-woman-no-hijab-execution-abaya-muslim-a7450096.html Figes, E. (1970) Patriarchal Attitudes: Women in Society. London: Macmillan PublishersFriedan, B. (1963) The Feminist Mystique. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.Greer, G. (1970) The Female Eunuch. Sydney: Harper PerennialHuman Rights Watch (2017) Fleeing Woman Returned to Saudi Arabia Against Her Will. Human Rights Watch [online], Friday 14th April. Available from: https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/14/fleeing-woman-returned-saudi-arabia-against-her-will Millett, K. (1970) Sexual Politics. New York: Doubleday and Co.Rasoodleen, M. (2017) 250 Saudi women to get jobs as part of SR500m project launched in Riyadh. Arab News [online], Friday 21st April. Available from: http://www.arabnews.com/node/1087896/saudi-arabia Roberts, R. (2017) Saudi women in silent walking protest over right to drive in the Kingdom. The Independent [online], Wednesday 5th April. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-women-silent-protest-walking-right-drive-kingdom-middle-east-only-country-world-theresa-a7667646.html#gallery
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download