Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Men are not allowed to walk dogs (or cats) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia due to newly passed law
The reason why men aren't allowed to walk dogs or take cats out on a stroll in Riyadh as of Wednesday is because they aren't allowed to buy pets there any more. A hamster, maybe. A goldfish, probably, but not a dog or a cat. If a person has a pet already, the person can keep the pet, just not take it outside. As of Wednesday, the ban went into effect.
According to this AP article, some men, it seems, were using their furry friends as a way to get up close and personal with women and bother families--a big no no in Saudi Arabia. The sexes are to be separate from each other. Dogs and cats are ice breakers for bridging the divide.
As bans go, this one sounds a bit loosey goosey since as of the writing of the article, people didn't know about the ban, including a pet shop owner. The other detail the article pointed out is that it's not often that people walk dogs in Riyadh anyway and when do people really walk cats?
From what the people who were interviewed said, it doesn't sound as if people are planning to follow the ban, just like what happened when there was a ban on cell phones with cameras back in 2004. The fear there was that people of the opposite sex would use the cameras to take pictures of each other. People didn't go along with that ban so it was dropped.
If you are planning on heading to Saudi Arabia, I'd leave the pooch or kitty at home unless you don't mind them having a stay under the care of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, the name for the religious police who are doing the pet confiscating.
One thought about this ban is that it's really to control pet ownership which is seen as a Western influence. Dog ownership has not been part of Saudi culture until more recently. Cats, though, have, so it is unclear why they are being picked on.
Dispatches from around the world
Filed under: Arts and Culture, Saudi Arabia, News, Middle East
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Nick Hawkins Aug 1st 2008 12:36PM
The mutaween are pretty good at blocking anything that might conflict with the Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. We'd jokingly call them "the fun police" if only they weren't so oppressive.
Jamie Rhein Aug 1st 2008 12:39PM
Nick,
Reading this story reminded me of old Monty Python routines. Couldn't you picture the Monty Python gang having a bit of fun with this one? What other pets might people have, for example?
Brenda SFO Aug 1st 2008 3:22PM
How about pet dolls on the end of a wire - of the Saudi royal family ? Will that pass?
Mike Aug 1st 2008 4:11PM
I can't see them actually enforcing this ban.
http://www.boxerhub.com
bandar Aug 1st 2008 9:04PM
all pets could wear pet hijab while out in public so people could not see how cute they are and would not be tempted to pet them!
if fact the religious police in Saudi should require all pets and animals to wear hijab in public not just because the pets are cute, but their genitals hang out in plain view!
the religious police should also be required to wear full hijab in public just in case the people of Saudi arabia find them too cute to resist and may want to pet them too.
pet hijab is good concept.
Jamie Rhein Aug 2nd 2008 1:00AM
Very funny, bandar. I think you might have a future in writing comedy routines.
Harvey Aug 2nd 2008 1:34PM
Wouldn't it be a lot easier if they'd all just admit that the real problem is not being able to control their sexual impulses and, after this admission, start working on doing this internally, as opposed to making absurd laws designed to control these sexual proclivities externally?
What is it about this culture that is so incredibly uptight about their sexual feelings? Just realize that freedom of expression is good. Expression of our sexuality is wonderful. And laws based on the Bill of Rights are much more sensible, human and realistic, not to mention practical.
valerie Aug 3rd 2008 2:31PM
just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it's wrong. that is the typical american male attitude. narrow minded and ignorant. really it doesn't matter if we as americans 'don't get it'. who are to say 'what is it with this culture' or that's wrong....NO. it's not. it's just different. "that culture" probably says the same exact thing about us..why are we...
Harvey Aug 4th 2008 9:10AM
Hi Valerie,
I see that stating, "What is it about this culture...." disturbed you. Perhaps, by me rephrasing, you wouldn't be deflected so much from the actual point I was raising.
So, to rephrase for clarity:
Why is it that we find, in countries whose legal system is based on Moslem philosophy, such repressive laws designed to prevent sexual expression?
Note, too, that merely critiquing another culture doesn't automatically mean that I don't have criticism for my own culture or that I'm not open minded and am ignorant. To say so indicates that you may be suffering from that which you accuse since there is not only nothing wrong with valid criticism but this type of exchange may, instead, serve to illuminate and connect since it asks for information based upon what most anyone can easily observe and, if denied, leads one to wonder what biases may exist in the mind of the one doing the denying.
Questioning is not indicative of close mindedness or ignorance.
Also, good to be thought of as a "typical" male, something that no one who knows me ever accused me of! :)
Harvey Aug 4th 2008 12:10PM
Furthmore, Valerie,
I strongly believe that we all have equal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness but to do so without unjustly infringing on the legitimate space of others. I believe these rights are inalienable and correct for everyone, from all cultures. Thereto, I believe in freedom of expression, as long as it doesn't directly endanger others (as in shouting, "Fire", in a movie theater when there isn't any fire).
The Saudi culture/government is obviously in conflict with this belief and, just because they have a political boundary defining the borders of their nation does not mean that the definition of freedom is any different there, or even should be different as defined above, in this post.
With your ideas, and correct me if I err, that each nation can set a new definition of what freedom means, progress or change for the better can and will be critically hampered. They need to question their beliefs, as we all should, and truly determine the real reasons for their oppressive laws.
I submit this law is based on a cultural assumption that males have a right to not control their sexual impulses and that, therefore, the laws should cater to them by preventing anyone in society from expressing sexual inducements that may excite a male. How's that for male dominance?!
Women must, thereby, walk about completely covered, regardless of the weather conditions while men can dress as they please, as long as their head is covered. Women are killed if they are raped while the man gets a relative slap on the wrist, if that.
You don't see something wrong with this?
Bob Aug 4th 2008 5:39PM
Ah, the looneytunes world of Islam, Woo Hoo
stnsmok Aug 3rd 2008 7:08AM
We have to be able to keep our pets. We might have to eat them when things get worse. I'm going to buy a heard of dogs.
G.L. Aug 3rd 2008 7:25AM
I would really hate to live in a place like Saudi Arabia. Those rich, islamic wackos control every aspect of life.
phillip Aug 3rd 2008 7:39AM
you know...the black plaque was probably caused due to the lack of cats (nothing to kill the rodents which carried the disease). they thought that cats were satanic and destroyed them by the hundreds. i wonder if they thought about the possible consequences.
John Leonard Aug 3rd 2008 8:10AM
I honestly believe muslims are the most stupid of people. Unfortunately they are also one of the most dangerous as 9/11 can attest to. We need to use a page ot two from their book and if they disagree with us we just wipe them out. Better still just arm and use a few A bombs.
Jauharah Aug 3rd 2008 1:28PM
John: Muslims aren't the only ones that count idiots amongst them nor are dangerous people found only among Muslims. Every religious and secular group has its share of wackos. And just want does your rant about "killing" or "bombing" proof about you? Other than the obvious; you are a dangerous wacko that needs to be dealt with swiftly and permanently because you won't listen to moral reason.
Rsvskinsense Aug 3rd 2008 8:20AM
Just so glad I do not live there!
So sick and tired of these religious Cults..
They are nothing but out of control, Control Freaks...
Abr Aug 3rd 2008 8:32AM
So...women and children are still allowed to take their pets outside? Or...they're just not allowed outside at all like the pets? I'm confused.
Pierel Labulay Aug 3rd 2008 8:48AM
It's their country and they can make whatever laws they wish. We may view such laws oppressive from an overly permissive western perspective, but it is repugnant to call the Saudi's names for living their lives in the manner they see fit to. I for one believe that the west needs to enforce their existing laws and severely punish all criminals rather than worrying about the impact upon the criminal. Perhaps it's the west who should look at itself before criticizing others.
Dani Aug 3rd 2008 10:08AM
Overly permissive? I feel that you are wrong. This country is NOT their country as they are not ALLOWED to live their lives as they see fit! Clearly they invent ridiculous laws to ENSURE that they DO NOT lead their lives as they see fit. They live their lives as their GOVERNMENT sees fit. Now call me crazy but that sounds pretty damn oppressive to me. You should watch what you say as it will probably be censored soon enough. THANK GOD FOR MY OVERLY PERMISSIVE WESTERN CIVILIZATION.