Segregating the sexes

[gturner]

A little background first.

Society has to keep on top of the hoodlums (Muldoons spelled backwards accurately enough for newspaper readers) or risk collapse. Some countries are better at maintaining order than others. North Korea, for example, is all about social order.

A North Korean factory worker has been executed by firing squad for sneaking news out of the country on his illicit mobile phone, Seoul-based radio said today.

The armaments factory worker was accused of divulging the price of rice and other information on living conditions to a friend who had defected to South Korea years ago, Open radio for North Korea reported.

The man, surnamed Chong, made calls to the defector using an illegal Chinese mobile phone, according to an unnamed North Korean security agency official cited by the report.

The execution took place by firing squad in late January in Hamhung, according to Open Radio for North Korea. The station broadcasts into North Korea, which tightly controls news.

Guardian link

That he worked in an armaments factory is insignificant, since North Korea doesn't have any other kind of factory.

What matters is that he passed along the price of rice, a state secret. A firing squad is quick and fitting justice for such loose-lipped miscreants. If I was in North Korea, you could bet I'd think twice before passing along the price of rice.

And now on to the women in Saudi Arabia and our poll question:

... an ultra-conservative cleric issued a fatwa concluding that people who oppose segregating Saudi men and women should be killed.

<snip>

Last week, Sheik Abdul Rahman al-Barrak issued his infamous fatwa threatening death to those who advocate the mixing of the sexes, presumably including the king, in response to what conservatives see as a collapse of moral order in the kingdom. The liberal blogosphere promptly savaged the sheik. Ahmed al-Omran called him a "caveman," and Eman al-Nafjan denounced him as the "last living member of the traditional, misogynist ... rat pack of sheikhdom."

But even she acknowledged that 27 other reactionary sheiks signed a petition supporting his view. And when the government blocked his Web site due to the incendiary nature of his ruling, al-Barrak simply stole a page from the liberal bloggers' rulebook and popped up on another site.

Fox News story

So, if you answered the poll question with "No, I don't oppose the mixing of the sexes," well, IT MUST SUCK TO BE YOU, fatwa breath!

 

[Vulcan Princess]

Last time I checked, the mixing of the sexes was essential to the perpetuation of humanity... (Unless they've perfected parthenogenesis and neglected to tell me about it.)

 

[gturner]

They're Saudis. They can hire foreign workers to breed for them.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Wait... what?

 

[scotpens]

So the Saudis treat the female half of their population the way blacks were treated in the American South under the old Jim Crow system. It's a sovereign country, and they can run it however they want. Any momentum for change will have to come from within their own society.

However, that doesn't mean we have to support them by buying their oil. One more reason to move toward less dependence on foreign energy sources.

On a somewhat related note, I've started a thread on the subject of "Should the Oscars be Gender Neutral?"

 

[gturner]

So you don't support keeping the sexes segregated? I believe there might be a fatwa on your head!

 

[Rii]

North Korean traffic chick - or possibly robot - has her eye on you.

 

[CaptainStoner]

This thread makes no sense.

 

[Tan Ru]

This thread makes no sense.

Needs more weed.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Last time I checked, the mixing of the sexes was essential to the perpetuation of humanity... (Unless they've perfected parthenogenesis and neglected to tell me about it.)

You are joking, but really, there's often something vaguely homoerotic about these ultra-conservative religious mysoginists, isn't there?

 

[John Picard]

 

[Alidar Jarok]

gturner, I know logic isn't the art it once was, but this isn't even effective rhetoric either. It's just a confusing mishmash of stories. I'd be happy to discuss one or the other or discuss the topic in the thread title instead. But I can't discuss all three at once. It makes for a bloated, confusing mess of a thread (similar to what your original post is).

 

[gturner]

That's the point. People who advocate death for such things are confusing, their justifications are confusing, their whole world view is confusing. One thing is tied to another in strained ways to justify their absurd positions.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

People who put unrelated stories together are confusing too. I'd argue that anyone supporting the death penalty has a confused view point too, but most wouldn't agree. In these two stories, they're advocating the death penalty for different reasons.

And that still has nothing to do with your poll. Don't try to discuss three things in one thread, split them up.

 

[John Picard]

People who put unrelated stories together are confusing too. I'd argue that anyone supporting the death penalty has a confused view point too, but most wouldn't agree. In these two stories, they're advocating the death penalty for different reasons.

And that still has nothing to do with your poll. Don't try to discuss three things in one thread, split them up.

Don't blame me, I voted for Perot.