Althouse: "Thousands of women applied for 30 train driving jobs advertised for women in Saudi Arabia, revealing the extent of untapped potential in the conservative desert kingdom..."

February 18, 2022

"Thousands of women applied for 30 train driving jobs advertised for women in Saudi Arabia, revealing the extent of untapped potential in the conservative desert kingdom..."

"... which only permitted women to drive in 2018.... Some 28,000 put themselves forward to operate bullet trains between the holy cities of Mecca and Medina... Feminists greeted the news with cautious optimism.... Until recently Saudi women were mainly employed in health or education. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has promised to open more opportunities to women after he came under criticism for his role in the war in Yemen, the arrest of women’s rights activists and the killing of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi."

The London Times reports.

28 comments:

David Begley said...: Why use “conservative” as an adjective in this story? Why not “misogynistic” or “backwards” or “patriarchal?”; 2/18/22, 7:08 AM
Howard said...: Nice start to defining conservative, David. I would add cowardly, ignorant, hyper-religious, intolerant, angry, insecure, greedy, etc, etc.

David Begley said: Why use “conservative” as an adjective in this story? Why not “misogynistic” or “backwards” or “patriarchal?”; 2/18/22, 7:29 AM
Temujin said...: Seriously. Is this the definition of 'conservative'? Is this the London Times standard?

If I were a woman living there, given the history and traditions there, I'd be less than excited to be an employee on a train surrounded by nothing but men who's reality includes free get-out-of-jail-for-rape cards.

I don't recall that as a conservative standard, but then I'm not a nuanced journalist.; 2/18/22, 7:39 AM
Fernandinande said...: Why use “conservative” as an adjective in this story? Why not “misogynistic” or “backwards” or “patriarchal?”

To our modern socialists, sexists and racists, “conservative”, “backwards” and “patriarchal” are all synonyms, and include “misogynistic”.; 2/18/22, 7:45 AM
narciso said...: Its a remarkably reformist move, prince salman deported zindawi an islamist to turkey from yemen; 2/18/22, 8:39 AM
Critter said...: Journalists reflexively seek to tie the term conservative to all bad things as part of the long war against all who would oppose globalism. That’s what they learned from Marxists who form the intellectual bulkhead of the globalist movement.; 2/18/22, 8:43 AM
West TX Intermediate Crude said...: "... which only permitted women to drive in 2018..."
Before I criticize the London Times for misplacement of "only," I must determine if British English conventions of "only" placement differ from American English.
Anybody know?; 2/18/22, 8:51 AM
Bill R said...: .. bullet trains between the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

Now THERE'S something new under the sun.; 2/18/22, 9:01 AM
mikee said...: Our English language adjectives are inadequate descriptors for the complexities and subtleties of non-English cultural history and behavior. Googling "arabic word for female emancipation" for example, the third item listed is Wikipedia describing Qiyan, or premodern singing slave girls/sex slaves, which were a thing in Islam, different from but sorta like geishas in shogunate Japan.

I propose that if the culture you're describing can't go three google entries before women sex slaves are listed as an important part of your history, care should be taken by one and all in describing present day attitudes towards females in that culture.; 2/18/22, 9:11 AM
Ann Althouse said...: A secular newspaper should not describe cities as “holy.” Call them venerable or say they are perceived as holy, but don’t you call them holy. It’s not factual and it’s patronizing.; 2/18/22, 10:24 AM
gahrie said...: A secular newspaper should not describe cities as “holy.” Call them venerable or say they are perceived as holy, but don’t you call them holy. It’s not factual and it’s patronizing.

I challenge you to cite a Muslim that does not consider Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem to be holy cities. In fact, I bet most of them would find your statement to be quite offensive.

The vast majority of Catholics certainly consider the Vatican to be a holy city.

Jerusalem is considered a holy city by three different religions.

What is your argument for why these cities are not holy?; 2/18/22, 10:53 AM
narciso said...: its the shrines that used to be managed by the hashemites, a consequence of world war one,; 2/18/22, 12:05 PM
narciso said...: interesting the prince on his mothers side, is ajman, one of the tribes that was persecuted twice fatally in 1861 and 1932; 2/18/22, 12:14 PM
Static Ping said...: Saudi Arabia is a unique country. In many ways it is a throwback to the monarchies of days gone by with court intrigue and assassinations and the like. A thousand years ago, the death of "journalist" Jamal Khashoggi would not have seemed the least bit unusual, the elimination of a rival to the current regime. The current machinations in Yemen are easily comparable to to the acts of many a Roman emperor, Persian shah, barbarian warlord, or steppe Khan, taking advantage of a weakened neighbor. But it is also a country trying to adapt to the modern world at the same time. It is an imperial country in a land where imperial countries are a novelty, a theocracy that is trying to reform itself - but not too much - enough to fit in, an accident of history that is only of importance due to the luck of large petroleum reserves.

I suspect that if they did not have the oil reserves, Arabia would be comparable to Afghanistan, except flatter and hotter. The only thing anyone would care about would be Mecca/Medina and the potential for bases on the Persian Gulf and Red Sea.; 2/18/22, 12:27 PM
narciso said...: yes there was a brief interregnum in the 1870s when doughty visited the kingdom between the 2nd and 3rd kingdoms, when the hashemites were in charge, the foreign office in india, forgetting their experience with wahhabis, supported arming the hashemites and ibn saud, much like their future counterpart gave weapons to massoud and bin laden's future fighters, you can guess what happened next,; 2/18/22, 12:50 PM
Josephbleau said...: "men who's reality includes free get-out-of-jail-for-rape cards."

What is the difference between a Saudi woman and an Occupy Wall Street Woman? the Occupy woman gets stoned BEFORE she gets raped.; 2/18/22, 1:01 PM
BUMBLE BEE said...: Calls to mind a comment by an MP regarding his involvement in Desert Storm. When asked what his most prominent impression of his deployment was, he replied "I never saw so many one car collisions in my life".; 2/18/22, 1:12 PM
Jack Klompus said...: "Nice start to defining conservative, David. I would add cowardly, ignorant, hyper-religious, intolerant, angry, insecure, greedy, etc, etc."

You're an insufferably miserable, insecure, stupid excuse for a man.; 2/18/22, 1:13 PM
John henry said...: I found the conflation of car driving and train driving to be a bit wierd.

I also find the concept of "driving" a train more than a bit weird and always have.

The train operator can start and stop the train and has some control over its speed. They have no control over where the train goes.

I've never seen that as "driving"

I think the us is the only place where "engineers" operate locomotives. Especially back in the days of steam this made perfect sense. An "engineer" was a person who made an "engine" go.

A number of states restrict who can call themselves an engineer. Now I'm curious if and how these laws affect train operators.

John LGBTQBNY Henry; 2/18/22, 1:58 PM
Robert Cook said...: "What is your argument for why these cities are not holy?"

They're not objectively holy. They're "holy" only to believers. A secular newspaper should not use descriptive terms meaningful only to believers as if they are objectively so. Instead, they could say something such as, "(Name of city or cities), considered holy (or sacred) by Christians/Muslims/Jews all over the world...etc., etc.," depending on what city or cities are being discussed.; 2/18/22, 4:11 PM
Robert Cook said...: I can't help but laugh at those so bent out of shape by the use of "conservative" used in this story, as if "conservative" has the same connotative (or even denotative) meaning in all contexts, in all nations, in all cultures.; 2/18/22, 4:16 PM
Gahrie said...: Instead, they could say something such as, "(Name of city or cities), considered holy (or sacred) by Christians/Muslims/Jews all over the world...etc., etc.," depending on what city or cities are being discussed.

Because no one in the world is smart enough to realize that that is exactly what people mean when they use the term holy city...it's a city that is holy to somebody.; 2/18/22, 6:49 PM
Gahrie said...: Even pedantics are raising their eyebrows over this one...; 2/18/22, 6:51 PM
Josephbleau said...: From my exposure to 'US media culture" a conservative is a person who does not reliably vote Democrat, and by implication a violence prone tooth deficient cousin boinker. Like the noted white supremacist Justice Thomas.; 2/18/22, 6:56 PM
AndrewV said...: "yes there was a brief interregnum in the 1870s when Doughty visited the kingdom between the 2nd and 3rd kingdoms, when the Hashemites were in charge, the foreign office in India, forgetting their experience with Wahhabis, supported arming the Hashemites and ibn Saud, much like their future counterpart gave weapons to Masoud and bin Laden's future fighters, you can guess what happened next,"

In World War I the British Foreign Office armed and supported the Hashemites. The India office, a separate cabinet level department, armed and backed the House of Saud and the Wahhabis.

Even with the Raj's historical independence from oversight from London it always amazed me that two departments of the British government could have independent and contradictory foreign policies.; 2/18/22, 9:01 PM
Gahrie said...: In World War I the British Foreign Office armed and supported the Hashemites. The India office, a separate cabinet level department, armed and backed the House of Saud and the Wahhabis.

The Wahhabis got Saudi Arabia and all of that oil, while the Hashemites got Jordan and Palestinian refugees.; 2/18/22, 10:16 PM
Joe Smith said...: At least they won't have to parallel park.

I'll be here all week...; 2/18/22, 10:52 PM
AndrewV said...: "The Wahhabis got Saudi Arabia and all of that oil, while the Hashemites got Jordan and Palestinian refugees."

The Western powers put two sons of Hussein bin Ali, the Hashemite King of Hejaz on thrones. Abdullah became the King of Jorden, and his brother Faisal the King of Iraq.; 2/19/22, 6:07 AM