Saudi Arabia elected to the UN Commission on the status of women

BalcombeSt4

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

When both run out, and they will, the Yanks will drop them faster than lead **** filled balloon.

I wouldn't be suprised if they do.

Just like they dropped Saddam after he stopped becoming useful to them.

The Rape of Lucretia

Augustine Worried Ping-pong wrote: »

What a load of codswallop. Inclusion my arse. We are not talking about some minor differences between men and women here, we are talking about limited rights for a gender.

The UN is there to hear all voices. Sure, they arent minor differences. But you cannot ignore those he believe there should be large differences between the rights for both sexes just because you are of an alternate view. The mission of the UN is to include all nations, cultures, religions and views - not to exclude. It is the UNITED nations.
Have some cop on.

pangbang

The UN is irrelevant, hasn't been for decades. Its just becoming too weak to even hide it anymore.

It was a club setup to stop war, and from the very beginning it failed.

The further down the path we follow the UN and its absurdity, the worse off we'll be.

The first few off the sinking ship will get the life raft.

Ulysses Gaze

pangbang wrote: »

The UN is irrelevant, hasn't been for decades. Its just becoming too weak to even hide it anymore.

It was a club setup to stop war, and from the very beginning it failed.

The further down the path we follow the UN and its absurdity, the worse off we'll be.

The first few off the sinking ship will get the life raft.

It is just a more convoluted and bureaucratic League of Nations.

About the same success rate in stopping conflict as well.

RobertKK

Irish foreign minister Charles Flanagan refuses to say if Ireland was one of the 5 European countries that voted for Saudi Arabia to be on the UN women's rights commission.

He should clear it up despite it not being the norm to disclose votes.
We should know for transparency reasons.

ScumLord

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

There are 15,000-20,000 members of the Royal Family in Saudi.

They'll burn through their post-oil resources quickly because they will not be able to rein in their spending.

That's very possible, but the guys who have bought property in some of the most expensive places in the world should always have enough to live off. Those fancy cars they buy are often worth more second hand than what they paid for them too. Just selling off their cars would give them millions.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

Irish foreign minister Charles Flanagan refuses to say if Ireland was one of the 5 European countries that voted for Saudi Arabia to be on the UN women's rights commission.

He should clear it up despite it not being the norm to disclose votes.
We should know for transparency reasons.

As much as I disagree with the decision unless there is a general agreement to discuss what was a private vote he should keep quiet.

This decision to make this public should be made in agreement with others.

jobbridge4life

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

It is just a more convoluted and bureaucratic League of Nations.

About the same success rate in stopping conflict as well.

Yes definitely. Lets see the League of Nations collapsed and we had the most brutal conflict in the history of man. The United Nations was founded and we live in the most peaceful period of recorded history.

Totes the same.

riffmongous

Christy42 wrote: »

As much as I disagree with the decision unless there is a general agreement to discuss what was a private vote he should keep quiet.

This decision to make this public should be made in agreement with others.

Belgium revealed their vote and the PM offered a public apology

ilkhanid

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

They won the geological lottery and could have changed the world for the better - could have advanced science and technology for the benefit of mankind. Instead they buy supercars and fund terror.

They also spend a lot of money producing theology graduates.

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

The UN is there to hear all voices. Sure, they arent minor differences. But you cannot ignore those he believe there should be large differences between the rights for both sexes just because you are of an alternate view. The mission of the UN is to include all nations, cultures, religions and views - not to exclude. It is the UNITED nations.
Have some cop on.

I couldn't disagree more. The UN sets certain minimum standards..that's why we have the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If you can't uphold these then to hell with you, The notion that women have no rights, isn't just "an alternate view", it's madness. demented zealotry.

smurfjed

Actually Saudi Arabia is changing, just ask any Saudi woman, but they are changing at their pace.

ScumLord

smurfjed wrote: »

Actually Saudi Arabia is changing, just ask any Saudi woman, but they are changing at their pace.

It's not like europe brought in women's rights all that quickly. Even almost 100 years after women got the vote they are still struggling to get equality. If this was to be the start of women's rights in Saudi we would still have to expect it to take decades for them to catch up to us.

Christy42

riffmongous wrote: »

Belgium revealed their vote and the PM offered a public apology

And....?

I disagree. I feel like if it is going to be a secret vote it should stay a secret vote. The issue that needs to be decided is if it should have been a secret vote or not. Not in my opinion but it was one.

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

And....?

I disagree. I feel like if it is going to be a secret vote it should stay a secret vote. The issue that needs to be decided is if it should have been a secret vote or not. Not in my opinion but it was one.

It was not exactly a papal conclave.

Are they obliged not to divulge how they voted?

topper75

ScumLord wrote: »

But if you exclude them from the equality process how do you ever expect them to change?

The fact is modern capitalist societies required women to work, we needed the labour, a traditional family where the woman stays at home just isn't workable for a lot of people in the west.

I suppose Saudi imports slave labour so they can keep women out of the work force.

I think they need to be involved, even if the odds of them changing is slim it creates a chance that wouldn't exist otherwise.

Aw not this marxist rubbish of everything being driven by economics! :mad:

What has driving a car got to do with work in a direct sense? What has the right to walk down the road by yourself got to do with work.

They are misogynistic cnuts down there and we cannot support that if we have any conscience.

RobertKK

It seems fours of the five European countries are:
Ireland who fail to deny.
UK who fail to deny
Sweden and Belgium who said they did.

Today I have read about women being stoned and heads chopped off in Saudi Arabia.
Not to mention the public execution of a man for being gay.

Personally having spoke to people here and abroad in Europe and elsewhere that is regarded as western society, I never came across anyone who is a fan of Saudi Arabia.

Some liberals thinks one can help create change in Saudi Arabia, but this is a country that funds terrorism against the west and has no intention of any real change.
Voting for them on any matter that deals with rights, is either highly deluded or something far worse.

Elmer Blooker

Isn't it interesting that up to 5,000 took to the streets of Dublin protesting over what they thought was Trump's misogynistic views.
No one will take to the streets over this Saudi vote business. How easy the media can whip up hysteria!
I wonder what Minister Varadkar makes of this support for the Saudis? -just a thought.

ohnonotgmail

Christy42 wrote: »

And....?

I disagree. I feel like if it is going to be a secret vote it should stay a secret vote. The issue that needs to be decided is if it should have been a secret vote or not. Not in my opinion but it was one.

They get to vote in secret. there is nothing to stop a country from revealing afterwards how they voted. Of course you would have to take them at their word because there is no way to confirm if they are telling the truth

Fratton Fred

RobertKK wrote: »

It seems fours of the five European countries are:
Ireland who fail to deny.
UK who fail to deny
Sweden and Belgium who said they did.

Today I have read about women being stoned and heads chopped off in Saudi Arabia.
Not to mention the public execution of a man for being gay.

Personally having spoke to people here and abroad in Europe and elsewhere that is regarded as western society, I never came across anyone who is a fan of Saudi Arabia.

Some liberals thinks one can help create change in Saudi Arabia, but this is a country that funds terrorism against the west and has no intention of any real change.
Voting for them on any matter that deals with rights, is either highly deluded or something far worse.

who has denied?

Elmer Blooker

If this vote was a worthy UNICEF cause Minister Flanagan would be shouting how Ireland voted from the roof tops!
I'm not surprised RTE's Drivetime is giving the Saudi vote story negligible coverage at the time of posting.

Fratton Fred

Just an FYI.

This is taken from Saudi's Vision 2030 programme, where they are looking to reduce their dependancy on oil and become a more open society http://vision2030.gov.sa/en/node/8

Providing Equal Opportunities
Our economy will provide opportunities for everyone – men and women, young and old – so they may contribute to the best of their abilities. We will place a renewed emphasis on lifelong training and we will seek to make the most of the potential of our workforce by encouraging a culture of high performance. These efforts will be coordinated by the recently established Job Creation and Anti-Unemployment Commission. One of our most significant assets is our lively and vibrant youth. We will guarantee their skills are developed and properly deployed. While many other countries are concerned with aging populations, more than half of the Saudi population is below the age of 25 years. We will take advantage of this demographic dividend by harnessing our youth’s energy and by expanding entrepreneurship and enterprise opportunities. Saudi women are yet another great asset. With over 50 percent of our university graduates being female, we will continue to develop their talents, invest in their productive capabilities and enable them to strengthen their future and contribute to the development of our society and economy. We will also enable those of our people with disabilities to receive the education and job opportunities that will ensure their independence and integration as effective members of society. They will be provided with all the facilities and tools required to put them on the path to commercial success.

so having read that, I would actually support Saudi being on this panel if it does help them reform their own society

smurfjed

10 years ago it was extremely rare to interact with Saudi females, these days it happens daily in hospitals, stores, help desks, meetings etc etc etc.....
They are changing.

ScumLord

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Just an FYI.

This is taken from Saudi's Vision 2030 programme, where they are looking to reduce their dependancy on oil and become a more open society http://vision2030.gov.sa/en/node/8



so having read that, I would actually support Saudi being on this panel if it does help them reform their own society

They are making pretty big efforts to modernise, they're building a whole city from scratch that uses ecologically friendly techniques to build the city so it will use the environment to naturally reduce energy use.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-05/city-light

BrokenArrows

Deleted User wrote: »

A predictable continuation of another fine US foreign policy. First, discredit the UN by financially undermining its work via not paying billions in debt to the UN. Second, then bully it into accepting one of the most heinous regimes on the planet, with arguably the most vile dehumanisation of women's rights (Pakistan and India give it a run for the money, though), because the same régime is a great ally of the great moral protector of the world that is the United States of America. Third, should the UN not be a puppet of the whims of the United States of America, well good old Uncle Sam will never pay its debts to the UN.

Yes but their views go against the whole point of the council.

The councils goal is for men and women to be equal.
Saudai Arabias goal is for women to be inferior to men and to always require a mans permission.

Granted that SA have changed a lot in the last few decades. They now generally graduate university, are allowed to run for government office and can work if granted permission.

Still a long way to go before they are even remotely equal.

ScumLord

BrokenArrows wrote: »

The councils goal is for men and women to be equal.
Saudai Arabias goal is for women to be inferior to men and to always require a mans permission.

That's not what they're saying their goal is. The problem is the top can want to change but they can't just pass a law that makes women equal, it's going to take generations of work to bring about a gradual change. Just like it was in Europe.

Christy42

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

They get to vote in secret. there is nothing to stop a country from revealing afterwards how they voted. Of course you would have to take them at their word because there is no way to confirm if they are telling the truth

There is nothing to stop them revealing how they voted. I feel they should not reveal unless others agree to reveal. Obviously some disagree with me and have revealed how they voted.

It is my opinion on what a secret vote should entail when there are low numbers of voters (as it makes it possible to work out how others voted easier). That is all. I am not proposing that anyone has to live by these rules if they disagree but it is my reasoning as to why we should not demand to know how Ireland voted. I can see the reasoning demand to see the full list though and have the vote not secret at all.

ilkhanid

smurfjed wrote: »

Actually Saudi Arabia is changing, just ask any Saudi woman, but they are changing at their pace.

Their pace is glacial. Up to 1979 there was a slight chance of change. But since then things have gone backwards and the clerical class has got their claws into the country with a vengeance. I doubt that there will be any substantial change in my lifetime, apart from some cosmetic gestures.

ScumLord wrote: »

It's not like europe brought in women's rights all that quickly. Even almost 100 years after women got the vote they are still struggling to get equality. If this was to be the start of women's rights in Saudi we would still have to expect it to take decades for them to catch up to us.

Decades? God bless your optimism! Comparisons with Europe are daft. Even in the 17th century women mixed freely with men at many public events, worked at many trades, appeared on the stage openly displaying their busts...and faces. Elizabeth was a queen in the later 16th century. I can't recall any case even in medieval times where female children were let burn to death, for fear people might see them in their nightwear. Europe had stopped persecuting witches by the end of the 17th century.

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Really nobody should be suprised by this, the US does not care about human rights abuses, as long as you are some way useful to them they don't care what what abuses you have committed, it's nothing new they supported dictators like Pinochet, Saddam Hussien & even defended the right of the Khemer Rouge to have a seat at the UN. This whole foreign policy of "my enemies enemy, is my friend" has totally failed. Saudis are an enemy of Iran that makes them a friend of the US.

Where do you get the notion that the US was behind this decision? The US doesn't decide everything in the world and plenty of other countries are inconsistent and hypocritical on human rights. The sad fact is that the KSA wields a lot of clout all over the world, especially in the Islamic part of it. Money buys influence, and the UN runs on mutual back-scratching. Down the road the KSA will sway the votes in favour of some country getting some UN post in return for this favour. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink and eventually it will be Buggin's turn.

Elmer Blooker

smurfjed wrote: »

Actually Saudi Arabia is changing, just ask any Saudi woman, but they are changing at their pace.

As long as it remains a Theocracy where God is the supreme ruler there will be no change.

The Rape of Lucretia

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

As long as it remains a Theocracy where God is the supreme ruler there will be no change.

True. And as long as you accept religions, then you must accept what is inherent in that religion. If you respect the right of people to be Muslim, then you must respect those same people's right to believe and act according to it. If Saudis believe that women have no souls, and women lack common sense because their minds are deficient, than you must accept their right to believe that and be part of a commission such as the UN one representing their point of view. You do not form a commission that is prejudged against the views of some countries.

The reluctance to clarify how Ireland voted on Saudi's inclusion on the commission is likely because they did indeed vote for it - but wish to avoid the criticism that some less enlightened Irish people would sling their way if it was explicitly known that they did.

On balance, I feel they probably should acknowledge how they voted - but proudly and with confidence in the merit in inclusive dialogue among nations of all views - that is what the UN is for.