At least three major U.S. companies — including McDonald's, Pizza Hut and Starbucks — are reportedly upholding gender apartheid in their franchise stores in Saudi Arabia. The companies have made a number of changes to their business practices in "deference" to Saudi customs, including maintaining segregated seating in their restaurants and having separate entrances for women and men. Starbucks even changed its corporate identity to do business in Saudi Arabia by altering its trademark mermaid logo, because in Saudi Arabia any display of the female form, even as a stylized graphic, is considered indecent. Ann Telnaes cartoon: 'McPartheid' A U.S. official who recently returned from a tour of duty in Saudi Arabia described the segregated franchises in a letter to the Washington Post last December. "The men's sections are typically lavish, comfortable and up to Western standards, whereas the women's or families' sections are often run-down, neglected, and, in the case of Starbucks, have no seats," the U.S. official wrote. "Worse, these firms will bar entrance to Western women who show up without their husbands." Despite public outcry in the U.S., Starbucks — which touts "corporate social responsibility" on its web site, describing the company's philosophy of contributing positively to communities near its franchises — says it will not change the way it does business in Saudi Arabia. "As a guest in any country where we do business, we abstain from interference in local social, cultural and political matters," Peter Maslen, president of Starbucks, said in a public statement. Activists, on the other hand, point out that religion, customs and "the dictates of society" were used for generations in the U.S. to justify slavery and racial segregation. Many believe that treating women in Saudi Arabia as second-class citizens in the name of local Saudi custom is no different. Women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to drive and must get a male relative's permission before having surgery, going to college, seeking a job or accepting a marriage proposal. The mutawa, or religious police, patrol the streets and shopping centers looking for anyone breaking the rules. Fifteen Arab school girls died recently in a school fire, reportedly after the religious police prevented their rescue. Why? Because the girls weren't wearing the obligatory head veil, and male firefighters were not permitted to enter the all-girls school. Activists say that the companies' refusal to desegregate their Saudi Arabia stores proves they are far more concerned with profits than with basic human rights. And Dunkin' Donuts, reportedly, has set an example for the other businesses by refusing to go along with Saudi segregation.
I suppose it's always easy to boycott those places for me since I never go to them in the first place. I won't eat the crap that McDonald's produces, I prefer to buy frozen pizza, however I know of a couple of other places that I'd go before pizza hut. And I can't stand starbucks. Mainly do to the people that go there though.
I think that these American companies are a good influence on those Muslim countries. The more the better. Instead of boycotting them , I'm gonna have a BigMac today for lunch (as to show my support, I actually think it taste terrible)
I think American countries are good influences, but only if they're are actually influencing them. These 3 only seem submissive, they're not bringing any western culture with them other that the food. :/
i think even in america we have issues relating to gender , not so much the fact that there are feminest now but gays and lesbos are frowned apoun by many not only in familys but work , and other areas . so in this we are showing the same way by the "no ask no tell " yes these Corprate gaints have issues and yes they should be boycotted by all means if the things that they allow to happen in other contryies to happen , but we also have to respect the laws of man and of other contries at least for now , i mean yah i would have to ask to go places , yes that is submissive . but in this case , that part of the world is slowly becoming western for women and hopefully gays and lesbeians too . just some thoughts
And why would we want to export our Western culture? Use and Throw Away! Instant Gratification! F**k future generations! Let's just use up all of the resources right now! Yeah, these are great influences that we want to spread to other countries...
I love Starbucks. the coffee is the best i've ever had, the atmosphere is awesome, and I meet such interesting people there. That's where my friends usually hang out. Look, they do things differently in the middle East because a majority of that area is a bigoted third world country and they have to. I sure don't see them doing any separation like that here.
I agree with this. They sell fast food... They're not there to try to change a culture that's been doing things a certain way for generations. While this situation may be an extreme, I don't think it's in the place of these establishments to suggest that their people should change their ways and conform to what McDonalds (and the others) think is sociably acceptable.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying ... is your issue with the deplorable conditions for women in Saudi Arabia, or with the three companies? I totally agree with you about the religious police and so on, but I don't see how boycotting McDonald's will accomplish anything (other than a bunch of healthier people). Why would the Saudi government give a rat's ass about a boycott in the US?
They wouldn't. But it isn't the Saudi government whose attention you would be trying to get. The idea is that, if everyone stops eating at McDonald's because they support (or, at least, condone) the treatment of women in these countries, McDonald's will go out of business. UNLESS they change their policies and buck the Saudi conventions and treat women like human beings. That's how a boycott works. You stop giving the greedy Mega-Corp your money until they change their policies. Governments don't have anywhere near the influence on people's behavior as do large, global corporations.
What would happen, if the boycott were effective (which it almost certainly will not be), is that the companies would find it more profitable to close their SA stores to end the boycott. Nothing in SA would change. Other companies that might be considering opening branches in strict Muslim countries would probably reconsider. SA would sink further back into the dark ages. However, getting the people of Saudi Arabia hooked into consumer culture does seem preferable to letting them continue with their 1500 year-old lifestyle. Boycotts have not been very effective for a long time. People say they'll take part, but mostly they don't. Now, if a company opened up and had the balls to break with tradition over there and put up with a the bombings and such, I would support a movement to always and exclusively buy that company's products.
This is why I asked who the original poster had an issue with ... the Saudi government or the companies. I'm still not understanding how boycotting Big Macs in the US will have any effect on the treatment of women in Arab countries. If McDonald's should decide to buck the religious police inside their own stores, the Saudis will simply shut them down and toss them out of the country. How does that change anything? McDonald's is not the real issue here. They're just bit players. The real issue is the treatment of women. McDonald's doesn't have the power to change that. I don't see how you can say that. Corporations don't make laws or sanction religious police.
Maybe not, but since when does law and governance actually influence people's behavior? Actually, I shouldn't say "behavior." I should say "attitudes." What the OP was complaining about is the treatment of women, which is supported by the attitudes of the people in that country. The behavior derives from the attitudes. Governments don't - can't - change people's attitudes. They can legislate all they want, but it doesn't change the way people really feel. The only thing that can affect that, with any degree of success, is advertising. Marketing. And that's where corporations excel, and governments fail. If McDonald's really wanted to go head-to-head with any government, in terms of getting a response from the populace, my money would be on McDonald's. But, McDonald's own greed does mandate that they pay some respect to local culture, which is how this whole post originated in the first place. If they were willing to risk bad publicity in the new market, they could absolutely butt heads with the government. But, they'd rather just be seen as a new part of the Saudi Arabian landscape, fitting right in with everything else. This is why a boycott would be valuable. But, of course, as Standingseated pointed out, boycotts generally have no effect because it requires a significant portion of a business' customers to take action, and nobody cares that much. At least, not in the United States. Not eating at McDonald's is just WAAAY too much effort to help a downtrodden woman in a nation on the other side of the world.
It's naive to think an American hamburger joint has the power to change the way a foreign government and foreign culture operates. And regarding attitudes vs behaviors ... you have it backwards. Behavior has to come first. Your argument is the same as that used against the civil rights movement and the women's movement in the US ... "we're not ready for it yet" or "you can't legislate people's feelings". To that I say ... I don't care if you're "ready" or not. If we had to wait for attitudes to change, nothing would ever happen. But if you try to stop blacks from entering the University of Mississippi, then the force of law will be applied. If you won't give me a mortgage because I'm a woman, then the force of law will be applied. I don't care about your "attitude". People's attitudes are secondary. What matters is the force of law. It takes a generation to change deeply held convictions like this anyway. If I have the force of law behind me, then your attitude is really irrelevant.
yeah, like that will happen. A few hippies not eating at McDonalds won't even make a dent enough for them to notice.
A high percentage of companies in Saudi Arabia are american owner. Well, provided they's sponcored by the Saudies. See, the saudies won't let an american company open up in their land unless a Saudi sponcers them by having most control in what happens with that establishment. That's why companies won't, even if they wanted to, change how things work there. The hypocracy behind it though, is that seeing how much money can be made in that country, american companies keep purchasing there, and bring lots of money into the country, turning a blind eye on how women are treated. Why is it that the US gov. doesn't say a word on how women in saudi arabia are treated like animals, yet they're quick to get all moral and ethical when it comes to other areas in the middle east?.
if you were to boycott the starbucks in saudi .. maybe you would get the reaction you want ... I suggest going to saudi and holding a sign outside starbucks saying something like 'GIVE WOMAN EQUAL RIGHTS' and when the authorties come and torture you until you are insane ... maybe someone will take notice .. but then again .. maybe not.
