kuwait

yesterday, kuwait's (all male) parliament decided that women shouldn't be able to vote in this year's municipal elections. municipal. that means local. like, new york city council, but in arabic. oy.

the times has it. so does the post. they cite somewhat different numbers but say basically the same thing. women are not allowed to vote or run in any elections. they can be appointed to cabinets, ministries, and ambassadorships, but they can't run for parliament or even vote for their local city representatives.

granted, kuwait also prohibits men serving in the police and military from voting (according to the times). the only explanation i can think of for that is that it's a weird way to try to avoid a military coup, but that doesn't make much sense either.

okay, i did some more research. the cia factbook (a fantastic resource for general country information) says that suffrage is granted to "adult males who have been naturalized for 30 years or more or have resided in Kuwait since before 1920 and their male descendants age 21. only 10% of all citizens are eligible to vote; in 1996 naturalized citizens who do not meet the pre-1920 qualification but have been naturalized for 30 years were eligible to vote for the first time."

that's not quite what was in either of the articles.

now i'm getting thoroughly confused.

i started out with the point that it was ridiculous for a cosmopolitan place like kuwait, a muslim country that doesn't force women to wear hijab, to prohibit women from voting at all, even while appointing them to high positions. the papers make the point that opposition probably stems from self-preservation on the parts of the male parliamentarians who don't want to lose their seats.

i am losing my train of thought so i'm just going to stop writing now. you're all smart people, so draw your own damn conclusions!