Tow #8 - Article - Saudi Women Rise Up, Quietly, and Slide Into the Driver’s Seat

On October 26th, women in Saudi Arabia started a demonstration. The demonstration protested the law of Saudi Arabia that it is illegal for a woman to drive. So on October 26^th, that’s exactly what a few activists did, they drove around the country. When it comes to women’s rights, Saudi Arabia remains one of the most restrictive countries in the world. Guardianship laws mean that a woman cannot marry, work or travel abroad without the consent of a male relative. This story was covered by New York Times columnist Ben Hubbard, who used biased diction to tell the story of the Saudi women drivers, and make them seem like the victims. Hubbard wrote very biasedly like for example, “On Saturday, a few dozen women insisted on violating one of the most stubborn social codes in staunchly conservative Saudi society, getting into their cars and driving, activists said.” The use of the word stubborn social codes creates a one-way viewpoint on the topic, and only sheds a light on the activists’ side of the story. This effectively helps Hubbard’s purpose of showing the bravery of the women activists and their story. Using biased diction, Hubbard also helps to appeal to pathos. It appeals to Pathos because Hubbard’s specific diction creates a rebellious mood. The mood affects the reader and immediately could make the reader feel for the women protesters. This is effect in the sense that getting the mass to agree with the protesters, then Hubbard successfully told the story to make the women drivers to look good. Hopefully, with this New York times article’s effectiveness, people will reach out to try and help the women drivers of Saudi Arabia, and maybe can overturn the guardian laws that are established there. Maybe even King Abdullah himself will read the New York Times article and be moved by Hubbard’s use of rhetoric to tell the story of the women protesters. That would be an example of the true power of rhetoric.