What bothers you about Abdullah and Rania

[Citizen2005]

This same thread was created for Frederick and Mary of Denmark And LITTLE STAR posted over there"

" I don't think it's a leading title. There are plenty of people who don't buy into all the hype surrounding this couple, so it's only fair that there be 1 thread where they can express their views."

So I thought it is fair too to create at least ONE thread to give a chance to some to express their views and to balance the discussion about Rania and KA.


Submit your views here.

 

[monamona]

This same thread was created for Frederick and Mary of Denmark And LITTLE STAR posted over there"

" I don't think it's a leading title. There are plenty of people who don't buy into all the hype surrounding this couple, so it's only fair that there be 1 thread where they can express their views."

So I thought it is fair too to create at least ONE thread to give a chance to some to express their views and to balance the discussion about Rania and KA.


Submit your views here.

Fair enough. Fine by me for this thread to exist.

 

[Saragli]

Wow these threads are popping up everywhere. The drama started in the British thread and it has spread. I dont have a problem with these types of threads because they show another side but I dont know how I feel about having this thread for the Jordanian King and Queen. For me, this thread could get very political and sensitive considering that the King is very involved in the government.

 

[monamona]

Wow these threads are popping up everywhere. The drama started in the British thread and it has spread. I dont have a problem with these types of threads because they show another side but I dont know how I feel about having this thread for the Jordanian King and Queen. For me, this thread could get very political and sensitive considering that the King is very involved in the government.

this shows that there are negatives about the JRF but this forum for some reasons does not allow people to talk abou them.
Anyway,Stating the obvious, every royal house/family is particular and that a king or a queen really governs does not mean that one cannot post the opposite views on this royality. to have some integrity in this forum, i guess we should not restrict our posts only to clothes, makeup, shoes, belts..how many times a dress has been worn and all that....

This thread is a test for this forum's objectivity.

 

[Avalon]

Nothing, really. I love the couple of theirs very much. Great King and Queen, Ideal parents, involved in different humanitarian projects... I love King Abduallah and Queen Rania very much and nothing whatsoever bothers be about them.

 

[Citizen2005]

Nothing, really. I love the couple of theirs very much. Great King and Queen, Ideal parents, involved in different humanitarian projects... I love King Abduallah and Queen Rania very much and nothing whatsoever bothers be about them.

It is marvellous that you find this couple perfect

 

[lizz70]

I personally would like to thank Citizen005 for posting this thread in the interests of balance and fairness. After all, a 'forum' is a place where people meet and engage in open discussion and there shouldn't be censorship unless people are saying really rude or crazy things. There is alot of hype about this couple and although I agree with PrinceJohnny to a certain extent about sensitivity because KA actually rules, I do think we should bear in mind that this couple has an iron grip over the media and press in Jordan and so a lot of what people post and read in magazines has been officially 'sanctioned' by the Press Office for the palace. We only see what they want us to see and hear what they want us to hear, therefore a more open discussion is welcome and especially by people who are not neccessarily out and out fans and who maybe have a biased viewpoint.

 

[lizz70]

My persoanl 'beef' with these two are the fact that they tout themselves as champions of freedom and democracy and yet under Abdullah, Jordan's freedom of speech is more restricted than it has been for many years. If they are so into human rights, how about making honour killings illegal, which Abdullah has the power to do with the stroke of a pen and how about people being able to write things in a free press? I also find it slightly offensive, that the King and Queen of a country which is kept afloat buy US Aid money, spend so extravagantly when there is huge unemployment and lack of rights for ordinary people in Jordan. Now, I understand that some people will say that other royal families spend extravagantly, but they are not poor little ME countries with no resources, I don't know the figures for the rest of Europe, but the UK has the 5th largest economy in the world, so they can afford it. Jordan can't.

 

[Elspeth]

Before this thread goes any farther, I'd like to remind everyone that the original purpose of the "What bothers you about Diana" thread was NOT for people who disliked Diana to pile in and have a free-for-all hate-fest. It was an attempt to host a civil, calm, mutually respectful discussion in a non-threatening atmosphere so that people could explain why they felt the way they did in the hope that posters on both sides of the issue would come to a better understanding of the reasoning behind the opinions on the other side.

I trust that the motivation behind this thread was similar. In any case, that's how the moderation team expect that it'll be conducted, and we'll be keeping a close eye on it. If people do decide to use it as a venue to pour scorn on the King and Queen or on posters on either side of the discussion, you can expect to see posts being deleted and, if need be, the thread being closed. The forum rules and guidelines apply to this thread as much as to any other.

Elspeth

Royal Forums administrator

 

[madonna23]

* finances
* media relations (both in and outside of Jordan)
* excessive pandering to themselves (i..e pictures everywhere)
* hypocrisy
* too much pandering to the West

Some things that don't bother me:
* willingness to engage in dialogue
* good language skills

 

[lizz70]

Before this thread goes any farther, I'd like to remind everyone that the original purpose of the "What bothers you about Diana" thread was NOT for people who disliked Diana to pile in and have a free-for-all hate-fest. It was an attempt to host a civil, calm, mutually respectful discussion in a non-threatening atmosphere so that people could explain why they felt the way they did in the hope that posters on both sides of the issue would come to a better understanding of the reasoning behind the opinions on the other side.

I trust that the motivation behind this thread was similar. In any case, that's how the moderation team expect that it'll be conducted, and we'll be keeping a close eye on it. If people do decide to use it as a venue to pour scorn on the King and Queen or on posters on either side of the discussion, you can expect to see posts being deleted and, if need be, the thread being closed. The forum rules and guidelines apply to this thread as much as to any other.

Elspeth

Royal Forums administrator

Sorry Elspeth, this is not a hate fest about Rania and Abdullah as individual people, rather my critique is of their role.

 

[lizz70]

Also, can someonme tell me why the little dot next to my name is red when it used to be green? What does it mean?

 

[lizz70]

* finances
* media relations (both in and outside of Jordan)
* excessive pandering to themselves (i..e pictures everywhere)
* hypocrisy
* too much pandering to the West

Some things that don't bother me:
* willingness to engage in dialogue
* good language skills

I do agree with the courting publicity critique, they are pretty much everywhere you look but also I think there is too much rhetoric from these two and not enough 'substance' so to speak. On the plus side, they have raised the profile of Jordan in the West and they do seem very family orientated.

 

[Laraib]

I'll tell you what bothers me about these two. First of, Rania wears a little too much make-up.I sincerely think, she believes she is trying out for the "NEXT TO MODEL" contest or something. I really don't have any problems with King Abdullah. I think he is wonderful.

 

[lizz70]

I thought QR was attractive enough when she first became queen and she didn't wear so much makeup. She looks fresher and younger with less.

 

[Elspeth]

Sorry Elspeth, this is not a hate fest about Rania and Abdullah as individual people, rather my critique is of their role.

I'm talking about the future direction of the thread as a whole, not the few posts that have been made so far.

 

[Elspeth]

Also, can someonme tell me why the little dot next to my name is red when it used to be green? What does it mean?

It means you're in "invisible" mode; in other words, when you're logged in, your name doesn't show as one of the logged-in users. If you want to change it back to green, you can go to your user control panel and uncheck the relevant box.

 

[ZZZ]

what really bothers me about rania and abdulla are the following (and these are just the tip of the iceberg):

rania - her unfounded philosophy that modernization does not mean westernization. yet in her "modernization", she is unable to part with her "westernization" in every form and way, from the way she dress's to the way she leads her life to her ideology.

abdulla - talks about jordans greatness and openess like the "west" yet his country does not display any qualities practiced by the west. starting with freedom of speech about him, his rule, his family and his love affair with the west.

 

[Humera]

I think its interesting to hear people, whether westerners or whoever it happens to be, talk about wanting "democracy" in the middle east but when things dont go their way or dont happen fast enough, they expect middle eastern leaders to control and police their populations.

Take the womens' rights issue in Jordan. There have been instances in the past when both the King Abdullah and Queen Rania have pushed stricter punishments for honour killings. And yet conservative politicians and the Jordanian parliament blocked such efforts (twice in 1999 and 2000).
Should the King then ignore parliament, abandon all rule of law and do as he pleases? How does that serve democracy?

Whatever the personal wishes of the King and Queen, the fact remains that they live in a male-dominated and very traditional society where change will not come easily. Tribal societies (as in parts of Jordan) are notoriously traditional, especially when confronted with change, they have their own rules of law. In many parts of the world they dont even realize the authority of the governments they live under.
No law is going to change such a mindset, that applies to Jordan, the Middle East at large, and other parts of the world that have similar problems. However, education, more involvement from women, socially and politically,will slowly bring about a change. And thats something King Abdullah and Queen Rania are doing right.
Thats how things changed for women in the west, it might've taken them decades, even centuries, but things did change.

So before anyone goes blaming KA and QR for not peforming any miracles overnight, it would be useful to get a better perspective of things.

This is a good article from 2004: Time Europe

It provides a summary of the reforms the Queen has been successful in carrying out (increasing participation of women in politics and behind-the-scenes lobbying) and those that have been repeatedly rejected by Jordanian politicians and parliaments (re: divorce rights, honour killings)

 

[ZZZ]

I think its interesting to hear people, whether westerners or whoever it happens to be, talk about wanting "democracy" in the middle east but when things dont go their way or dont happen fast enough, they expect middle eastern leaders to control and police their populations.

Take the womens' rights issue in Jordan. There have been instances in the past when both the King Abdullah and Queen Rania have pushed stricter punishments for honour killings. And yet conservative politicians and the Jordanian parliament blocked such efforts (twice in 1999 and 2000).
Should the King then ignore parliament, abandon all rule of law and do as he pleases? How does that serve democracy?

Whatever the personal wishes of the King and Queen, the fact remains that they live in a male-dominated and very traditional society where change will not come easily. Tribal societies (as in parts of Jordan) are notoriously traditional, especially when confronted with change, they have their own rules of law. In many parts of the world they dont even realize the authority of the governments they live under.
No law is going to change such a mindset, that applies to Jordan, the Middle East at large, and other parts of the world that have similar problems. However, education, more involvement from women, socially and politically,will slowly bring about a change. And thats something King Abdullah and Queen Rania are doing right.
Thats how things changed for women in the west, it might've taken them decades, even centuries, but things did change.

So before anyone goes blaming KA and QR for not peforming any miracles overnight, it would be useful to get a better perspective of things.

This is a good article from 2004: Time Europe

It provides a summary of the reforms the Queen has been successful in carrying out (increasing participation of women in politics and behind-the-scenes lobbying) and those that have been repeatedly rejected by Jordanian politicians and parliaments (re: divorce rights, honour killings)

it is not overnight changes that people are expecting. it has been 6 years of publicity shots of the king and queen, 6 years of her growth in western circles, 6 years of no change in their country, 6 years attending events in new clothes and jewels. one of her dress's could feed 10 jordanian or palestinian families that live in refugee camps for a month.

 

[Humera]

rania - her unfounded philosophy that modernization does not mean westernization. yet in her "modernization", she is unable to part with her "westernization" in every form and way, from the way she dress's to the way she leads her life to her ideology.

I dont think she ever said its her philosophy. Infact this was mentioned by President Musharraf of Pakistan at the WEF session on Muslim societies. And the panel, not just QR, reached this conclusion together.
They were referring to extremists who accuse those who advocate progress and modernization of being western. People who would prefer to take every Muslim society back to the 7th century, ban music, have women sit at home, not paricipate in politics or public life etc.
I dont like the insinuation that Queen Rania's ideology is western. Are human rights, democracy, just a western ideology?
I believe in all those ideals but i dont consider them western. They are part of the inherent teachings of Islam.
I think the label "western" is almost used as a derrogatory term applied to Rania (and others) to invalidate her ideas by those who dont like change, or what she represents.

 

[Saragli]

I dont want to divulge too much into my problems with them because my views are very political but I will generalize and say that the hypocracy and extravagence is what really gets to me. I mean the Queen is supposed to be this championship of Jordanian rights when her husband is the one who wont change the backword laws. He says he wants democracy but the democracy looks pretty fake and if he is still going to retain a lot of power mind as well put it to good use.

 

[Saragli]

Its a shame they are not monarchs of a western or richer nation cause they do make great royals. They know how to get publicity and look like royalty.

 

[Laraib]

it is not overnight changes that people are expecting. it has been 6 years of publicity shots of the king and queen, 6 years of her growth in western circles, 6 years of no change in their country, 6 years attending events in new clothes and jewels. one of her dress's could feed 10 jordanian or palestinian families that live in refugee camps for a month.

Thank-you!

 

[ZZZ]

I dont think she ever said its her philosophy. Infact this was mentioned by President Musharraf of Pakistan at the WEF session on Muslim societies. And the panel, not just QR, reached this conclusion together.
They were referring to extremists who accuse those who advocate progress and modernization of being western. People who would prefer to take every Muslim society back to the 7th century, ban music, have women sit at home, not paricipate in politics or public life etc.
I dont like the insinuation that Queen Rania's ideology is western. Are human rights, democracy, just a western ideology?
I believe in all those ideals but i dont consider them western. They are part of the inherent teachings of Islam.
I think the label "western" is almost used as a derrogatory term applied to Rania (and others) to invalidate her ideas by those who dont like change, or what she represents.

as a muslim i welcome change in action-taken, not in talk; as the saying goes "talk is cheap". what democracy have abdulla or rania bestowed on their country? is it in the form of free speech? should'nt free speech be a starting point for democracy? as for human rights, rania being a palestinian has not done much to ease the suffering of the palestinian refugees in jordan, why is that? might it have to do with her gucci loafers getting dirty or her maybe her hectic publicity events does not allow time?

as for the article, what a load of mumbo-jumbo..... why do articles about her always start with "stylish" or "modern"?? why not with "muslim" or "arab" - without a comment on her out-look being commented on? might it have something to do with the west also viewing her image above her actual work (if that is what it is called).

 

[Laraib]

I dont think she ever said its her philosophy. Infact this was mentioned by President Musharraf of Pakistan at the WEF session on Muslim societies. And the panel, not just QR, reached this conclusion together.
They were referring to extremists who accuse those who advocate progress and modernization of being western. People who would prefer to take every Muslim society back to the 7th century, ban music, have women sit at home, not paricipate in politics or public life etc.
I dont like the insinuation that Queen Rania's ideology is western. Are human rights, democracy, just a western ideology?
I believe in all those ideals but i dont consider them western. They are part of the inherent teachings of Islam.
I think the label "western" is almost used as a derrogatory term applied to Rania (and others) to invalidate her ideas by those who dont like change, or what she represents.

No one is telling women to sit at home nor is anyone telling any woman to shut her mouth. What I don't like about Rania is that--now it's just an example--she is giving us a knife but not telling us how to use nor informing us of it's dangers. She is visiting American schools to "help other countries come to know of Jordan and it's traditions" while back in her country people are dying of hunger? What does this really say about Rania and her principles?(It's not the best example I could think of )It's strange how Queen Rania is all about democracy yet, she still RULES a country?The reason why I, personally, consider Rania trying to fit in with the westren culture is because of her clothes--sorry.I mean her attire, sometimes, is awful.(elegent though )Iam not going to lie, if I showed a picture of her "evening dresses" to one of my nonmuslim friends, they would not be able to distingush her as a "muslim queen." I don't mean to offend you Humera.

 

[Humera]

it is not overnight changes that people are expecting. it has been 6 years of publicity shots of the king and queen, 6 years of her growth in western circles, 6 years of no change in their country, 6 years attending events in new clothes and jewels. one of her dress's could feed 10 jordanian or palestinian families that live in refugee camps for a month.

really? 6 years isn't overnight in a region that has had these problems for centuries?
there hasn't been a revolution, but there have been changes. Increased participation of women in politics, business, and other spheres of life.

Recent article from an organization based in Sweden:

Jordan has seen important achievements in recent years regarding women’s rights and empower­ment and the raising of their status in society. In addition to increasingly entering the workplace, education and politics, women have recently obtained a number of rights, represented in amendments to some laws, including a quota of seats for women in Parliament and provisions related to divorce initiated by the wife, male polygamy, and the raising of the legal age of marriage. In addition, a gender perspective was incorporated in the five-year national development plan for 1999–2003 in various state institutions and government departments.
http://www.idea.int/arab_world/jordan/index.cfm

 

[Alexandria]

it is not overnight changes that people are expecting. it has been 6 years of publicity shots of the king and queen, 6 years of her growth in western circles, 6 years of no change in their country, 6 years attending events in new clothes and jewels. one of her dress's could feed 10 jordanian or palestinian families that live in refugee camps for a month.

I think it will take more than six years to change centuries of traditional and very conservative beliefs. To expect that Abdullah and Rania will have completely transformed the Jordan they inherited into a modern one is unrealistic, and is setting them up to fail.

as for the article, what a load of mumbo-jumbo..... why do articles about her always start with "stylish" or "modern"?? why not with "muslim" or "arab" - without a comment on her out-look being commented on? might it have something to do with the west also viewing her image above her actual work (if that is what it is called).

But there isn't anything Rania can do about how journalists write about her or what they take away from interviews about her. She could've talked about women's rights for three hours non-stop without a single comment about what designer she was wearing, but if the journalist goes back and decides to start his or her article about how "modern" or "stylish" or "fashionable" Rania is, what can she do? Rania can't really control what's written about her -- because as some of members have commented on, among the rights the King and Queen should be fighting for is freedom of speech -- so isn't a journalist who starts his or her article off that Rania is modern and stylish rather than Arab and Muslim exercising his or her free speech?

 

[Laraib]

I think it will take more than six years to change centuries of traditional and very conservative beliefs. To expect that Abdullah and Rania will have completely transformed the Jordan they inherited into a modern one is unrealistic, and is setting them up to fail.



But there isn't anything Rania can do about how journalists write about her or what they take away from interviews about her. She could've talked about women's rights for three hours non-stop without a single comment about what designer she was wearing, but if the journalist goes back and decides to start his or her article about how "modern" or "stylish" or "fashionable" Rania is, what can she do? Rania can't really control what's written about her -- because as some of members have commented on, among the rights the King and Queen should be fighting for is freedom of speech -- so isn't a journalist who starts his or her article off that Rania is modern and stylish rather than Arab and Muslim exercising his or her free speech?

What if that jounalist said that she WASN"T stylish or fashionable?I wanna see how far that freedom of speech thing lasts.

 

[Alexandria]

What if that jounalist said that she WASN"T stylish or fashionable?I wanna see how far that freedom of speech thing lasts.

But then you're putting her (them) into a position where they can't be right or wrong: On the one hand people want articles about her to reflect more than her physical appearance or her designer clothes, and to focus on her causes and her work. Yet by the same token, you're saying that if they don't say anything about her physical appearance they would seek to curb the freedom of speech by these journalists.

How is that fair?

I'm all for criticism of public figures, but you can't be unreasonable about it. You have to be objective and be fair. You can't expect that they'll be able to walk on water or that they'll be able to jump through hoops -- whatever their title, they are still human.

Besides, if someone at TIME Magazine writes that Rania isn't fashionable or isn't pretty, as TIME is based out of New York, there isn't much the King or Queen can do to curb their right to freedom of speech. If they do do that, they could only squash that right within Jordan, and possibly in other ME nations, but certainly not in the U.S.