Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Cold and Cruel World and W... | We're Never Leaving Iraq, But ... »

Monday, November 26, 2007

Saudi Government Now Says Gang-Rape Victim Caused Crime

posted by on November 26 at 11:36 AM

The Saudi government said yesterday that a gang-rape victim violated Islamic sharia law and brought the crime on herself by meeting with a man who was not her husband or relative. In a statement, the Saudi justice ministry said the victim had an “illegitimate relationship” with a man who was not her husband, and that both “exposed themselves to this heinous crime.”

The Saudi woman was raped repeatedly by seven men and subsequently sentenced to 200 lashes for meeting with a former boyfriend who she had asked to return pictures of her because she was engaged to marry someone else. The two were sitting together in a car when seven men attacked them. Initially, both were sentenced to 90 lashes each for being together in private; however, the girl’s sentence was increased to 200 lashes and six months in jail after she appealed. (The rapists got between two and nine years.)

Perhaps the most outrageous aspect of this story is that no one knew about the rapes (the woman, probably fearing sanctions, did not report the attack) until the woman’s now-husband tipped off government officials, referring to the woman’s meeting with her ex-boyfriend as “my wife’s affair and adultery” despite the fact that the meeting and attack happened before the two were married.

RSS icon Comments

1

The fact that the White House is mum about this isn't surprising, just depressing. Is it because they don't want to tick off their Saudi friends and business partners? Is it because they don't really give a rat's ass about human rights? Is it some of both? Depressing.

Posted by Greg | November 26, 2007 11:46 AM
2

What's everyone acting all suprised about? I'm sure this kind of stuff happens in Islamic countries all the time.

Posted by Hal | November 26, 2007 11:52 AM
3

This persecution is an example of intense misogyny. It's a bright, shining supernova of misogyny. So glaringly, intensely misogynistic that next to this, one wonders how anybody could not be so blinded by it that they could ever detect a hint of misogyny in an American Apparel ad or a box of boob-shaped pasta. We might not have the power to send our armies to the middle east and reshape their culture in our image (learned that the hard way), but we should at least be able to look at things like this horror in Saudi Arabia and come away with some sense of scale.

Posted by elenchos | November 26, 2007 11:57 AM
4

And why aren't we waging war on S.A. right now instead of Iraq?

Posted by Corliss | November 26, 2007 11:57 AM
5

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-y'all!

Posted by Hal | November 26, 2007 12:01 PM
6

The man she was with was raped too.

Posted by Dan Savage | November 26, 2007 12:01 PM
7

She was AKSING for it people!! Damn, she was wearing a barka and that is the HOTTEST thing to wear. Hell, she may as well been laying in the street banging herself with a Ken Ryker dildo in her twat and a Jeff Stryker dildo up her ass.

Posted by Just Me | November 26, 2007 12:27 PM
8

Uhm ... I hate to be kind of religious bigot of sorts, but I think that kind of religion is fucked up.

Makes me question the whole Islam is the religion of peace, and how in it's "truest form" it is a religion of peace etc. etc.

I'm just saying that's all.

I guess also the whole blaming the victim (or victims) is sort of like what the "secret" is all about.

Posted by OR Matt | November 26, 2007 12:30 PM
9

Dan: But he wasn't sentenced to jail and 200 lashes.

Posted by ECB | November 26, 2007 12:33 PM
10

yawn...let me make something up...every sixteen hours an undisclosed rape happens in seattle...yawn...type type...let somebody else comfort, shelter the women

Posted by not in my office | November 26, 2007 12:34 PM
11
Posted by tsm | November 26, 2007 12:54 PM
12

they were both raped and sentence similarly. the extra lashes were for the appeal (and for talking with the press?).

it is a ridiculous law, but -- in this case -- does appear to be applied blindly regarding sex.

Posted by infrequent | November 26, 2007 12:56 PM
13

I have to agree with @3.

Never forget that the Saudi funded al-Qaeda attacked us on 9-11.

To this day, Saudi Arabia still provides more than 90 percent of all money and volunteers for al-Qaeda, and the government of Saudi Arabia provedes 100 percent of the religious fanatic texts that the extremist Wahhabi sect uses to preach hatred of America worldwide - even in the US and UK.

Iraq had nothing to do with it, of course.

Posted by Will in Seattle | November 26, 2007 12:57 PM
14

week4
Saudi Arabia-bad because of this and that. oh and they are friends with the white house.
Iraq-good in comparison to Iran, but inept at running a government
Afganistan-evil because they produce Al queda and produce heroin

Week 5
Israel-good because they are haveing peace talks
Palestine -good because of peace talks
Iran -bad because they get involved with palestine
Afganistan- bad, but close to evil because they still have Al-Queda
Saudi Arabia- Evil- must be abolished as our ally and invaded because they have stupid islamic law.

My point is just like bush we all tally up this and that incident in the middle east, like its the NFL and still it comes down to this. The way they are is the way they will always be and no amount of our getting pissed of about human rights over there is going to change their minds about how they view women.
And that makes all of them crazy. but not unapproachable. I'm sure we still appreciate that deep rooted desert history and culture that our professor tells us is soooo important.

Posted by middle east playoffs | November 26, 2007 1:14 PM
15

@14

I thought Aladan made an excellent film. I enjoyed that thoroughly. Wasn't that genie funny? And I like Arabic numerals ... chemistry and algebra.

Deep rooted desert history and culture? Is that like Dune or something?

Oh and I like oil .... I guess

Posted by OR Matt | November 26, 2007 1:48 PM
16

If one were to read the original CNN story that the newser article is based on, one would find out all sorts of interesting things:

The husband never said “my wife’s affair and adultery”. Newser and CNN said the gov called it "his wife's affair and adultery".

One would also find out that the perps claimed that she was getting naked w/ the other victim at the time of the crime. One might then reasonably conclude that that the statement "someone contacted the woman's husband 'telling him what happened, and about his wife's affair and adultery,'" refers to the "adultery" w/ the other victim, not w/ the rapists, especially since the husband is later quoted as saying "She was not given any chance to prove her innocence or describe how she was a victim of multiple brutal rapes."

I mention this not to in any way mitigate the severity of the sexual assault that occured, nor to diminish the travesty of the court ruling, but only to point out that ECB's original post makes the husband look like an asshole, when in fact it sounds like hie isn't.

What it looks like happened is that somebody told him his fiancee had fucked around on him and when he confronted her she told him about the gang rapes. He wanted the bad guys prosecuted, and the fine, fine Saudi justice system started spooling up.

Later parts of the story talk about how the husband doesn't even believe she committed "adultery" with the other victim, but was forced to meet w/ the other victim.

Posted by Big Sven | November 26, 2007 2:46 PM
17

her sentence was increased from 60 to 200 lashes because she appealed the original sentence. In SA, if you appeal the judges, they can punish you harder just for appealing. The lawyer can also be punished.

At least pretend you are a journalist and do a little research into a story thats been out there for at least a week.

Oh, and if you like, I'll buy you a plane ticket to Riadh so that you can lecture them on how to be a civilized society.

But then again, how does that mesh with your generalized mish mash liberal claptrap moral relativistic garbage that you blather about all the time?

Posted by ecce homo | November 26, 2007 3:08 PM
18

Oh, ecce.

Posted by tsm | November 26, 2007 3:18 PM
19

@8, bigotry should be restricted to things that can't be changed or don't matter. i.e. race is immutable and has no intrinsic effect on behavior or much of anything. Religion is a choice, no different from political affiliation or brand loyalty. Therefor it can be criticized at will without needing to feel bad.

As for Islam being about Peace, thats kind of like asking if Han shot first. Its fucking make believe. It can be anything one wants it to be. The problem is that people assign certainty to their fairy tales and pretend that any change is a violation of their little gods law.

Stubbornness and ignorance should be called as such, even when dressed up as religious enlightenment.

Posted by giffy | November 26, 2007 4:58 PM
20

@17,

More lashes for daring to appeal to the judicial system? Sounds like another day paradise for shameless Rethug
troll Ecce.

With allies like these....

Posted by Mr. X | November 26, 2007 6:26 PM
21

I ain't the liberal moral relativist here.

ECB is.

Posted by ecce homo | November 26, 2007 7:21 PM
22

Oh, ecce.

Posted by tsm | November 26, 2007 9:29 PM
23

Aw, how cute. Ecce doesn't know the definition of moral relativism.

Posted by keshmeshi | November 26, 2007 11:40 PM
24

He sure doesn't keshmeshi, adorable no? I always think he's at his most adorable when he's being an insufferable douche.

Posted by Dono | November 27, 2007 12:28 AM
25

oldz mbkdslyuz hbaiu yiesoa khmlg wcizlmgx txzpmwvyl

Posted by kqrditjn ypbecqxli | December 3, 2007 4:41 AM
26

oldz mbkdslyuz hbaiu yiesoa khmlg wcizlmgx txzpmwvyl

Posted by kqrditjn ypbecqxli | December 3, 2007 4:41 AM
27

bcjlrmqz kavqminc zgowyiksv klezjda kvnzwxprm lwofcv syhckmfi xmntrihuc luysbdah

Posted by edkopvs bdikqst | December 3, 2007 4:42 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).