A U.S. businesswoman was arrested by Saudi Arabia’s religious police for sitting with a male co-worker at Starbucks, says CBS news.
She sat with a male colleague in the Starbucks’ family area, the only place women are allowed to sit with men.“Some men came up to us with very long beards and white dresses. They asked ‘Why are you here together?’ I explained about the power being out in our office. They got very angry and told me what I was doing was a great sin,” she told the Times.
Following her arrest and interrogation, the woman was hauled before a judge.
“He said ‘You are sinful and you are going to burn in hell.’ I told him I was sorry. I was very submissive. I had given up. I felt hopeless,” she told the Times.
Saudi Cops Grab U.S. Woman In Starbucks [CBS News] (Thanks, J!)
(Photo:Scarequotes)
More From Consumerist
-
U.S. Airways Passenger Arrested After Saying She Has "Surgically Implanted Device" Inside Her
-
Netflix: We’re Only Doing One Season Of Arrested Development
-
American Airlines Flight Grounded Because Typhoid Fever Apparently Still A Thing To Worry About
-
That Overdue ‘Twilight’ Book & DVD Could Get You Arrested
-
Complaining About McDonald’s Food Is One Thing But Slapping Workers Is Just Rude
F4#@ her, f4#@ Saudi Arabia, f$#@ anyone who travels there to do business with those backwards muthaf$#@#s. Ya gets watcha pay fer.
@femmesavante: In my opinion, we should be having the conversation about basic human rights and barbaric ideas of how to order what ought to be a free society.
“Dumbass you should have followed the law” is right, but it should have been followed by “We shouldn’t really consider a nation civilized if they mete out 5 year sentences for possession of a bottle of vodka (or a joint for that matter).”
I’m not prepared to call access to booze a basic human right, but I will call freedom to assemble and travel one.
hehe you know that islam forbids men and women who are not related from being next to each other. Well in egypt they issued a fatwa(religious order) that said said since if the woman had breast fed the man they could not have sex……….
coworkers should breast feed from their female workers and all would be fine… LOL
//actually this makes sense to me
“Ok. It was against the law for black people to be served at the same tables/area as white people in this country not to long ago.”
Agreed, FemmSavante. It’s difficult to have a “Holier than thou” attitude about Saudi Arabia’s laws when laws such as this where themselves present in our OWN country just a scant 50 years ago.
We still have a lot of “Stupid Laws” in this country as well though, although most of them are unenforced. I found one recently that boggled me, there’s actually a law on the books in Alabama that it’s illegal to pour salt on a railroad track, punishable BY DEATH. Eeep. Better be safe and not any any McDonalds fries around railroad tracks in Alabama.
At any rate, I’m sympathetic to her cause, and I’m sure that the State Department will pull some strings and have any charges dropped.
I feel much more sympathetic, however, to the people that actually LIVE there, such as teenagers that aren’t even allowed to socialize together, still have arranged marriages (which isn’t limited to just Saudi Arabia ya know, that’s prevalent in MANY societies, including India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Afganistan, and (surprise!!) the UK & CANADA..
But the only people that CAN change that are internal to the country, unless you really want to go to war with pretty much the entire world until EVERYONE abides by OUR laws.. *cough*.
southern……… arranged marriages are not done in canada lol
@kable2: The lol is on you. There are arranged marriages in Canada and shocker… even the US.
@Adam Hyland: You don’t get to define what and what isn’t feminism and your “if I was a Muslim fundamentalist” argument doesn’t work.
As for this:
“What we are doing is providing an analogy that shocks the conceience in order to get people to think about these rights violations for what they are…”
Don’t kid yourself. Because you and a few others have a different opinion, doesn’t mean I hold my opinion due to ignorance. Nor does it mean it will be changed by your “Weekly Reader” attempts at “enlightment.”
If you’re so distraught about the Saudi mistreatment of women, you could enlighten us as to what you’ve done about it. I’m sure you’ve written numerous letters of protest to our government and companies that do business with the Saudis when there was that tragic fire at a girl’s school, a few years back.
Along with your arrogant defining as to who and who isn’t a feminist, you’re now attempting to say their are only two sides to this case – an two sides that you alone have defined: “What we can do is either be supportive of her or supportive of them. Let me know which side you are on.“
We should follow the laws of the country we’re in, like people follow our laws when in our country? Since when? We can’t say Christmas for fear of offending someone, is a good example. Come out to California. You can take your drivers license test in any one of 33 languages, hell, you don’t have to speak English at all, just recognize the shape of the signs!
One is not required to support or condone humans rights violations when visiting another country. It’s not that difficult. She isn’t some petty scofflaw, for crying out loud. Sitting next to a man is so natural to her she probably didn’t even realize what she was doing. Saudi Arabia was wrong to arrest her just as any government anywhere would be. Ugh. Double Ugh. I have to stop reading the comments sections at most of the blogs I read because it makes me weep for humanity.
@brandymb: Ah yes, the recently passed law that makes the mention of Christmas, a crime and the one that penalizes you for speaking English. Why your life is almost as difficult as women in Saudi Arabia. I believe God said that vengenance is mine.(Our Judeo-Christian God, of course.) Soon he will smite the immmigrant and the infidel and all will be fine.
@brandymb: Yep, those anti-Christmas laws are starting to get to me.
@Pithlit: While getting arrested is wrong, “not being able to sit next to an unrelated man,” scarcely qualifies as a human rights violation.
Maybe you should weep for the real human rights violations, instead of the petty inconveniences.
@zouxou: Well played, sir or madam.
@zouxou: I’m not telling anyone whose side they are on. That person (forget the name, pink something) claimed to be a feminist. I called bullshit. I wasn’t mandating that she was not a feminist, I was speculating. I bet a dollar he/she isn’t a feminist, because if she was, her response probably wouldn’t have been a more polite version of ‘bitch got what she deserved.” I could care less if she were in support of them or against them. That is her business. but it doesn’t really further debate for us to lie to one another.
“What we are doing is providing an analogy that shocks the conceience in order to get people to think about these rights violations for what they are…”
Am I not allowed to give that answer? Is it suddenly unfair to parallel the treatement of women in these countries to that of jews in germany BEFORE the holocaust? Is it wrong?
And more importantly, why are you so fervently against the notion that men and women should have equal rights in these countries? Sure, the actual act of sitting down to coffee isn’t protcted, but the right to be treated in the same manner as a man by the law should be. We should be angry that these people for perpetuating a state where women are second class citizens. We should be angry at our government for coddling this state.
But no, fuck it. Let’s just be angry at her. That’s easier. What a stupid woman. How could she have moved there and not known all of the rules, including those so ridiculous that you wouldn’t even think of them.
@zouxou: How is going to jail in a foreign country a petty inconvenience?
@brandymb: Oh, I love that statement! Especially as one of those angry atheists that don’t celebrate Christmas. Christmas Christmas Christmas…totally just offended myself!
Please. Don’t believe the media hype, it’s just not true.
As a female attorney, I am appalled by this behavior and any American should be. While it is natural to want to follow the laws of a country you are visiting (or live in), laws are used by the powerful to rule over the weak and the weak must rise up, in civil disobedience, to change them. You must must must learn to think for yourself and not blindly follow a law that has at it’s heart, evil as its intention, whether that is religious law or secular laws. It saddens me to see good people approve of bad behavior simply because “it is the law”.
Apartheid in Africa was the law, and Nelson Mandela was jailed for many years while others said “but it’s the law”. Jim Crow was the law in the U.S. and many people died trying to sit at the front of the bus or at an all-white lunch counter while whites said “but it’s the law”. Anti-jewish regulations were the law in Germany and millions, yes millions, of people died while lots of citizens sat around saying “but it’s the law”, The U.S. system is not perfect, by any means, but I wouldn’t trade it for any other in the world. So shut up with your “it’s the law” argument. As a lawyer, that offends me.
As to why this appears on Consumerist, Starbucks is an American company and the idea that they would support this type of behavior in their store, no matter where it’s located, is incorrigible. An American company should bring the best of American values with it, while trying to be respectful of local customs.
I am sad now and will get off my high horse.
Some of you (who think landing in a foreign prison qualifies as ‘petty inconvenience’) might want to watch Midnight Express.
Arrested for the wrong crime. She and everyone in there should’ve been arrested for going to a Starbucks.
@howie_in_az and all the “when in Rome types”:
It may be their country, but we as people do not have to accept bullshit oppressive laws, even if we chose to visit a place. To quote JFK, “Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.” It is our duty to rise up against bullshit Medieval laws that oppress our fellow human beings.
@Steel_Pelican: Nicely said.
Iran and Saudi Arabia = same anti women laws (charia)
Iran = Evil
Saudi Arabia = Best friends
Hypocrisy at its best….
other type of hypocrisy:
Wearing a Anti-Bush T-Shirt if you are a student: same result as in Saudi Arabia when you ‘re woman sitting with men… arrested.
Integrism is a question of concept…. we can find too in our own backyard !
When Maureen Dowd was in Saudia Arabia with the Bush pilgrimage, she wasn’t allowed to use the hotel gym.
I bet they charged her full price for the room.
@Dude27:
Iran: very openly anti-American and anti-west; big sponsor of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia: very quiet about their anti-west feelings; big sponsor of terrorism. Contibuted millions to the libraries of Presidents Carter, Clinton, GHW Bush.
@cmdr.sass: Try to work on your reading comprehension, I stated that I disagree with what they did. However, I still believe that people need to respect the laws of other countries while they are willingly visiting there.
It is up to the people, the citizens of Saudi Arabia to rise up against oppression, and I wish them luck.
@Adam Hyland: You’re a riot. You say “but it doesn’t really further debate for us to lie to one another,” and then go on to make up these lies:
1. Accusing a person who says one needs to follow the laws of another country as
using more polite version of ‘bitch got what she deserved.”
2. Accusing me of of being “fervently against the notion that men and women should have equal rights in these countries.” and ” angry at her.”
Learn how to support your arguments without creating straw men and twisting people’s words to suit your purposes.
@femmesavante: that’s a bit of a gross over-simplification. Not all Sharia laws are equal. Malaysia has Sharia law for Muslims and they don’t have such draconian interpretation (sure don’t shack up with a woman you’re not married to, but the same could be applied here in the US).
Still, plenty of Muslims (not to mention non-Muslims) confuse Arab culture with Islam (e.g. hijab, veils — not required). Though when in Rome…
But hey, we (most Western governments) still prop up plenty of repressive governments around the world for a variety of reasons. It’s no wonder people get pissed at us.
I’ll get off my soap box now…
@glycolized: yeah, why is this on consumerist?
In the future, wouldn’t the best defense just be a fake wedding ring? If all that is keeping these folks from breaking the law is some arbitrary vow, then fake being married and get on with your lives.
This is an article that brings up important issues, but I don’t understand why it’s on Consumerist. The fact that it happened in a Starbucks is not really significant. What does this have to do with consumer rights or the company as a whole?
I’m not saying it shouldn’t be read or discussed, I’m just wondering why it should be discussed on this blog in particular Is this really the appropriate place for a debate on Islamic tradition in the modern world?
When in Rome….
While I may not agree with some parts of other cultures, this included… we would expect those who visit our country to follow our laws. If you can’t/won’t respect their laws… don’t go.
@thirdgen: and how would you feel if those from other countries came to the U.S. and did the same thing because they hold different beliefs? What do you think would happen to them? I’m sure depending on the law that was broken, a short jail detention and a plane ticket home are among the possibilities.
she should have known better, she obviously had been over there for a while so she would know the proper rules of engagement when it comes to interacting with a member of the opposite gender in public.
The irony is that a man can sit on the lap of either a boy sheep or a girl sheep – it’s all good!
Yet one more reason we should allocate more funding for alternative energy sources.
Hanke is wrong:
It’s legal in Saudi Arabia for men and women to be in public together. The interpretation by the highly conservative muttawwa in and around Riyadh is that khulwa (the Shariah law that prohibits men and women form being in “seclusion” together — as in, a room isolated form others) applies to public places.
In other words: there is no law against it — it’s silly tribal interpretations that the Saudi gov’t tolerates out of constantly appeasing these tribal assholes.
Also: A “US businesswoman” in misleading. Her parents are Jordanians and she grew up in Salt Lake City, but has been married to a Saudi for 27 years and they moved back to Saudi Arabia about 8 years ago. Her husband happens to be a bigwig in the more liberal city of Jeddah, which is why this story got publicity in the first place.
So, hanke, you’re wrong: there is no law against unrelated men and women sitting together in Starbucks. It’s more complicated than that. Why do Americans always insist on looking at the world as if every place is just a more primitive version of the American way of doing things? To talk about “a law” in Saudi Arabia is not the same as talking about “a law” in Ohio. Very few things are codified in Saudi Law.
For example: there is no “law” against women driving.
The problem isn’t specific simply to Muslim culture – which is quite barbaric in many regards – it’s with religion itself. When you believe that an invisible man lives in the sky and wrote you instructions, albeit asinine, morally-depraved instructions and stands ready to punish you for not following those ridiculous edicts, when you truly BELIEVE it, there’s not much anyone can do to dissuade you from that sort of nonsense, no matter how illogical or unreasonable the command. Christianity also suffers from the same sort of blind unreason we see in the Bible – however, most christians have chosen to ignore the parts of the Bible which declares a woman to cover her head with a veil whilst in prayer. Muslims have not undergone any sort of reformation akin to the processes of christianity. While ancient Muslims did help advance math, sciences, and even the arts many centuries ago, since then they have beset their culture (and ours) with little else but a backslide into violent barbarism.
Freedom of assembly simply isn’t prized in the Muslim world as it is here – in fact, an invisible man who controls their fate in the sky forbids them from it.
For anyone who can acknowledge how absurd this is and has a good sense of humor, I recommend the webcartoon
The problem isn’t specific simply to Muslim culture – which is quite barbaric in many regards – it’s with religion itself. When you believe that an invisible man lives in the sky and wrote you instructions, albeit asinine, morally-depraved instructions and stands ready to punish you for not following those ridiculous edicts, when you truly BELIEVE it, there’s not much anyone can do to dissuade you from that sort of nonsense, no matter how illogical or unreasonable the command. Christianity also suffers from the same sort of blind unreason we see in the Bible – however, most christians have chosen to ignore the parts of the Bible which declares a woman to cover her head with a veil whilst in prayer. Muslims have not undergone any sort of reformation akin to the processes of christianity. While ancient Muslims did help advance math, sciences, and even the arts many centuries ago, since then they have beset their culture (and ours) with little else but a backslide into violent barbarism.
Freedom of assembly simply isn’t prized in the Muslim world as it is here – in fact, an invisible man who controls their fate in the sky forbids them from it.
For anyone who can acknowledge how absurd this is and has a good sense of humor, I recommend the webcartoon http://www.jesusandmo.net