Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Former friend with chequered past about to marry Saudi muslim...

162 replies

BelleDameSansMerci · 31/01/2010 18:16

...and I am genuinely concerned that she doesn't necessarily have the temperament for monogamy. AIBU to be so worried or should I just keep my beak out?

I should state that although I am not religious I do have a lot of respect for the Muslim faith and my concern is not that she has converted, etc, but that she will find it hard to live according to Muslim law in Saudi.

Background - we were close friends approx 9 years ago when she moved to Bahrain. She married English chap based out there. I went to wedding, etc. She was quickly unhappy and the marriage ended. She has since floated about from man to man and has now become engaged to a Saudi Muslim and is fully covered, etc.

She has always wanted a man who will provide for her financially so she doesn't have to work and is not great at taking responsibility for her actions. So, on the one hand this may be ideal for her but, on the other, I am very worried that her overly romantic streak and desire to be desired and adored by new men may prove disastrous if she is living in Saudi.

OP posts:
mumoverseas · 02/02/2010 12:26

bonnyb1, sadly what your friend has described is standard practice here. A few times we've been invited to iftar (meal after sunset during ramadan)at my DH's Saudi colleagues house. Quite a few of the men from the office went but none of the wives were brave enough, except me. It was as you described. The men went off to a huge marquee in the garden while I went and joined the ladies of the house (mother, sisters and aunts of the work colleage) on the back terrace. At sunset we ate dates and drank coffee and tea whilst the men ate in the main dining room in the house and then when they had finished, we went in and ate what was left. (thankfully no sheeps eyes contrary to popular rumours!)

Although I'd never met these women before they welcomed myself and my daughter then aged 1 into their house and were lovely. Communication with the head lady of the house was difficult as she spoke little english and my arabic was rubbish then but they were clearly very pleased that I had made the effort to learn. They have often asked after me since and when my DS was born last year their family (very very highly 'wasta'd' important family in Riyadh) sent a HUGE bouquet of flowers to the hospital.

Of course I found it very odd and a bit chauvanistic (sp?) that us women had to wait for the skanky leftovers (as my teenage daughter would say) but that is their culture and their tradition and who am I to criticise.

sarah293 · 02/02/2010 12:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

bonnyb1 · 02/02/2010 12:38

hmm 'culture' is debatable - a country that stones women to death for witchcraft and 'adultery' aka rape uses 'culture' as a valid reason to condone female apartheid.

mumoverseas · 02/02/2010 14:12

I'm a bit shite on my history but didn't us christians/brits used to burn and drown witches though?

bonnyb1 · 02/02/2010 14:45

not in the last 200 or so years.......

BelleDameSansMerci · 02/02/2010 18:08

And, to be strictly accurate, most witches in England were hanged. The burning thing was more of a Scottish/Continental trend.

I'm making light of this but my friend also used to be very into tarot cards/spells/etc. I can only hope that she must completely converted and that her new husband does know all about her past.

I think she has cancelled her Facebook account as other mutual friends can no longer see her either.

OP posts:
AnyFucker · 02/02/2010 19:10

some witches are still alive and well...

Tryharder · 02/02/2010 21:12

OP, A lot of doom and gloom on here but look on the bright side. Presumably your friend's DH is awash with oil money so your friend will now be able to fly into the UK first class, stay at the Ritz and amuse herself with her platinum Amex in Harrods.

BelleDameSansMerci · 02/02/2010 21:29

AF you know me too well already!

Tryharder she always wanted that kind of lifestyle so you may be right. I hope she remembers me as she stalks past the Louis Vuitton counter.

OP posts:
AnyFucker · 02/02/2010 21:45

I meant myself belle...but if the cap fits...

BelleDameSansMerci · 02/02/2010 21:52

And that got me wondering what a witch's hat is called. this apparently.

OP posts:
AnyFucker · 02/02/2010 21:54

you beat me to the googling

Judy1234 · 02/02/2010 23:54

It might help women's weight. Women need to eat less than men but when they marry they eat as much and pile on the pounds. If they only got left overs itm ight keep them slimmer... but more seriously I am sure the Saudis will get to where we are in due course. They just need a stronger feminist movement. I was in Iran 2 weeks ago. I met a lot of professional women. They don't seem quite so bad but still silly laws and clothing rules. I see more women with their face covered 5 minutes from my house in 10 minutes than I saw ever in Iran. Mind you that's just the face thing.

sarah293 · 03/02/2010 08:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

crazycrazy · 03/02/2010 09:46

If I only got DH's leftovers I'd starve

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 03/02/2010 12:52

Come on, if this situation was, say, all black people in town have to wait until all white people in town have finished in sainsburys before they go in and buy from the leftovers, everyone would be up in arms. No matter what the "culture" is that's obviously wrong, and it's the same in this case IMO.

I sometimes wonder if people think that culture is some mysterious veil that just covers up human rights offences and makes everything ok. There is no mystery about misogyny, it's as old as the hills and perfectly obvious. And wrong.

sarah293 · 03/02/2010 13:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

GothAnneGeddes · 04/02/2010 02:15

Look folks, the women eating after the men is not the norm. Certainly I've never had it happen, even when I've eaten separately from the men. Usually if the women are socialising separately from the men, they will be eating in that separate room too, so there will be two lots of food, one for the men and one for the women. And, yes, before anyone starts, the food will be of equal quality, because giving guests anything substandard is not done.

I get really wary of threads like these, because they start off well intentioned but then some seriously dodgy stereotypes start coming out and it becomes anecdotes = true for everyone ever.

In summary. Saudi has different laws to here, which anyone living there should be aware of. But as for Saudi people, like all people it's best to take them as you find them, because they are living breathing human beings, not walking stereotypes.

Oh and the person who mention replacing the word 'women', with the words 'black people', try replacing 'Saudi', 'Arab' and 'Muslim' with 'black people' and see how well it reads.

foxytocin · 04/02/2010 02:30

good post, anne.

I can't see the avg Saudi being so hard up for food that the women get the 'left overs'. and deffo right about the guest thing.

mumoverseas · 04/02/2010 04:11

Anne, have to beg to differ.
The family who I had the honour of sharing iftar with are one of the most prominent families in Saudi. My DH has been here 11 years and I've been here 4 and the times we've been to their house the women have always eaten after the men in the main dining room. Its not because they are hard up either as they own numerous houses and farms and the man of the house has a collection of classic cars that my DH was drooling over including one that was previously owned by the King of Bahrain. Its not about money, its about their traditions.

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 04/02/2010 09:18

I don't think anyone on here has said "all Saudis do this" or "all Arabs" etc, Anne. I was saying that women being treated as second class citizens (yes "all women" as that's who the laws apply to I assume) in Saudi Arabia is wrong, regardless of historical/cultural circumstances. And that's not to say I think other cultures are flawless at all in this context, just that we are talking about SA here.

Also it's all very well guests getting great food, but what about when no guests are present?

Just to reiterate, I am not stereotyping or saying all families in SA operate in this way, but plainly it's not unusual.

Judy1234 · 04/02/2010 13:05

But I believe we all have a moral duty to change traditions which are morally wrong and Saudi is a country with terrible traditions. In other words ob viously without being rude about it and getting arrested it must be made clear we don't tolerate these things. I never allow a racist comment to pass - if a taxi drive makes one I say something like - not everyone agrees with that or something. I never just say yes, it's awful there are so many blacks or whatever.

This is Bangladesh 2010 - www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/bangladesh/7073191/Rape-victim-receives-101-lashes-for-becom ing-pregnant.html

If we ensured that 100% of MPS and rulers in some of these countries were women and took all power from men for a bit we might get things improved or even just simple things like letting women drive in Saudi.

These countries do need to know how dreadful most people regard their practices particularly in relation to women's rights.

illgetyoubutler · 04/02/2010 16:47

I dont believe what you mentioned earlier about Imaan ibn Adul Wahaab is totally correct riven.

the word Wahabi. It all started first by the Turkish government during the life time of Sheikh Abdul Wahab.
The Turks wrote and published many books in their campaign of vilification and misrepresentation of the Sheikh's works. They started it around 1746 and continued for a long time even after the death of the Sheikh Abdul Wahab.
Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab was a scholar who stood alongside the Saudi family in overcoming the Arabian Peninsula. Because the Turks were the ones who were ousted, Turks who were Sufis, they started a campaign to defame the claims of Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab and his followers. Thus the term "Wahabi" came into being.

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab was trying to teach was nothing more then the return to the pure worship of Allah, without grave worship (which the Sufis did) and without good luck charms, amulets, or slaughtering for anyone other then Allah.
His book, Kitaab At-Tawheed, and many many more, are nothing more then verses of Qur'an and sayings of the Prophet, used as evidences against the misguided.

So, in other words, Abdul wahaab came at a time when many deviated sects were prevalent. He was a reviver of the Sunnah which had been lost to misguided practises, calling the people away from them, and encouraging them to do good, by calling the people back to the correct worship of Allah. He used numerous examples from the Quraan, then the Sunnah, and finally words from the Salaf, the pious predessesors, as proof that the muslims at his time were straying far from the correct worship of Allah.
He forbade the practise of grave worship and saint worship, which was widley practised around him, always using the proofs in the Book and sunnah that those practises are strictly forbidden and a grave sin, and many other practises like these.
As a result, he became very unpopular with individuals who believed the worshiping of graves and the dead were from Islaam, and so set about to slander and vilify the Imaans name, and those who followed him. Thus the term wahaabi is used on anyone who sticks to the fundementals of the Deen. All he called to was the reminder for muslims to stick to the absolute fundementals of islaam, without deviation and used proof after proof for this by way of Allahs word, the messengers word and the salaf.
Saying from the imaams works, and schoolof thought came al queda and the taliban, is incorrect. the taliban are a sect known as the Khuwarij, or in other words, the renegades, known in islaam as the worst sect. they believe in declaring muslims as disbelievers, or kaafir, from the commiting of major sins, beliving them to be non muslim and therefore permissable to kill. in effect the khuwarij declare the muslim rulars as disbelievers and rally to overthrow the muslim ruler, which opposes the sayings of muhammad regarding the muslim rulers. it was them who killed the 4th caliph, Ali ibn abdul talib, the BIL of the prophet and son in law of the prophet as they believed him to be a disbeliever. the creed or aqeeda of the khurarij, and likewise the Takfeeris, and other sects like these, have NOT arisen from the works of abdul waahab, as their aqeeda opposes that which he taught, and which is written in his books, and are against the teachings of the quraan
I have 2 disks riven named 'the belief of muhammad ibn abdul wahaab, and the wahaabi myth', I could send it to you if you wanted to listen to them. it explains in a much better and coherant way than i do!i am gonna check out the source you referanced.
excuse typos, in a rush and have sleeping, heavy baby on one arm.

groundhogs · 04/02/2010 17:48

Crikey, talk about splitting hairs....

illgetyoubutler · 04/02/2010 18:29

is that aimed at me?
if it is, why?