Trouser-wearing Sudanese woman escapes the lash for indecency

dlofnep

Trouser-wearing Sudanese woman escapes the lash for indecency

Lubna Hussein found guilty and fined as protesters clash outside Khartoum court over 'unconstitutional' decision

A Sudanese woman has been spared the lash todaybut found guilty of indecency – for wearing trousers.

A judge at a Khartoum court ruled that Lubna Hussein should be fined 500 Sudanese pounds (£127) rather than lashed 40 times, which had been threatened under Sudan's Islamic decency regulations.

"She was found guilty but we know she is not guilty," Yasser Arman, an official who is a senior member of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement, told Reuters.

Full story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/07/sudanese-woman-escapes-lash-trousers

How lucky for her - She only got a fine, for wearing pants. Democracy is running wild in Sudan. What an arse-backwards, cesspool.

dlofnep

She's now been jailed for a month for refusing to pay the fine. Fair play to her!


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8241894.stm

Dozen Wicked Words

Apparently the Union of Sudanese Journalists say she has been freed after one day. It seems insane that trousers are considered indecent, I suppose they consider seeing the shape of the leg is indecent?

Nehaxak

No, it's the point she was making of even to dare express any idea, however simplistic in nature (ie., a woman wearing trousers), that women are equal to men in their society.

dlofnep

Nehaxak wrote: »

No, it's the point she was making of even to dare express any idea, however simplistic in nature (ie., a woman wearing trousers), that women are equal to men in their society.

Yup, nail on the button. Terrible that women have to live in such a terribly inequal society these days. Threatened to 40 lashes of a whip for wearing trousers is absolute backwards madness, no matter what way you look at it.

Salvelinus

Wow, what an amazing country. To be such a peaceful lawless place with no death and suffering that you can get worked up about trousers on the wimmin. Must send her a teddy bear.

Fratton Fred

Salvelinus wrote: »

Wow, what an amazing country. To be such a peaceful lawless place with no death and suffering that you can get worked up about trousers on the wimmin. Must send her a teddy bear.

Good idea, but for pete's sake don't call it Mohammed.

My local girls school nearly ended up in front of the european court for human rights because it refused to let girls wear trousers. the Muslim girls insisted that wearing trousers was part of their culture.

Sudanese muslims are obviously different.

wes

This is the exact same shower that until very recently was engaged in Genocide against the people of Darfur, so I can't say I am surprised by there frankly appaling behaviour here. At least there President is a wanted man and hopefully he will be sent to the Hague sooner or later.

Manic Moran

Nehaxak wrote: »

No, it's the point she was making of even to dare express any idea, however simplistic in nature (ie., a woman wearing trousers), that women are equal to men in their society.

Try an experiment. Send a guy jogging around Stephen's Green on a hot day. Have him wearing trainers, socks, and shorts. See how long it takes before he attains Garda attention.

Have a woman go jogging around St Stephen's Green on a similarly hot day. Have her wearing trainers, socks and shorts. See how long it takes before she receives Garda attention.

Standards of decency and indecency vary wildly. There are a number of places which think that Irish standards of legal indecency are ridiculously prudish.

NTM

DoireNod

It's amazing that such medieval measures are still in existence in places around the world.

Nehaxak

Manic Moran wrote: »

Try an experiment. Send a guy jogging around Stephen's Green on a hot day. Have him wearing trainers, socks, and shorts. See how long it takes before he attains Garda attention.

Have a woman go jogging around St Stephen's Green on a similarly hot day. Have her wearing trainers, socks and shorts. See how long it takes before she receives Garda attention.

Standards of decency and indecency vary wildly. There are a number of places which think that Irish standards of legal indecency are ridiculously prudish.

NTM

Fair bit of a difference though, it's one thing a woman getting lashed or going to prison for wearing trousers and quiet another for a woman to go jogging around Stephens Green topless.
I'm sure most of the hot blooded males in Dublin would have absolutely no problem at all with it though
If more women in Dublin went around topless, it wouldn't take long for it to become accepted as a norm (8 or 9 minutes maybe at most) - so with that I invite all ladies to henceforth stand up for their absolute right to go around topless in Dublin as men are allowed too. I hear it's going to be a lovely day tomorrow so no time like the present, get your kit off for the lads, tomorrow is officially now declared womens right to be topless day.

Manic Moran

Fair bit of a difference though, it's one thing a woman getting lashed or going to prison for wearing trousers and quiet another for a woman to go jogging around Stephens Green topless.

You're missing the point. A woman going jogging around Stephen's Green can theoretically result in a 500E fine, and six months in jail under either Sec 18 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1935, or Sec 5 Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994. You consider wearing trousers not to be indecent. Sudanese disagree and can send people to prison for it. Irish people consider topless females to be indecent and can send people to prison for it. Brazilians or South Africans may disagree. You can have your opinion, but bear in mind that it's only one perspective.

However, I do agree with the rest of your post, and strongly encourage it.

NTM

Cannibal Ox

She was released after journo's paid her fine. Fair play to her, brave woman.

Nehaxak

Ten other women arrested along with al-Hussein have already been whipped for their offence.
...

Last year nearly 43,000 women were detained for indecent clothing offences in Khartoum region, according to al-Hussein's supporters.

Bloody hell ! :eek:

tallus

It seems to me that the real issue at hand is that women are classed as lower than men in some in some countries, and it wouldn't matter if she was flying a kite, the fact that she has had the gall to deviate from what is acceptable under normal circumstances that has landed her in trouble.
It's laughable that she was actually covering up and still ended up in trouble.

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

Democracy is running wild in Sudan. What an arse-backwards, cesspool.

DoireNod wrote: »

It's amazing that such medieval measures are still in existence in places around the world.

You mean like the death penalty for giving a dying man a drink of water?

dlofnep

prinz wrote: »

You mean like the death penalty for giving a dying man a drink of water?

?

rasper

Is it actually illegal then in Ireland for a woman to sunbathe topless in say St Stephens green and illegal to breastfeed a child, I'm highly surprised if someone could be charged with such an offence

rasper

http://193.178.1.79/1935/en/act/pub/0006/sec0018.html


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1994/en/act/pub/0002/sec0005.html

To answer my own question neither of those two pieces of legislation state anything of the sort and doubt very much that a woman could be prosecuted for exposing her chest successfully or not using either of them, never mind topless bathing or child feeding

getz

it is illegal in italy for a prostitute to be called mary