[Pants-of-dog]

I know very little of ancient societies outside of Europe and the Americas, but based on my extensive reading of historical fiction, I would go with ancient Rome.

Women were property with no rights at all, if I recall correctly.

[Zamuel]

The topic title says it all, really. Are there any historical societies/nations/lands - or particular historical periods within them - that stand out to you as being extremely oppressive towards women even beyond the usual?

I'm Surprised no one even mentioned China, Japan, etc. They're STILL trying to wipe out the barbaric traditions in remote / rural area's.

Zam

[Drlee]

Modern Saudi Arabia, of course, can be there any other options?

+1

This is pretty close to correct. One could make a case for some ancient civilizations but modern Saudi Arabia stands out because it stands condemned by its close ties to more enlightened societies. Further it attempts to export this particular flavor of belief.

It is a travesty that the US has any relations with it at all.

[Dagoth Ur]

It says more about the West that supports them than it does about themselves..

[Drlee]

It says more about the West that supports them than it does about themselves..

I said that we should not support them. It is them what did the crime gov.

[Dagoth Ur]

Which they are only capable because of the force of US power. Blaming the Saudis is like blaming your own hand.

[Drlee]

Which they are only capable because of the force of US power. Blaming the Saudis is like blaming your own hand.

Nonsense. There is not the slightest opposition to Saudi Arabia in the region. If anything it is driving the radical Islam train. It would do just fine without us. And I would like to see that.

[Thunderhawk]

Nonsense. There is not the slightest opposition to Saudi Arabia in the region.

Iran.
Plus a large part of the populations of Bahrain and Yemen, as well as fringe Wahhabi who think house Saud has strayed from their alliance with the Wahhabis.
Seems to me there is notable opposition to Saudi Arabia in the region, its just that most of them are weak or contained.

[Drlee]

I was indulging in a bit of hyperbole. Suffice it to say that there is little significant opposition to SA. Clearly Iran's lukewarm opposition to the House of Saud has more to do with its alignment with the west than its behavior. More particularly though SA's oppressive behavior is NOT the source of what little opposition there is.

[Igor Antunov]

Girls were just chillaxing at home being totally in charge and men had it worst because they were sacrificed to War <- Igor's serious view of the past.

What are you on about? Calm down. Social Justice can wait, this is a history thread.

I think there is an interesting battle going on right now in Pakistan(forget Saudi Arabia, that place is beyond medieval).

Top Pakistani religious body rules women's protection law 'un-Islamic'
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakis ... SKCN0W51O9

Basically it is a country of multiple ruling factions. One seeks to maintain medievalism, the other seeks to modernize. Neither is strong enough to define the law of the land 100%, across the board. Pakistan is in constant flux, dependent on regional variations also.

Overall the situation down south in India is worse, but mainly because that is a massive demographic with very weak rule of law across the board and far more acute poverty on a larger scale.

[fuser]

This "top" religious body is called "Council of Islamic Ideology", the scary part is that its a constitutional body whose job is to advise government in making new laws or modifying existing one. The good part is that government is not bound to follow its advise. They have recommended many crazy things in past which will get reported in media but never the fact that government didn't followed those advises. But I guess there is no sensationalism in second part of the story.

And as per things being worse down south (for whatever bs reasons you just made up), you just know nothing of the region as you have been told before and India is not automatically worse just because its a rival of China (Yes, this is the real factor behind your reasoning).

Pakistan is a good warning in the region for why not to dabble with religious theocracy although its not as bad as sensationalist journalism will like to portray it but nevertheless its a good warning, after all it used to be one of the most progressive and "the" most economically prosperous region of British India.

[Igor Antunov]

India is worse by virtue of having 8x the population of Pakistan, and being just as poor and loosely governed. Policies don't matter here. Step one is applying them effectively. Both Pak/Ind failed miserably in that regard.

[fuser]

Policies don't matter? Really?

Yes, they do. When you prioritize army over everything else you end up with high rate of infant mortality much lesser literacy rates (Because you are not spending on education and health) even when your poverty rate is slightly less, making long term future bleaker, in nutshell, yes policies do matter.

[Igor Antunov]

Policies don't matter here.

Even if India had a one child policy when it needed it most, like its larger next door neighbor, there is no way it could have implemented it effectively. So that policy would have fallen on the wayside. Even if India had a national infrastructure policy to modernize its rail and roads (and I believe it actually did), it doesn't count for shit because corruption and misappropriation is so high, nothing ever gets built properly. Once again, policy doesn't matter here.

What India (and Pakistan) need, is an overhaul of their political systems, before they can embark on meaningful policy decisions. India's current economic growth is completely indirect and random, demographic issues will continue to pile up until the country implodes. Same can be said of Pakistan. Baby factories. Both of the populations are very young overall and poor. A terrible situation all around. And India's caste system is not going away any time soon. Neither is the role of mothers and women, this is still the society that sells its daughters off to old men for the highest dowry.

[fuser]

So you ignored everything (facts rather than your theoreticals) I said and went for China great, its great talking to you Igor as always.

[Drlee]

I think a distinction can be made in the case of India. Though its system of marriage and caste is not to the western ideal, it is not particularly oppressive for the majority of Indians. There has to be room in any serious discussion for cultural differences without evaluating all of them in the glaring light of Sweden.

The official policies in India are protective to a great degree and clearly women have "it" infinitely better there than in many of the majority Islamic countries.

[Igor Antunov]

I beg to differ. Treatment of women in India is appalling relative to the situation in Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Kuwait or UAE.

[The Immortal Goon]

There were periods in Rome's history when women didn't have names. They would just take on the female versions of their father's name, and then when they got married change it to the female version of their husband's name. To not even have a name, let alone rights, is pretty intense.

But we can do worse.

China was bad in spots too.

Various parts of pre-Islamic Africa practiced all kinds of mutilations and flesh-pulling of women that don't happen so much any more.

Though, of course, it's hardly surprising that there's a chorus of people saying, "Saudi Arabia! Women can't drive there!" As if that's literally the worst thing that someone could do in history. For all the problems with women in Islam, and there are many, they at least have some protections and rights. There were plenty of civilizations where they had virtually none.

[fuser]

Really Kuwait, UAE?

Of course there are numerous problems in India and position of women in Indian society leaves much to be desired, its still basically a peasant country (regardless of middle class trying to pretend otherwise) and frankly peasantry does tends to be culturally backwards but let's not jump the gun here like Igor who obviously does knows nothing about the region he is trying to play expert. Plus India is a large place with much regional variances, rural Haryana is one of the worst places to be a Women while Kerla is on par with most developed countries.

The whole of South Asia including Pakistan and Bangladesh are better than all the countries Igor has listed (except Turkey) in terms of position of women and that while being economically poorer. Its beyond ridiculous to compare India with countries who were in 21st century fighting for voting rights for women and countries where women are by law required to ask their male "guardians" before taking many decisions for themselves but let not reality come in your way, Igor as always.

[Ganeshas Rat]

Though, of course, it's hardly surprising that there's a chorus of people saying, "Saudi Arabia! Women can't drive there!" As if that's literally the worst thing that someone could do in history. For all the problems with women in Islam, and there are many, they at least have some protections and rights. There were plenty of civilizations where they had virtually none.

Saudi Arabia? Women can't drive here. Women can't go street here. Women can't dress anything except the ugly black coat. And they can be prisoned or stoned to death as the penalty for their rape.

Of course, it has nothing with the US. I think, the common opinion that Saudi has any ally relations with the US is absolutely opposite to the real state of things. Who created Saudi Arabia? Who controls all the oil exports and all the trade? Who rules all the sectors from transport to finances? For whom Lawrence of Arabia worked? CIA you say?

This shame of Saudi Arabia is defnitely connected with the West. Only the US is the another part of the west, the part that fights against this darkness.