Why does a woman not need a driver's license? Because there is not a road between the laundry room and the kitchen. This poor attempt at passing sexism off as a joke is an all too common occurrence. Women around the world face sexism when it comes to driving more often than we would like to admit. For years, women in Saudi Arabia have been banned from driving. Even though women have not been able to get behind the wheel, they still are told they are not smart enough to drive, or even that their bodies cannot handle the task. Recently, Saudi Arabia announced that it would finally lift the ban on women driving. The article “I Can’t Wait to Drive in Saudi Arabia Again” written by Manal Al-sharif for The New York Times argues that this is a major …show more content…
Logos is strongly presented in the article by the pragmatic viewpoint the author takes on the current situation. The article reveals that women are still not allowed to do basic things without permission from a male guardian. The author argues that social change cannot occur without major political change, and uses historical examples to support the claim. Not only is logos very present in the arguments, but the author also utilizes ethos. Al-rasheed is a professor and the author of A Most Masculine State: Gender, Religion and Politics in Saudi Arabia. Ethos is applied again when the author reveals exposes nations for advertising movements towards gender equality, in order to gain support from other nations. In order to persuade readers emotionally, the author includes shocking statements such as “in the last year, Saudi embassies abroad worked to return girls defined as ‘runaways’. These are abused girls who leave without the consent of their guardian” (Al-rasheed); revealing the government does not view women equal to men. The repeal on the ban is a way for the Saudi Arabian government to become more popular with other nations, while still leaving women at a major disadvantage. By including all three parts of the Aristotelian Method The Guardian is able to effectively argue that valuable social change will not occur from the ban on women