A total of 68 opponents’ comments were retrieved from the three videos. These comprise 36 comments on the #Khaliji video, and 32 on the Idaa’t video. No opposing comments were retrieved from Miadeen video. However, the four most dominant attitudes extracted from opponents’ comments are listed according to their frequency in terms of the following types of language: racist, sceptical, evaluative and offensive.
Racist:
Comments labelled as racist are those that articulate insults to social actors based on their race (e.g. non-Arabs), their religious doctrine (e.g. Shiite) and their citizenship (non-Saudis, immigrants). The racist attitude was highest among opponents featuring in 32% of the total number of the opposing comments. In this string of observations, commenters described and portrayed social actors in favour of women driving as outsiders, immigrants, non-Arabs or
42% 25% 19%
14%
Opponents commenters' attitudes
Raceist Sceptical Evaluative Offensive
134
Shiite whom only bringing troubles and interfere in our private affairs. The following comments illustrate how the racist theme was constructed:
(6.1) Al-Nojaimi is a hero. May Allah create more like him, to disallow a minority of nationalised rabble and others from controlling the majority.
(6.2) The show is full of refugees…moreover, it is in Jeddah. I don’t trust you. (6.3) Boukharstan has nothing to do in Saudi Arabia!! We call for their nationality to
be withdrawn.
(6.4) The foreigners and nationalised women are the only people demanding to drive!! I hope that Ministry of Interiors beat with an iron fist any rebelling woman who wants to disrupt the system.
(6.5) Lamia Bukhari….the girl of Buoukarstan, go back to your motherland. You illegal residents have corrupted the country.
(6.6) Send the refugees back to their countries and free us of their opinions. Why is the interviewer is hosting an Indian and other Indonesian ladies?
In the above observations, commenters reflected on the social actors who condone women driving in a racist manner to degrade and classify them as outsiders. Some commenters used racist words and hinted at or directly accused social actors of being disruptive and interfering in ‘our own’ society. Others found it acceptable to label social actors as outsiders and not belonging to ‘our society’. Similar to the Self and Other presentation strategies used by speakers in mass media, the opponents aimed to express their rejection of the women driving calls by classifying its advocates as different group; thereby stigmatising them as outsiders or non-Saudis. Therefore, they expect them to be less loyal to our country, less committed to our Saudi conservative customs and acting as tools of foreign governments.
Sceptical:
Opponents’ comments that were classified under scepticism are those that articulate doubts regarding the Other’s intentions and portray the women driving campaign as a premeditated conspiracy targeting Us and Our society. The submissions raise concerns about the true intentions behind the campaigns (e.g. “the matter is far bigger than driving”, “the whole thing is planned to distract people”), and the activists’ credibility and loyalty (e.g. “backed up by
135
the trash Hilary”, “the time you picked, the Shiite camerawoman”). The comments below illustrate how the opponent commenters have doubts and are sceptical of the initiative and its advocates:
(6.7) The time you picked the Shiite camerawoman and your statements to the foreign media made us sceptical about your initiative.
(6.8) Let us think about it. When we see people like Manal and Wajiha backed up by the trash Hilary interested in this topic, be assured that nothing but troubles will arise..Will you solve women’s problems through driving? What about other women’s issues? Why don’t you suggest alternatives or solutions? The country is he biggest oil exporter country, yet all of its cities has no other transport except cars.
(6.9) The matter is far bigger than driving. Think about it…it is only a tool for other purposes that aim to destroy the Islamic society by focusing on secondary issues like women driving.
(6.10) Since she is on Al-Arabiya channel, the whole thing is planned to distract people attention away from bigger issues such as housing and unemployment. (6.11) I am a Saudi girl and thanks to Allah I belong to the peaceful and safe country
of the two holy mosques. We are queens in our houses but wondering why the west wants us to drive? Why are they interested in it!?
Drawing such a picture against the intentions of the women driving advocates reflects how some public are against women driving, not because the mere fact of women being behind the wheels; rather, they oppose it because they have doubts or do not trust its advocates. This could be a typical reaction to the moral evaluation of the Other proposed by opponents on mass media which encourage the theory of conspiracy and betrayal of the country. Based on the posted comments, the online opponents seem to be reproducing the same rhetoric of doubting the advocates’ intentions proposed in the mass media (see Chapter 5).
Evaluative:
Opponents’ comments that were classified as evaluative ones articulated some judgemental words regarding whether to evaluate the issue, social actors or even other commenters’ opinion. In terms of evaluating the social actors, positive evaluation tends to go to the Us group while negative ones are reserved for the Them group. The following comments illustrate how the online opponents constructed the evaluative theme:
136
(6.12) Regardless of my opinion of this campaign, I say if this cued lady is leading you, you are in trouble. I hoped she was more wise and spontaneous. By the way, although she prepared for this interview as she said through her account on Twitter, you should notice in most questions how shamefully she was reading from her notes and files.
(6.13) Let me know who did say Shariah forbids women driving!? All those discussing the issue say it is permissible, but it will lead to catastrophes…got it??
(6.14) Regarding the customs, it has nothing to do with customs, I say women driving isn’t banned because of customs, it is because if women drive, it will lead to catastrophes…did you understand? You are in Saudi society, we travel abroad for vice how about if vice is within us….hope you got it.
(6.15) My brothers and sisters favour women driving; the problem is not merely in driving, it is that all countries allowing women driving are mixed-sex societies. A guy in those societies will not harass a woman driving her own car, but in our society, controlling men is a problem. What happened with Manal (guys chasing her) is not an individual case as she tried to portray it.
(6.16) Although the host was not neutral and did not give the Sheikh the right to reply, also the channel was not neutral, and this is obvious from their public interviews, Al-Nojaimy done well to refute them. I am with Sheikh Al-Nojaimy and against women driving.
Most of the above comments reveal a straightforward evaluative approach arriving at one conclusion: we are opposed to women driving. This is because, based on their evaluation, women driving will lead to trouble: ‘it will lead to catastrophes’, ‘if women drive, it will lead to catastrophes’, ‘Riyadh is crowded while it is only men, what will happen if women drive’ or because the women driving advocates are evaluated as degraded people by doing socially unaccepted acts: ‘Does she deserve to have the reputation of the Prophet Muhammads’ family?’, ‘this fool is looking for fame’, ‘may Allah curse you Manal, we thought you are respectful’. However, the construction of the evaluative comments suggests that the online opponents are influenced by or agree with the portrayal of a frightening hypothetical future and the negative moral evaluation of the Them group presented by the opponents speakers on mass media (see Chapter 5).
Offensive:
The offensive comments articulated harsh, personal insults targeting the speakers’ appearance or morality to express anger and disagreement with the issue to women driving. What distinguishes these comments is that they all adopt an arrogant, hostile attitude towards social
137
actors and do not provide any logical reasoning to their opposition stances. Indeed, they find it sufficient to insult and threaten to harm the reputation of advocates; thereby diminishing their supporters. As illustrated in the following comments, they included harsh insults such as: ‘ةسناعلا’ spinster, ‘ةلفاسلا’ immoral, ‘ةسجن اي’ dirty:
(6.17) No driving bitch Manal.
(6.18) All of us are against you dirty, jail is not enough for you. I think you need recycling away from this pure land. Unfortunately, those people gave you more than your dirtiness.
(6.19) Stay at your home Manal. Otherwise, if I see you driving, I will come at you with my 86 GMC and pull you over.
(6.20) OK, if this spinster drives a car, no one will know she is a lady…I am a man and yet I look better than her, hahahahahahaha! They should reward the policeman who caught her….he recognised that she is a lady. Hahahahahha! (6.21) The hosts, Lamia and Najla, are two faces of a deluxe secular shoe.
Hahahahahahaha!
(6.22) Nine thousand bitches are demanding.
6.3.2 Support comments
A total of 88 observations in favour of women driving retrieved from the three videos. This represents the highest among all three public reactions towards women driving. In total, the four main perspectives constructed through these comments were: supportive, evaluative, enlightening and feminist grievance.
Figure 10. The most dominant attitudes from the support comments.
35%
32% 23%
10%
Proponents commenters' attitudes
138 Supportive:
Supportive comments are those demonstrating their agreement or support for what advocates are saying or doing. These observations also contained a sense of appreciation and heroes’ portrayal to reflect the sincere admiration to the proponents, (e.g. ‘you are heroes and strong’, ‘your names will be written within the Saudi history’, ‘Najla and Lamia may Allah save you’,). They also expressed the commenters’ enthusiasm towards change and their encouragement to advocates of continuing, (e.g. ‘Lamia and others, go ahead and we are with you’, ‘go ahead’, ‘We are all with you Manal’). The comments below illustrate how the supportive tone was constructed:
(6.23) Master Lamia and Master Najla your names will be written within the Saudi history, you are heroes and strong, and hopefully, you will see the fruit of your seeds. May Allah help you, I am with you in heart and soul.
(6.24) Well-done Lamia, you are better than a thousand men.
(6.25) Good job Lamia and others, go ahead, and we are with you, the ignorant will stay ignorant forever.
(6.26) We thank Sister Najla Hariri for her good answers; we are with you in supporting women driving.
(6.27) I am very proud of you the pure, free and brave Manal Al-Sharif, Allah with you.
(6.28) Go ahead Manal; every great Saudi is with you.
Evaluative:
Similar to the opponents’ construction of evaluative comments, the proponents’ comments classified as evaluative ones articulated some judgements or decisions regarding the social actors, women driving issue or even other comments. They positively portrayed the Us group describing them as e.g. ‘senior intellects’, ‘among the best’, ‘normal human being’, while the Them group was negatively portrayed as e.g. ‘the godfathers of extremism’, ‘leaders of ignorance’. Other comments evaluated the issue without addressing social actors or other commenters e.g. ‘Women driving is personal freedom because of the necessity and sake of women privacy’, ‘women driving is a right for each female citizen’. The following comments explain how the online proponents framed this evaluative theme:
139
(6.29) Al-Nojaimi is provocative, he speaks as if we are the elites among people and our system is a democratic one from A-Z !! Is he crazy?
(6.30) Al-Nojaimi insists on calling it a protest because he has not a good argument. (6.31) Women driving is personal freedom because of the necessity and sake of
women privacy.
(6.32) Backwards people, taxi cars are more than our cars, besides they stay a longer time in streets, so it will not be the case if women drove their cars....sometimes, while waiting for the traffic light, you find yourself surrounded by many taxis. It is stupid and indicates how silly you are. Are you happy with your family standing in the street and people are looking at them while they are waiting for a taxi!?
(6.33) When opponents fail to provide any evidence from Quran or Sunnah to support their opinion, we find them manoeuvring to mention some of the old stories about women oppression in ancient times which has nothing to do with a necessary right for a Muslim woman. They are contradicting themselves, and the aim behind this is to distract the public among Muslim community……etc (6.34) We all know that driving is not forbidden by Shariah so it is not a shame to
make all this noise. Some girls don't have brothers to drive them, so it is best for them to drive their cars instead of hiring a driver, paying his salary and dealing with his harassments. It is only a matter of time to lift the ban.
Enlightening:
To some extent, comments under this theme are similar to the evaluative ones but are characterised with their tone of admonishment and educating other readers of what is the issue is indeed like based on the commenter’s opinion. This could include; correcting information or ideas presented by opponents whether on mass media or through online comments, and or explaining why the ban on women driving should be lifted. These observations adopt an intellectual stance and rely on logic and knowledge when making an argument, which could indicate that people who posted these comments are characterised with a higher level of education or maturity. Commenters aim to raise public awareness rather than only speaking their support out. The following examples illustrate how enlightenment was constructed through online proponents’ comments:
(6.35) Prof. Al-Nojaimi, the right is a right even for one person; it is not true that the minority has no rights.
(6.36) The preacher Ayed Al-Qarni states there is no evidence (from Quran or Sunnah) on which opponents could rely.
140
(6.37) There is no Hadeeth or Quranic verse that indicates the ban; it is futile mentalities and customs…..if I don’t have a man drive and can’t hire a driver what shall I do!? Damn futile mentalities.
(6.38) First, feminising the rights does not turn it into horrible topics. Second, some rules in Saudi forbid women from the permissible to save men from committing the sin!!...in what religion and mind is this? Sick people…
(6.39) Oh girl, Islam has nothing to do with a tribe or family roots. This is a right for women that has been taken from them in the homeland of Islam, the country that opposes women driving in cities arguing for their safety. Meanwhile, they travel hundreds of kilometres outside cities via dangerous roads to get to schools without a male guardian, even if they are in danger daily…what a contradiction!
(6.40) May Allah guide us to goodness, women driving is a right for each female citizen.
Feminist grievance:
Comments under this theme expressed sympathy and understanding of what activists are calling for and the amount of suffering that Saudi women are experiencing because of the ban. From a micro-linguistic perspective, the feminine Arabic pronouns indicate the potential that all comments were posted by female users e.g. ‘تايدوعسك انل’ (for us Saudi women), ‘انتبك ةيافك’ (it is enough oppressing us), ‘قوسن ىتم’ (when will we drive). The comments agreed on the need to lift the ban by portraying a gloomy picture of the situation experienced by Saudi women; e.g. ‘we are suffering a lot’, ‘we complain to Allah those who oppressed us by depriving our right’, ‘don’t care about our girls honour’, ‘It is enough oppressing us from the simplest basics of life’. The examples below illustrate how feminist grievance was constructed:
(6.41) I am a tribal girl and living in Riyadh; I support the ladies’ opinion…it is true we are suffering a lot because of the ban...we complain to Allah those who oppressed us through abusing religion.
(6.42) For us Saudi women, driving is a necessity, we complain to Allah those who oppressed us by depriving our right.
(6.43) Ooooooh when will we drive; we are fed up of ignorance?
(6.44) I hope and wait for the day when our children laugh on the backwardness we are living now as I did on the Sheikhs of the past when they opposed girls’ education, mobile phones and cars. It is oppressing enough us from the simplest basics of life. (6.45) We want to drive….please it is enough, think maturely.
141 6.3.3 Neutrals comments
Almost 20% of comments on the three videos adopted a neutral stance regarding women driving. Neutral comments are those that failed to articulate a clear-cut opinion of whether or not women should drive. Instead of supporting or opposing, commenters remained conservative or ambiguous regarding women driving. Their neutral observations resulted in the emergence of four main themes: evaluative, admonishing, correcting and enlightening.
Figure 11. The most dominant attitudes from the neutral comments.
Evaluative:
The evaluative comments dominated almost 50% of the total number of neutral comments. In general, these comments were criticising social actors appearances or manner of speech rather than discussing the points they rose: e.g ‘you look confused’, ‘I don’t like his tone’, ‘why your chest is uncovered!?’ or objectively criticised both parties (opponents and proponents) e.g. ‘why we never see a cleric talking about the citizen main problems such as: housing and unemployment’, ‘look for solutions then build your civilisation’. Other evaluative comments criticised the show: e.g. ‘A silly interview, especially at the end’, ‘Why you didn’t let Sheikh Al-Nojaimi talk…you interrupt him continuously’. The comments below illustrate the construction of the evaluative theme by online neutral commenters:
(6.46) A silly interview, especially at the end. (6.47) I think the issue is over discussed.
57% 17%
14% 12%
Neutral commenters' attitudes
142
(6.48) Media is using the issue to create more action; in my opinion, the report was a bit biased.
(6.49) Ryan Al-Zahrani, with all respect, you don’t evaluate what you say….you accused them of many bad things, I don’t know based on what?. I am not supporting or opposing driving, but the way you comment is a reason for them to drive if the opponents are morally accusing girls…how do we take their opinion, you are reflecting a negative image about the opponents.
(6.50) Why you did not let Sheikh Al-Nojaimi talk…you interrupt him continuously. (6.51) Women driving is a mean not an aim. Uunfortunately, it became an aim for
every Saudi women in favour of driving.
Admonishing:
Comments classified as admonishing were those that adopted a preaching style targeting other commenters and readers. Admonishing comments are distinguished for their social reformative approach; their primary concern is the people way of thinking and expression when discussing such issues rather than who is right or wrong e.g. ‘Disagreement doesn’t ruin amicability’, ‘Regardless of our stance towards women driving’. They all denounce the harsh, offensive comments from both sides and call to a more sophisticated way of expression e.g. ‘think better’, ‘why cursing and showing disrespect to others? ‘, ‘may Allah forgive us about