Attitude Towards Women In Saudi Arabia University Essay Example

In Saudi Arabia, both men and women have a surprisingly wide range of views. It is considered an insult to question the decisions these women are making and their culture. If most Saudi women want to wear a tent and choose not to drive, that should be respected. However, it is important to give them the choice.

Why ban women drivers and empower the religious police, the mutawwa, to scold those who show a patch of hair? In this quote, Kristof appears disconnected from the world, failing to acknowledge his Western upbringing and unfamiliarity with diverse cultures. He shows this in his own article by referring to young women in black abayas as “three giggly black ghosts”.

Kristof’s justification for using the terms “Saudi women” and “repressed” is illogical because he immediately contradicts himself by mentioning the Women in the West. According to his article, in Riyadh, a number of women strongly criticize this argument by stating that Saudi women are the ones who enjoy freedom from sexual harassment, pornography, and objectification for marketing purposes. Kristof claims that it is actually Western women who have been manipulated into becoming objects controlled by men. He then questions whether the alleged oppression of Western women is as severe as Saudi women portray it to be.

While it may appear that women in Saudi Arabia lack the freedom to engage in a variety of pursuits like their Western counterparts, a closer examination of the facts reveals that Saudi women make deliberate choices and take intentional actions. Their society imposes restrictions on the range of activities they can partake in. To individuals from the West, Saudi Arabia may seem peculiar and unusual. Adjusting and assimilating into their lifestyle would prove challenging.

The cultural practice of Saudi women concealing a new blouse under their black abayas may seem puzzling. However, this custom is deeply rooted in their upbringing and beliefs regarding self-respect and modesty. While some women in Saudi Arabia accept and embrace this tradition, others may yearn for greater freedom and the ability to live as Western women do. However, due to the laws and traditions in place, they adhere to these customs in order to avoid any potential repercussions.

The article by Kristof implies that he does not understand why Saudi women find joy and excitement in alluring and attractive clothing, even though they have to hide it beneath their cloaks. The truth is that women do not dress to please men, including Saudi women. Tracy Quan, in her response titled “Who’s Repressed?”, points out that educated American men are often ignorant about fashion – its history, theory, and even its practice. This is a burden that fashionable urban women have learned to bear.

Thank goodness we don’t actually dress for them! Women regularly dress for other women – a fact that Kristof appears to overlook, despite men complaining about this for generations. It is widely believed that the language Kristof uses in his essay is not only insulting to Saudi women but women in general. His criticisms of Saudi women, including referring to them as “giggly black ghosts” and consistently questioning their choices within their own culture, are viewed as a means of justifying further attacks that can have troubling consequences (Deleon 4).

It is common for laws and traditions to evolve with time. The laws and customs in America resemble those seen elsewhere globally. It is logical to comprehend that if Saudi women desired to dress attractively for others, they would not buy fashionable clothing only to hide it beneath their abayas. The act of dressing up should be solely about pleasing oneself, with no obligation to please anyone else. If an individual opts to wear a miniskirt but then conceals it under an abaya, there is nothing inherently incorrect about this choice. It could be influenced by personal preference or religious convictions.

If three Saudi women are seen peacefully conversing about clothing, would they always be perceived as “giggly black ghosts?” The perception depends on one’s upbringing, societal norms, traditions, and cultures. Is it truly uncommon to observe Saudi women and automatically assume they are oppressed? Saudi women have the freedom to make choices within the parameters of their culture, which can be advantageous at times. However, this does not necessarily imply that they feel repressed. At least not in their own perception.

Saul’s Vocation Story Sample

This subdivision is anyting but a simple narrative of how Saul was knocked off his Equus caballus and converted. Our popular spiritual imaginativeness and art to the contrary notwithstanding. this subdivision and its analogues in 22:1-6 and 26:9-18 nowhere say that he was siting a Equus caballus. Now do these texts speaks of Saul’s transition as if he were the most deplorable evildoer antiquity sired. This subdivision is a “vocation” narrative. We will mine the rich vena of this career narrative on three degrees: ( 1 ) Saul as tormentor ; ( 2 ) Saul’s career ; ( 3 ) Luke’s purposes and the figure of Saul.

Saul as Persecutor

From what Luke says in Acts it is patent that Saul is non a private tormentor ; he represents official Judaism. This factor is present in all three histories of Sauls’call: 9:1-3. 22:4-5. 19 ; 26:9-11.

Saul’s Vocation

Saul would ne’er hold changed from amazing tormentor of the Lord’s adherents to tireless missional to the heathens unless the Lord had called him. In what have taken more clip than the three histories of Acts lead us to believe. Saul lets the Lord’s call to him drop into and under his tormentor tegument.

The narrative of Saul tormentor edifies Luke’s community: God does continue his church from persecution ; encouragement is offered to those who suffer persecution like that directed by and enfleshed in Saul.

Luke’s Intentions and the Figure of Paul

A questio may assist us peer into Luke’s treble purpose in this subdivision:Why does Luke hold three histories of Paul’s name? First. by giving cherished infinite to three histories of Paul’s call. Luke spotlights the significance of Paul as cardinal points in his narrative. In chapter 9 the call of the missional to the heathens par excellence—Paul—is introduced when the Spirit is on the threshold of traveling the misson to the heathens ( see 10:1-48 ) . In chapters 22 and 26 the call of Paul is introduced to demo that Paul and Christianity are non deserters from Judaism ; both Jews and Romans should take careful note that Christianity fulfills the promises God gave to Judaism. Second. Luke highlights the fact that the mission to the heathens was non due to human impulse ; God willed it in fulfilment of his promises. This fulfilment is embodied in the really individual of Paul. Finally. Luke’s purpose is to provide ammo for his communities. some of which have been founded by Paul and are under onslaught from Jews because of their religion. Luke tells them that through Paul. one time an observant Pharisee and unmerciful tormentor of the church. they stand in continuity with Judaism. Like Paul they are non deserters from Judaism. Like Paul. they have their eyes opened by God to see that Judaism is fulfilled in Jesus.


Damascus hovered witin sight. It was about noontime. or at least the other histories so inform us ( 22:6 ; 26:13 ) . A “light from heaven all of a sudden shone round about him. ” “More brilliant that the beams of the sun” is the description offered in 26:13. Even his comrades were affected by it. for “all fell to the ground” ( 26:14 ) . What sort of visible radiation was it? We know from the Gospels how the intercession of celestial powers is really often accompanied by a cryptic visible radiation. . this visible radiation is a symbol. a contemplation of that visible radiation which in linguistic communication of the Bible is like the cryptic glorification of God.

A voice addresses the adult male prone on the land: “Saul. Saul. why do you oppress me? ” These words are besides found in the parallel transitions ; and in verse 26:14 it is noted expressly that the voice made usage of the Hebrew lingua. We can pull this decision from the name of Saul. by which he was addressed. The self-revealing Lord radius in his female parent lingua. which was basically more familiar to Paul thank Greek. although he was Hellenic in beginning.

For it is Jesus who speaks in this manner. Jesus the Risen and Transfigured One. And we take fro granted that Saul saw the individual of Jesus. . it was accordingly a face-to-face brush which Saul experienced. one which was vouchsafe merely to him and non to his comrades. These comrades saw no 1. eventhough htey were surrounded by an incomprehensible visible radiation ( 26:13 ) .

“Who are you. Lord? ” Saul retorts. In all three narrations of the transition. a inquiry followed by another inquiry in reply to the first is the manner in which the conversation is carried out. We do non cognize for certain whether earlier Paul had personally made the aquaintance of Jesus.

But we know that after this incident. Paul now belongs to his kyrios. his Lord. for whom he was called. He besides had travelled to Damascus. armed with the warrants of the high priest. to convey back to Jerusalem the adherents of Jesus. is himself siezed by the superior power of God and returns. led by his comrades. as a captive of Christ. to the metropolis he had sought out in order to follow out the waies of the voice.


The enigma behind the action of grace is made ocular and in writing. As it was the transfigured Christ himself who had initiated the wrok of transition. so now he entrusts its completion to the church.

Ananias experriences daze at the intelligence of the undertaking which is b eing pushs upon him. By his expostulation. the work of grace—which had to be perfected harmonizing to God ; s decree—appears now in all its lucidity for the first clip. What appears unthinkable and impossible to human ground can be brought to go through by the freely granted love and the benign Providence of God. The apostle is chosen without virtue. Yet anyone who is caught up in the munificence of godly grace is called by and likewise enabled to prophesy the salvific will of God strictly and convincingly—as we learn from Paul’s letters.

What is so curious about God’s pick?

Salu will be “a chosen instrument. ” He was chosen no because of his endowments. but because of the concern of redemption. He must be an embassador for the “Lord. ” He must go a informant in the same manner as the others were and bear testimony as they did. And he was being readied for this by being commissioned as were the 12. His undertakings every bit were as theirs was that of proclaiming the Risen One.

He will endure for the interest of Christ. This is a alone jurisprudence of discipleship in Christ so contrary to swerve human esthesia. Christ himself underwent agonies of his passion.


There is all of Christianity in what the Risen Jesus said to Paul: “Go into the metropolis. and you will be told what to make. ” Up to this minute Paul had been making what he liked. what he thought best. what his will dictated. From this clip frontward. he would be told what to so. Tha Christian is a adult male who has ceased to make what he wants to make and who has begun to make what Christ wants him to make.

Verse 14 is a drumhead non merely of the life of Paul but besides of the Christian life. there are three points in it. ( 1 ) to cognize the will of God. It is the first purpose of the Christian to cognize God’s will and obey it. ( 2 ) To see the Just One. It is the purpose of the Christian to walk daily in the presence of the risen Lord. ( 3 ) To hear God’s voice. It was said of a great sermonizer that in his sermon he paused of all time and once more as if listening for a voice. The Christian is of all time listening for the voice of God above the voices of the universe to state him where to travel and what to make.


Does the narrative of Saul’s call tell us anything about our call to be Christians?


Karris. Robert. J. . Invitation to Acts: A Comentary on the Acts of the Apostles with Complete Text from the Jerusalem Bible. New York: Image Books. 1978.

Barcklay. William. The Acts of the Apostles Revised Edition. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. 1976.

Kurzinger. Josef. The Acts of the Apostles. volume 1. London: Nathan birnbaums and Oates. 1969.

Krodel. Gerhard. Proclamation Commentaries. Philadeplhia. Pensylvania: Fortress Press. 1981.

Paton. Jeff. The Conversion of Paul. Free Grace or Forced Grace?

Savage Vs Civilized Sample

By definition. a barbarian is person who is natural or of nature. Today’s definition of a barbarian is besides any individual. group or behavior that is distinguishable from civilisation. In the novel. Robinson Crusoe. the character Friday does non suit this description. Defoe describes Friday. non in footings of a barbarian but in European footings. Clearly Friday is non European. yet his characteristics are non consistent with the description of barbarian. Throughout the novel. Crusoe attempts to educate Friday. In making so. Crusoe shows us his ain negative traits and the darker side of his ain personality which makes us oppugn the thought of “civilized” being better than “savage” . Friday is a merchandise of the civilisation that surrounds him where he comes from. His visual aspect. behavior and beliefs are that of all the others in his folk. Yet. he seems non to be barbarian in any manner. Defoe describes Friday non being barbarian or ugly but more softened like a European. “And yet he had all the sugariness and softness of an European” ( Defoe 219 ) . Except for his cannibalism. Defoe does non picture Friday as being savage-like. Crusoe preconceives an thought of a barbarian. but it is non evident in Friday.

When they foremost meet. Friday uses gestural linguistic communication to pass on with Crusoe. which is an indicant that Friday is civilized to some grade. He is speedy to larn Crusoe’s linguistic communication and tidal bore to larn more. This clearly shows that Friday is more civilized than what Crusoe thinks of as barbarian. particularly by the eighteenth century criterions. It is evident that Friday has some spiritual beliefs. which are besides a mark of civilisation. When Crusoe saves him from those who want to devour him. Friday is highly thankful and offers himself as an ageless retainer to Crusoe. This shows that he has a sense of higher order. Subsequently. when Crusoe teaches Friday English. they have a treatment about God and Friday’s God Benamukee. Friday inquiries Crusoe about the Satan and why Crusoe’s of all time powerful God did non merely kill the Satan. ( Defoe 220-230 ) This inquiry shows Friday’s openness and willingness to encompass a new faith every bit good as his mind. Crusoe does non hold an reply for Friday. Later. Crusoe comments that Friday is larning Christianity so good that he may be better than him ( Defoe 233 ) .

Religion is besides a mark of civilisation. Friday is wholly loyal to Crusoe. an honorable human feature. After a piece Crusoe is cognizant of this but still does non swear him. He thinks Friday will go forth the island and may try to kill and eat him. He shows Crusoe that he is a wholly loyal retainer. “for ne’er Man has a more faithful. loving. sincere retainer. than Friday was to me without passions. moroseness or designs. absolutely oblig’d and engag’d ; his very fondnesss were ty’d to me. like those of a kid to a male parent ; ” ( Defoe 222 ) . Later. a group of indigens land on the island with three canoes and captives. Crusoe is afraid that Friday may non be loyal to him. Friday says. “Me dice. when you bid decease. Master” ( Defoe 241 ) . This reveals Fridays complete trueness to Crusoe. Friday’s simplistic and honest attack to life goes against Crusoe’s beliefs of humanity. Bing able to larn so rapidly. it is apparent that Friday is non every bit crude as Defoe reveals. During three old ages they are together. Friday teaches Crusoe many things that are utile. Friday explains the currents environing the island. He tells Crusoe that the current goes one manner in the forenoon and another in the afternoon. ( Defoe 227 ) .

This account clearly shows that Friday is knowing in pilotage around this island. Friday. explains to Crusoe about the cannibalism of his folk. In explicating this to Crusoe. Friday discloses that cannibalism is a ritual they merely perform on enemies of other folks. This ritual by his folk is merely one little portion of Friday’s former tribal imposts. This apprehension of his environing environment shows us that Friday is non a true barbarian but knows much more of the universe than Crusoe believes. Friday shows an array of emotions. During a trip to the top of Crusoe’s hill overlooking the island. Friday sees a position of his fatherland for the first clip since geting on Crusoe’s island. He jumps and dances with joy at seeing his state. ( Defoe 235 )

In another case. Friday discovers that one of the three captives is his male parent. “how Friday kiss’d him. embrac’d him. hugg’d him. cry’d. laugh’d. hollow’d. jump’d about. danc’d” ( Defoe 247 ) He shows enormous elation and felicity at seeing his male parent. These Acts of the Apostless of love and felicity are the emotions of a lovingness. compassionate adult male which is a really desirable trait of a human being. Friday comes from a really crude folk. Defoe depicts Friday with features of a civilised adult male. Friday is spiritual. quick to larn. emotional. and loyal. These are all really existent and honest qualities of a civilized individual. This comparing of Friday’s honestness and artlessness non tainted by civilisation are qualities that are beyond Crusoe. It seems that civilisation is non what it should be and a “savage” has more good qualities than those that a civilised adult male should hold.

Plants Cited

Defoe. Daniel. Robinson Crusoe. 1719. Ed. Evan R. Davis. Peterborough: Broadview. 2010. Print

error: Content is protected !!