Choices are great. Agreed. the ability to choose is fundamental even if we don’t agree with one’s choice. No argument there.

BUT that’s not whats going on here. The guardianship laws in Saudi Arabia are the ELIMINATION of choice. Its giving husbands power over their wives equivalent to the power parents have over their children. It is a paradox, and thus impossible, to freely choose to give up your ability to choose. Thus these women are not simply ‘making a choice we disagree with’, they are enslaving themselves. They are infantilizing themselves. Its impossible to choose something like this.

You can certainly submit yourself to the will of your husband or father or sister or cat or whoeever on a case to case basis. But not indefinitely. This is not a choice — its slavery.

Where do we decide the limit? Well, as a matter of fact, I have the perfect line drawn right here: (Well, I borrowed it from classical western AND non-western political texts:)

Everyone over an agreed upon age of maturity (in this case, 18 is the universal standard), is autonomous, and thus free to make their own choices regarding their personal, professional, spiritual, and cultural lives. This is regardless of sex, race, or socioeconomic status, and as long as they do not harm others or alienate themselves from their fundamental human rights of freedom from torture, slavery, and death.

There you go.

OK! Let me put it this way?
Who decides where the limit is? On what basis can we – and by that I mean people who have written here – decide what a wrong choice is?

This parent-ship in the relation between people reminds me when a parent stands his child’s decision because he thinks it’s a wrong one.

And women all over the world are not my or your children. Even if it’s a wrong choice from where you stand, she still has the right to take that wrong choice and its consequences. What gives me the right to take that from her?

Another question.
It’s OK if you reject her for her choice, but it’s bad when a man does the same for the women who asks for their right to vote, drive and travel freely?

I respectfully disagree. I mean, yes I believe women should be free to make choices about their lives. But isn’t there a point at which we must stop and question some of the choices that some women make? Especially when it seems they’re giving up what agnecy they may have?

Rochelle:

I agree with you. It is ironic.

How can we tell this is their agency and “real choice” anyway? Supposedly these are women whose political and personal actions are controlled by their husbands and fathers. How much influence are the actual ‘guardians’ having in these pro-guardian campaigns?

Their self contradictions are just too obvious for me to take any of this seriously and to be honest, this entire thing makes me sick.

nd I hope everyone here realizes that the “one million signatures campaign” concept is stolen DIRECTLY from the Moroccan, Tunisian, and iranian women’s rights initiatives of the same name who fight FOR their equality and not the status quo system of domination. What a f-cking insult.

Correct me of I am wrong, but I have got the impression that what is being criticized here is what is perceived as contradiction between believing women are free to chose their lives, and the fact that the article didn’t state what’s clearly against the campaign.

I would be doing the same mistake if I took someone’s choice away just because I personally don’t like it.

And it’s interfering by the law in people’s lives is what this article is all about. Weather it’s for guardianship or not, a life style and the relation between people can’t be forced onto people’s life by law.

Can you voluntarily enslave yourself? No. This is not choice.
But can I force her into not doing that? Do I have the right to judge her because she believes so? I don’t think so.
May be if I’m given the opportunity, and she welcomes, I can enlighten her with what I think she needs.

It’s all about “There’s no such a thing that is the ultimate only true right thing to do”

“women’s empowerment means the ability to choose.”

gaurdianship is the RELINQUISHMENT of the ability to choose.

Can you voluntarily inslave yourself? No. This is not choice. Getting the advice of your husband on personal matters is one thing. Giving up all autonomy to him is another.

Are you at all aware of what meaningful choice means? How can muslimahmediawatch supprt this kind of systematic infantilization of muslim women?