A woman in slacks is an abomination

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:26 am

Sudanese woman risks flogging over 'indecent' trousers - Times Online

Protesters back Sudanese woman in trousers case | World | Reuters

Sudan 'indecency': woman wears slacks to court - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Women of FG - please support in any way you can think of Sudanese, Lubna Hussein whose crime consisted of going out of her house wearing trousers.

Attached files

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:22 am

What would have happened had she not been wearing trousers?

Seriously, though, places abroad have different customs. This is not one of the ones I would be most concerned with.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:35 am

â€œThe problem lies in Clause 152 of the criminal law, which sentences to 40 lashes or a fine, or both, for improper dress, without stipulating what exactly that is.â€
A quote from the first link provided.. gives them a lot of scope dont it:sneaky:

I think its going to take people like her to stand up to it and other women standing behind her to eventually change things

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:47 am

Bill Sikes;1224951 wrote: What would have happened had she not been wearing trousers?

Seriously, though, places abroad have different customs. This is not one of the ones I would be most concerned with.

I agree it it just the tip of an iceberg of injustices towards women, Bill Sikes - but where do you start? This woman probably won't be stoned to death, merely publicly flogged.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:48 am

Yes..... this attitude, customs and country, I would be worried about...

I can't even imagine living in a country that downtroddens their women. It's a disgrace that women are not free to walk amongst their peers and dress as they like...and are flogged for wearing slacks:mad:

It was so hot and humid at the beach yesterday. This woman was sitting amongst her family covered from head to toe and all the men were wearing shorts and no shirts playing ball. The poor woman was so hot and walked towards the water. She was caught up in a wave and nearly drowned.

What a fun life for women...

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:39 am

I think it's amazing Kathy, and Kaz - that with so much stacked against them, so many brave women in oppressive regimes in the Middle East and Africa are standing up to the bullying and intimidation.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:42 am

AussiePam;1224980 wrote: I think it's amazing Kathy, and Kaz - that with so much stacked against them, so many brave women in oppressive regimes in the Middle East and Africa are standing up to the bullying and intimidation.

It is amazing,,, cos women are amazing,, and strong in mind:-6 I am sure they will one day have freedom

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:05 am

For those of you who care, and have FaceBook accounts, you can search there for Lubna Hussein and post directly to her. I've done that. She has supporters world wide, including the Middle East and Africa.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:46 am

She is a brave woman, and such a pretty one too. I hope they change the law and do not flog her also, that was sad to hear the other ladies got 10 lashes each. :-1

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:50 am

kazalala;1224981 wrote: It is amazing,,, cos women are amazing,, and strong in mind:-6 I am sure they will one day have freedom

Kaz, In my heart I do not believe that these women will ever, ever have their freedom. I also believe that these terrorist cultures will take over the world....I see it happening very quickly in many, many countries.

Pam, I deleted my account in Facebook but will open a new one just to post to this woman and give her my support.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:54 am

chonsigirl;1225002 wrote: She is a brave woman, and such a pretty one too. I hope they change the law and do not flog her also, that was sad to hear the other ladies got 10 lashes each. :-1

Hi Chonsi,

I just wonder what kind of a culture this is that beats their women for wearing slacks, and yet the men on the beach yesterday had no shirts on, wearing shorts and enjoying playing ball while she sat dressed in hot clothes

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 8:22 am

In some ways we're not so far removed in attitudes. How many employers expect their female employees to wear skirts or schools have tried to insist that skirts were the approved wear for school and sent girls home for wearing trousers? The school my wife was teaching at was trying to do that doing as part of trying to enforce a uniform code (which in itself isn't actually that bad an idea) but her suggestion that perhaps being forced to wear skirts just so the middle aged male teachers could ogle the girls was a bit sexist kind of left the management a bit lost for words so dark slacks became an acceptable compromise

How often have any of you made comment about someone wearing too short a skirt or too short a top is asking for it or otherwise commented on someone looking a bit tarty. Mini skirts used to be shocking (although I never thought so and still don't) an older woman in a mini skirt usually get ribald comments made about her.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 8:29 am

GMC, that is a good point. It wasn't until the 1970s that girls here could wear pants to school. And some schools require faculty members to wear dresses and not pants, luckily mine doesn't. I could not survive during the winter without long johns under my pants.

Kathy, it is a different culture, one that has women on an unequal standing as men. I can not say I understand it, it is not my culture. But beating a woman for wearing pants, I do not know if they will change their laws, since they are based on religious beliefs.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:13 am

chonsigirl;1225067 wrote: GMC, that is a good point. It wasn't until the 1970s that girls here could wear pants to school. And some schools require faculty members to wear dresses and not pants, luckily mine doesn't. I could not survive during the winter without long johns under my pants.

Kathy, it is a different culture, one that has women on an unequal standing as men. I can not say I understand it, it is not my culture. But beating a woman for wearing pants, I do not know if they will change their laws, since they are based on religious beliefs.

Correct me if I'm wrong but is it not the case that under your constitution women do not have equal rights with men? That there is an assumption that males hold rights and females must prove that they are entitled to them?

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:20 am

That is one of the things courts have decided for years, along with racial/ethnic equality. Terminology used in original founding documents have to be redefined legally and judicially over time. I think it is much more than the woman has to prove she is entitled to the same rights.

Is there equality here for women? I think that would make a good thread topic of it's own.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:54 am

chonsigirl;1225095 wrote: That is one of the things courts have decided for years, along with racial/ethnic equality. Terminology used in original founding documents have to be redefined legally and judicially over time. I think it is much more than the woman has to prove she is entitled to the same rights.

Is there equality here for women? I think that would make a good thread topic of it's own.

You can post anonymously if you want. Having a girl's name is a bit clue but if you use initials or other name then the sex of the poster is not apparent or even really relevant. I don't think it's an issue and don't see why it should be. There's a few posters like odie I didn't realise were female until something they posted made it apparent. Same with race, religion or sexual orientation. it's only a factor if you decide it should be known. tombstone-ok I assume he's male but is he? accountable, nomad, farmer giles they could be blue with pink spots for all anybody knows.

Oscar is female-you can tell she never shuts up and talks a load of drivel:eek::yh_rotfl

.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:00 am

gmc;1225063 wrote:

Mini skirts used to be shocking (although I never thought so and still don't)her.
Until you stopped wearing them :p

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:02 am

gmc;1225106 wrote:

oscar is female-you can tell she never shuts up and talks a load of drivel:eek::yh_rotfl

.
shuddddduppp you know you love me.......... Your just in denial

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:13 am

oscar;1225110 wrote: shuddddduppp you know you love me.......... Your just in denial

and you can't spell.

Sudan police attack protesters as Lubna Hussein goes on trial for wearing trousers | World news | guardian.co.uk

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:37 am

[QUOTE=gmc;1225143]and you can't spell.

AND I DON'T CARE :p:p

You never denied that you love me :yh_rotfl

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:39 am

oscar;1225156 wrote: [QUOTE=gmc;1225143]and you can't spell.

AND I DON'T CARE :p:p

You never denied that you love me :yh_rotfl

Did you just "flog" him?:wah:

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:49 pm

gmc;1225106 wrote: tombstone-ok I assume he's male but is he? accountable, nomad, farmer giles they could be blue with pink spots for all anybody knows.

OK. Male; male; male; blue with pink spots. Gosh! You're a good guesser!

Edit: What about Rapnuzel? I ought to know this, but I've forgotten. I have just read something that has made me wonder.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:51 pm

She is no different than those women here in north america who faught for our rights to vote and such so long ago.... humans are humans regardless of culture. Given these days and ages of the great global information highways, opression of any sort is slowly being intolerable everywhere.

I applaud her and all the power to her.

I don't have a facebook account anymore but if there is other ways of supporting her I am there.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:01 pm

gmc;1225063 wrote: In some ways we're not so far removed in attitudes. How many employers expect their female employees to wear skirts or schools have tried to insist that skirts were the approved wear for school and sent girls home for wearing trousers? The school my wife was teaching at was trying to do that doing as part of trying to enforce a uniform code (which in itself isn't actually that bad an idea) but her suggestion that perhaps being forced to wear skirts just so the middle aged male teachers could ogle the girls was a bit sexist kind of left the management a bit lost for words so dark slacks became an acceptable compromise

How often have any of you made comment about someone wearing too short a skirt or too short a top is asking for it or otherwise commented on someone looking a bit tarty. Mini skirts used to be shocking (although I never thought so and still don't) an older woman in a mini skirt usually get ribald comments made about her.

We wore pants so our undies did not show when we partook in physical activities. how can that be deemed inappropriate, we are still covered up....probably more so. (also they are warmer here in the north)

Sorry to be crass here for a moment, but some days I think men in these cultures are getting angry about things like pants because they can't give up their cave man tendancies... "me man you woman, when I say jump you say how high, when I want to get it on with you, a skirt offers me quick...." ok you see what I mean... it is no longer globally acceptable to have the male control the female so totally anymore.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:03 pm

chonsigirl;1225067 wrote: GMC, that is a good point. It wasn't until the 1970s that girls here could wear pants to school. And some schools require faculty members to wear dresses and not pants, luckily mine doesn't. I could not survive during the winter without long johns under my pants.

Kathy, it is a different culture, one that has women on an unequal standing as men. I can not say I understand it, it is not my culture. But beating a woman for wearing pants, I do not know if they will change their laws, since they are based on religious beliefs.

religious beliefs yes CG, however is religion not a choice? I too do not fully understand the culture and am no expert... but again just my opinions.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:09 pm

gmc;1225106 wrote: You can post anonymously if you want. Having a girl's name is a bit clue but if you use initials or other name then the sex of the poster is not apparent or even really relevant. I don't think it's an issue and don't see why it should be. There's a few posters like odie I didn't realise were female until something they posted made it apparent. Same with race, religion or sexual orientation. it's only a factor if you decide it should be known. tombstone-ok I assume he's male but is he? accountable, nomad, farmer giles they could be blue with pink spots for all anybody knows.

Oscar is female-you can tell she never shuts up and talks a load of drivel:eek::yh_rotfl

.

:) I've talked to Nomad and AC, they are guys.

But what you say is true, I think I botched up my first time signing up, and wanted just chonsi. It was my nickname from school, but it was a male's name to begin with.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:11 pm

minks;1225214 wrote: religious beliefs yes CG, however is religion not a choice? I too do not fully understand the culture and am no expert... but again just my opinions.

Yes, I think religion is a choice. But in some countries, it is also made the law, and they do not have freedom of religion. She is a very brave woman.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:34 pm

I'm glad that some of you thought enough of Lubna Hussein's bravery to stay on topic. It looks like the Sudanese court is trying to delay proceedings till public interest wanes, and they are also trying to show that Lubna could not dispense with her United Nations immunity. In other words, they don't really want the world to watch them conducting this trial. Lubna is arguing that there is nowhere in the Koran which forbids her from wearing trousers. Only that dress should be decent. She argues hers was - and that these clothes are the clothes she prays in.

On FaceBook it is awesome, and an eyeopener, to see how much support Lubna has from fellow Muslims, both male and female.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:47 pm

Yahoo news this morning

"KHARTOUM, Sudan â€“ Sudanese police fired tear gas and beat women protesting at the trial Tuesday of a female journalist who faces a flogging for wearing trousers in public."

Police beat women opposing Sudan dress code trial - Yahoo! News

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:49 pm

gmc;1225063 wrote: In some ways we're not so far removed in attitudes. How many employers expect their female employees to wear skirts or schools have tried to insist that skirts were the approved wear for school and sent girls home for wearing trousers? The school my wife was teaching at was trying to do that doing as part of trying to enforce a uniform code (which in itself isn't actually that bad an idea) but her suggestion that perhaps being forced to wear skirts just so the middle aged male teachers could ogle the girls was a bit sexist kind of left the management a bit lost for words so dark slacks became an acceptable compromise

How often have any of you made comment about someone wearing too short a skirt or too short a top is asking for it or otherwise commented on someone looking a bit tarty. Mini skirts used to be shocking (although I never thought so and still don't) an older woman in a mini skirt usually get ribald comments made about her.

I think that you may be missing the point of the op gmc....excuse me if I'm wrong. I'm not concerned about my boss telling me how to dress because I can always quit if I so desire. I have the freedom to do that.

I'm talking about women being beaten for wearing slacks or stoned to death for talking with an unknown male, made to completely cover their whole body with cloth while the men enjoy their freedom.

What kind of a culture/religion does this to their women. Men and women should treasure each other not control them in this way:mad:

And, I wouldn't believe for one nanosecond that the women enjoy this control. They have no control of their wishes and are probably scared to death of being stoned to death.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:57 pm

Kathy Ellen;1225243 wrote:

What kind of a culture/religion does this to their women.

And I think the answer may be any culture/religion (man made constructs) - where those in power think they can get away with it. Lubna Hussein is trying to put one small spoke in that getting-away-with-it wheel by focussing national and international attention on this case.

Good for you, Kathy for not accepting the trivialisation of the issue!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:59 pm

AussiePam;1225244 wrote: Good for you, Kathy!! And I think the answer may be any culture/religion (man made constructs) - where those in power think they can get away with it. Lubna Hussein is trying to put one small spoke in that getting-away-with-it wheel by focussing national and international attention on this case.
I do admire her stance in a very difficult culture.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:37 pm

oscar;1225246 wrote: I do admire her stance in a very difficult culture.

I also admire this brave woman Oscar.

I usually keep a low profile about some of my opinions as I don't always wish to argue or prove my point of view by providing endless links for all of my opinions because that's all they are...my opinions:-6

But this issue really has touched a raw nerve in my spirit and heart. I do not appreciate any religion, culture or person dictating my behavior as long as I am being a good citizen.

I think that's all our government/culture/religion should expect from us...be a good citizen and do the right thing as best you can.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:50 pm

I think this woman will also have the support of Islamist women who prefer to cover from head to foot ............slacks is the apporiate dress for these women.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:34 pm

Kathy Ellen;1225243 wrote: I think that you may be missing the point of the op gmc....excuse me if I'm wrong. I'm not concerned about my boss telling me how to dress because I can always quit if I so desire. I have the freedom to do that.

I'm talking about women being beaten for wearing slacks or stoned to death for talking with an unknown male, made to completely cover their whole body with cloth while the men enjoy their freedom.

What kind of a culture/religion does this to their women. Men and women should treasure each other not control them in this way:mad:

And, I wouldn't believe for one nanosecond that the women enjoy this control. They have no control of their wishes and are probably scared to death of being stoned to death.

I'm not missing the point nor was I trying to trivialise it. I was just highlighting the fact that the kind of attitudes that lead some to believe they have a moral right to tell women how they should behave and dress are not so far beneath the surface in our culture. It's not actually that long ago that women couldn't vote and had no property rights they were in fact the possessions of the man. There are still those who think it's OK for a man to hit his wife or girlfriend if provoked by her behaviour and that divorce is too easy and wives that walk away are in the wrong regardless of the circumstances. Rape trials tend to focus on whether the actions of the woman encouraged the attack or not and it's taken in mitigation in she behaved in a way that gave the impression she was willing. You never hear muggers getting off because they were tempted by the big fat wallet their victim had. Even other women hold a woman who gets attacked while drunk partly to blame. If she happens to be sexually active then she is really asking for it isn't she.

OK we were never as bad but once upon a time many would have thought it was only right that the men get a grip on the women and make them behave. Ever wonder about the origins of the term loose woman? it's means one not under the control of a man.

In the west it wasn't until women stared getting economic freedom that they started getting equal rights. These guys are terrified of western values and don't like to see women becoming independent because they can't deal with change. It takes a lot of self confidence to live in a free society. On the other hand In the bible women are either wives and mothers or whores and women should do what they are told. Maybe monotheism is the root of it all.

This woman has tremendous courage I wouldn't detract from that in any way.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:50 pm

gmc,

I will never, ever understand why men in these countries think that they have the right to control, beat and kill their women.

Never:mad:

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:31 pm

Kathy Ellen;1225377 wrote: gmc,

I will never, ever understand why men in these countries think that they have the right to control, beat and kill their women.

Never:mad:

kathy men think they have the right in all countries.

Example: in America if a woman calls the police because her husband is assaulting her and he turns around and says she assualted be back ....she is also handcuffed and interviewed. It doesn't matter if they are wounds inflicted in self defence.

Is that woman going to call the police next time? so it gives the man a right under law to assualt his wife as much as he wants because the state has now vilified him to do so, and punished the woman for defending herself.

tell me the difference

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:42 am

Kathy Ellen;1225377 wrote: gmc,

I will never, ever understand why men in these countries think that they have the right to control, beat and kill their women.

Never:mad:

It's the same reason some people think they are somehow "better" than others or demand respect when they haven't done anything to have earned it. They want things to be just so and they don't think of themselves as oppressors but as guardians of the way things are supposed to be. You get them in America and the UK as well but they don't have any real authority any more.

I can understand it intellectually (I think) but I don't have any sympathy with it. These men aren't somehow different from the rest of humanity maybe that's why it's so shocking-you can't imagine someone just like you doing these things yet you know they can't really be that different. The thing is other men are standing round letting someone flog their wives or daughters, sometimes respect for "authority" be it religious or secular is a bad thing. These women aren't trying to exert their right to wear trousers they are trying to keep a measure of freedom they already had.

posted by fuzzywuzzy

Is that woman going to call the police next time? so it gives the man a right under law to assualt his wife as much as he wants because the state has now vilified him to do so, and punished the woman for defending herself.

tell me the difference

In the west we are gradually coming round to the idea that such behaviour is not acceptable. Human rights issues are not just about letting scroungers immigrants stay in a country they are also very close to home. Women aren't being attacked more often than in the past or children abused more often than in the past because of the break down of societal values as some would claim rather it's just we no longer accept it as being none of our business what happens behind the closed doors of a marriage home. We used to shove it under the carpet and pretend it didn't happen. Trouble is some believe it never used to.

Don't know about the states but here some of the early shelters set up for abused women hiding from their abusive had a hellish time of it.

How feminists tried to destroy the family | Mail Online

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:03 am

fuzzywuzzy;1225449 wrote: in America if a woman calls the police because her husband is assaulting her and he turns around and says she assualted be back ....she is also handcuffed and interviewed. It doesn't matter if they are wounds inflicted in self defence.

That's the same in most countries, isn't it, and not just for husbands and wives - but for the whole population.

fuzzywuzzy;1225449 wrote: Is that woman going to call the police next time? so it gives the man a right under law to assualt his wife as much as he wants because the state has now vilified him to do so, and punished the woman for defending herself.

tell me the difference

The difference is that that's obllocks.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:24 am

Bill Sikes;1225468 wrote: That's the same in most countries, isn't it, and not just for husbands and wives - but for the whole population.

The difference is that that's obllocks.

Oh my god are you trying to say women and men in your country have the exact same rights as each other in every socio economic enviroment?

No it's not Bollocks !!!! I can tell you some harrowing stories, and no it's not just someone who slipped through the cracks but the norm .

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:50 am

fuzzywuzzy;1225470 wrote: No it's not Bollocks !!!!

I meant that your statement is. It still is.