A Slap in the Face

The article came and went from the CNN.com homepage with little or no fanfare. In the news world, the shelf life of stories, even important ones, has gone from days to hours to minutes. But despite the never-ending barrage of news to which I subject myself every day, this story stuck to the back of my mind like so much peanut butter to the roof of my mouth. This story bubbled up into my consciousness at every free moment, and made me as irritable as if I had forgotten to eat all that time. So, three weeks later, I can no longer ignore the irrepressible urge I have to write about this, no matter what may come of it.

The headline read "Saudi judge: It's OK to slap spendthrift wives", which I first thought might be one of CNN's cute wordplay-style headlines. Surely by "slap" they didn't mean that a judicial official in a civilized nation would have declared it "OK" for men to physically strike their wives for any perceived offense, let alone overspending, right? But no, that was exactly what they meant. The actual quote was from Judge Hamad Al-Razine who said (and I'm not making this up) at a conference on domestic violence, that "if a person gives SR 1,200 [$320] to his wife and she spends 900 riyals [$240] to purchase an abaya [the black cover that women in Saudi Arabia must wear] from a brand shop and if her husband slaps her on the face as a reaction to her action, she deserves that punishment."

So, let me get this straight: an educated and appointed judicial official (for the record, the process for appointment to the Saudi judiciary is extremely comprehensive and robust) in one of the world's richest "first-world" nations, as a representative of its government, when addressing widespread domestic violence in that nation at an academic conference dedicated thereto, declared that it was acceptable for a man to physically strike his wife for spending more than three quarters of her allowance on a brand name version of the cover she is required to wear in public? And what's more that she'd be asking for it?! In the immortal words of Mugatu, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

But, after I allowed my alarm and disbelief to cool (with the help of a very level-headed muse), I found that my real problem with this story was not the story itself, but rather the startling absence of any real reaction to it. In particular, there were two things about the relative silence that accompanied this announcement which troubled and continue to trouble me:

1. Not hearing anything from the American Saudi community; and

2. Not hearing anything from the United States government.

Silence from the Saudis

The traditional response from a group of people who have been unfairly represented in the media is to speak out loudly and quickly, and to let everyone know that that is absolutely not who they are. There is no guarantee that such a declaration will sway public opinion - but a failure to do so appears for all the world like agreement. In the weeks and months following September 11th, there was a strong collective voice from the global Muslim community that was quick to point out that radical Islam was not Islam. Their scholars identified the principles of the world's largest religion which had been distorted into the anti-American jihad which bore those terrible attacks. And although there are still many hate-mongers who cannot be swayed from believing that all Muslims are American-hating terrorists - they are in the vast minority.

There was no such response from the Saudi community; no declaration from the government, no statement from American Saudi groups; just a seemingly damning silence. I don't want to believe that Judge Al-Razine speaks for all or even the majority of Saudi Arabians. I don't want to believe that in 2009 there is a first world nation where the large scale subjugation of half of its population is not only permissible, but encouraged. I don't want to believe that there is still a place in the world where marriage is viewed as an ownership proposition, and where domestic violence is viewed as an acceptable form of family dispute resolution. But what choice do I have? The announcement wasn't meant with outrage by the American Saudi community. There was no assurance from the Saudi ambassador that his is not a nation of close-minded misogynists hiding behind religious idealism. There were no pleas from Saudi scholars for the government to distance themselves from the Judge, and no open letters from now naturalized Saudis decrying a gross misrepresentation. There was nothing except the deafening silence of tacit approval; a terrifyingly passive acknowledgment.

So, if I'm wrong, and I pray that I am, please - someone, anyone, step up and let me know, because I'm not sure what to think if I'm not.

Silence from the United States Government

There is no doubt that we are living in an era of change. President Obama rode into office on a wave of hope and inspiration, the likes of which we haven't seen for decades. Among the many campaign promises which were turned into action in the first hundred days of his administration, the President has moved forward to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, and forbidden the use of torture by the United States government. There was no doubt that President Obama held human rights in the highest regard, and not just for Americans, but for all citizens of the world. But how can his administration be concerned and we, as a nation, be overwrought about how a couple hundred prisoners (many of whom were innocent) were mistreated at Guantanamo Bay when there are 13 million women (all of whom are innocent) being subjected to the antiquated and barbaric subjugation that Judge Al-Razine espouses?

The human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia are certainly no mystery to the U.S. Government; as it has been on the Human Rights Watch List for as long was we have had one. But, the regional and economic importance of an alliance with the country, combined with recent progress and dedication to some of the more egregious and systemic violations has dictated a U.S. response of "wait and see". But after the cavernous reticence following a declaration of state-approved wife beating, it would appear that we're doing our diligent observation through a blindfold. How valuable does a nation need to be to us for us to ignore their judiciary authorizing nationwide spousal abuse?

Would it be too much to ask, for the tens of thousands of Saudis who are granted visas to the United States each year (over 30,000 in 2008), that it be made clear to them that the slapping of one's wife for overspending is not only the sort of thing which can make you unwelcome in our country, but also get you a unique tour of one of our correctional facilities? Does it not bear mentioning that although we are a nation literally built on religious tolerance that we are also the land of the free? I am afraid that our own silence misrepresents just how far our "tolerance" extends, and I fear that Saudi households in our own country are hiding an ugly truth of this storied culture.

With a federal administration seemingly unafraid to speak up authoritatively on anything, this failure to respond is all the more shocking.

* * *

Perhaps I'm being a bit of a Pollyanna here. I haven't traveled and seen much of the world, civilized or otherwise, and I've spent a lifetime around intelligent, capable and independent women who make the traditional Saudi system seem about as viable as a geocentric universe or a flat planet Earth. So I cannot imagine that an entire nation, what's more an entire group of nations, with access to education, technology and the knowledge of the world's scholars could continue to live in the ignorance that Judge Al-Razine so deftly displayed. But if I'm wrong, and outcry and censure continue their absence, perhaps I've at lease unwittingly come across the one thing that could help every Saudi man who sits silently by and lets this outdated barbarism continue - a good slap in the face.