It looks as though Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti and other top religious scholars in the kingdom have done themselves more harm than good by rushing out a fatwa last week which forbade women from working "in a place where they intermingle with men" (i.e. at the tills in supermarkets).

As I mentioned earlier, the scholars cited no scriptural evidence to support their ruling, and now their opinion is being openly challenged in sections of the Saudi media. There was a time, not very long ago, when a Saudi journalist who disputed the word of the Grand Mufti would probably have been out of a job, but fortunately things are changing.

In an article for Okaz (translated into English by Arab News), Khalaf al-Harbi highlights the muddle that the gender segregationists have got themselves into. If it's OK for a woman to beg in the street, why is it not OK for her to work as a supermarket cashier? If it's forbidden for a woman to collect money from men at the checkout, why is it not forbidden for men to work at a checkout collecting money from women?

In Asharq Alawsat, Mshari al-Zaydi asks "Doesn't evidence constitute a solid basis for argument?" and offers six arguments to refute the fatwa. Among other things, he points out that there is no way a woman working in such a public place as a shopping centre, under the eye of surveillance cameras, can be considered "indecently" secluded with members of the opposite sex.

The real debate here, of course, actually has next to nothing to do with religion. It's about a bunch of reactionary men who simply want to keep women "in their place" – stuck in the house all day.

Posted by Brian Whitaker, 7 November 2010.