
Check out Maram Makkawi's closing statement masha'Allah. Anybody have an answer for her? Tara Umm Omar
A RELAPSE INTO TRIBALISM
Maram Makkawi | Al-Watan
Although the founders of Saudi Arabia were themselves men who came from deep-rooted tribal traditions, the Kingdom was founded as an advanced state with allegiance solely to the country and not to any particular tribe.
The new state needed a constitution that would be both neutral and in sync with people’s culture and convictions. It was not feasible to use translated British or French laws as was the case in some Arab countries. This only left Islamic Shariah, which is a comprehensive constitution. Shariah has been, and still is, the strongest bond among members of Saudi society. Its rulings are the most acceptable to people here. This is not only because Islam is their religion but also because they trust its fairness as it considers all human beings equal.
Therefore, when a ruling that goes against this ethos is made, the ruling becomes a matter that needs attention — not only from a Shariah perspective but also from a national one. Even if these rulings (which are contrary to Shariah) have a basis in people’s customs and culture, they still do not suit our society because they are man-made and do not consider all people equal. They give superiority to blood ties and kinship over the values of justice and equality, and they view gender, color and race in a biased fashion.
Needless to say, not all tribes accept the same norms; nor does civil society that considers the concept of tribalism as strange and unacceptable in our age.
As an example, let us take the concept of marriage in which the tribal norm has the upper hand. While some married couples have been forced to separate because of “inequality in lineage” (though they may have met all other requirements for legal matrimony, including their own consent and that of their guardians and even have had children), other marriages were made legal regardless of the fact that all other requirements had not been met, including the mutual consent of the couples themselves — as in the case of marriages involving minors.
Furthermore, some marriages have been approved despite falling short of meeting Shariah objectives for a marriage. Marriages that fall into this category include misyar or marrying women to men who are serving long prison terms or facing the death penalty.
I was certain that I would never read anything more horrible than the incidence of old men marrying minor girls until I came across a recent news item which said six Saudi women had agreed to marry their cousins who were infected with AIDS. How can we accept the fact that the government, represented by the Ministry of Health, and the concerned marriage officials were aware of this fact? Why were such marriages approved in the first place?
These women were either forced into these marriages and are, hence, in need of official help to save them from this forced suicide or were brainwashed. Either way, this necessitates an immediate awareness campaign to enlighten women. Rules should also be issued to prevent such marriages.
Before we are accused of meddling in the affairs of others, it is important to point out that the bad effects of such marriages are not only limited to the married couples but will extend to wider society.
While the entire world is fighting AIDS, we are helping to spread it by legalizing sex between a healthy woman and an AIDS carrier. Will the government in this case not be responsible for providing treatment to two people instead of one? What about the children who will be born from such marriages? Are we permitting the development of a generation of AIDS-carrying children?
To say that the women involved have themselves agreed to marry their sick cousins is not an excuse because we are a society that meddles in and controls everything concerning women. We dictate what they should wear and learn, and where they can walk and pray.
Marriage is only one example of the hegemony that tribal customs have over our society. Some people go even further and entertain suspicions that our civilized society might relapse into tribalism. Some people contest this by claiming that people in other nations are exaggerating these issues because they want to annihilate the tribal influence in our society. For such people I have a simple question: How can marriage to an AIDS carrier from a tribal background be legal while marriage to a healthy foreigner who is not of a tribal background be illegal?




13 comments:
i agree with the sentence :Why were such marriages approved in the first place?: How can anyone allow 6 lives to get infected and spread AIDS.If world can burn live bird flue infected innocent birds then how can anyone do this because they r humans.......
Why they agreed to marry infected bad people...while as boy like me is in search of them................
.........
1- This article of ( Maram Makkawi ) based on that the news taken from the media are true , while in reality it is not always true or accurate .
2- in general it is good to be cautious with ( Maram Makkwi ) articles , sometimes true and false statements or conclusions are mixed .
3- most of Saudis that follow tribal customs don't take articles like this one seriously , there effect is minimal if any.
Chiara & Mueen- I believe that a person with AIDS should only marry another person with AIDS (not my intention to be prejudicial towards AIDS carriers). It does not make sense to risk infecting healthy people with AIDS (even if both parties are consensual) for the sake of tribalism when there are other healthy Saudis and non-Saudis for them to marry.
Man of Arabia- They should take it seriously. Why? To be aware that something like this could be happening, understand the implications of its effect on future generations and Saudi society as a whole. Educate themselves on AIDS and marriage. Potential spouses have a right to know if their partner has been infected with AIDS or any other STD before committing to the marriage. Isn't this why the Saudi government made pre-marital medical tests mandatory?
They won't take it seriously because :
1- They don't trust the media ( including the story of those who married the sick cousins ) and this article - as I said before - depended on it .
2- the writer represents a different ideological point of view ( according to her articles it seems to them as if she is somewhat liberal ).
3- cousin marriages has nothing to do with tribalism - as clarified in point 4 - , to them this proofs her ignorance ( if the translator of the title was accurate ).
let me add some points to clarify what I want to say :
3- what if the two women are also sick ,do you think they will admit that ? especially to the media ?
4- tribal racism here has nothing to do with cousin marriages , tribal racism has something to do with Arab or non Arab even if the husband and wife are from different Arabic tribes .
cousin marriage is a custom , and some strictly follow it but it has nothing to do with Arabic tribal racism .
5- The right approach is to say to them :
well fellows you marry from Syria and Egypt and other countries knowing that they are not tribal women and it is O.k.,but you become very angry when someone marries a Saudi women knowing she is not tribal,HOW COME ?
Man Of Arabia- I was under the impression that cousin marriage CAN involve those within the same tribe whether from the mother or father's side of the family. Yes I agree that familial marriage is a custom. However some have taken it to the extreme by forbidding their sons/daughters to marry outside of the family/tribe, this can be a form of tribal racism no? Also, they only marry cousins to the point that it starts to negatively affect the genetics of future generations.
Some may admit to things if their names or personal details aren't released by the media. The two women are under no obligation to admit they have AIDS to the media, only to their potential spouses. But it IS a possibility they may have AIDS as well, which could explain their insistence on marrying their AIDS-carrier cousins.
It was my understanding that the author meant the non-AIDS carriers were still choosing to marry only within their tribes to AIDS carriers rather than to non-tribal Saudis/non-Saudis. And why only just their cousins...do they not have other non-AIDS carrier cousins to marry? The question in my mind is whether they were coerced into the marriages under tribal pressure or was it really as consensual as was reported?
#5: That would be a hypocritical Saudi man eh?
Chiara- That bugs me. Either the girls were AIDS carriers already but didn't disclose this to the media (refer to Man of Arabia's opinion) or they had to be ignorant of how contagious AIDS is and how to protect themselves against being infected.
Its my impression that in Saudi Arabia, family and tribe are synonymous. For me, cousin marriage is not the issue at this was practiced by the Prophet (peace be upon him). It is when its done to protect the "purity" of the tribe with the attitude that any other tribe or non-Saudis are considered to be tainting the tribal blood if they were allowed to inter-marry with them. Aren't these tribal Saudis usually the ones who only marry cousins within their tribe? Would that constitute as tribal racism?
(Any Saudis reading this, please don't be offended...I'm just trying to understand. Feel free to negate or confirm my statements and answer my questions from an insider point of view.)
Also Chiara, regarding genetic mutation, I think this is one of the reasons why the Saudi government makes pre-marital testing mandatory.
I'm so shocked by this..what if it had been the women with the aids...would the men have married them?
Angienader- Your comment caused my eyes to widen! I didn't think about it that way. You made a good point. What a good question.
To Umm omar :
sorry for being late ... here is my comment on what you said :
when they say ( cousin marriage ) in Arabia they mean from the father's side not the mother side .
and it is not tribal racism - as I said before - it is a custom, some tribes practice it some don't ( most of those who practice this custom are bedwin tribes ).
----------------
even if thier names are not released,the reporter would know the family and this is enough . also it's not the only possible version of the story - if it is true - it is just a possibility .
-------------------
There is nothing in the story - as reported - that support the author claim and God knwos if it was consensual or not .
-------------------
5- The problem is that this type of behavior is widely accepted among the tribes.
Man of Arabia- No problem. Aha! See now I have heard that the Bedwins of Saudi Arabia tend to be the most racist regarding tribes. Is this true? And why is it that the Bedwins usually practice this custom?
If its so widespread then there needs to be a full-fledged campaign to educate regarding the dangers of HIV/AIDS and help eradicate this behavior.
As long As I know The bedwins are not the most racist but many of them follow the custom of ( cousin marriage ).
why they are practicing this custom ?
There is no clear cut answer , but maybe because the family ties among bedwins are - in general - stronger than urban , so they tend to marry their cousins .
in NO.5 I was commenting on " That would be a hypocritical Saudi man eh?" which relates to my previous comment NO.5 about the right approach , so there is no link between that and the story mentioned in the article .
Man of Arabia- Gotcha. Sorry for the misunderstanding re: #5.
No problem.
Post a Comment
No limit on the length of a comment, write as much as you wish. Please be warned that if I deem your comments to be unsuitable, I will D E L E T E them. If you select the anonymous option, you MUST use the Name/URL option to enter a (first) name or nickname and become semi-anonymous to help distinguish your comment from other readers' comments. Entering a URL address is optional. If I receive an anonymous comment with no name, it will NOT be approved.