Why does Tranche B specifically mention Saudi female divorcees? Is the implication that married and single women aren't allowed to purchase shares, or am I misunderstanding?

It seems like there's a presumption that a Saudi woman who marries a foreigner will take his citizenship. Eg in [1]:

> 17 - Considering Articles (132 – 133) of Legal Civil Procedures System, the Saudi female does not lose her Saudi Citizenship if she married a foreigner, unless she is allowed to leave the Kingdom with her husband, and joined her husband's nationality according to statutory laws of this nationality.

> 18 - Saudi wife of a foreigner has the right to recover her Saudi Citizenship in case of divorce and returning to the Kingdom.

So, although it's explicitly not the case that a Saudi woman automatically loses Saudi citizenship on marriage, reading between the lines a bit, it seems that it's common that she does in practice, because she takes her husband's nationality. Perhaps it's common for the citizenship rules in other Arab countries to require that? So if a Saudi woman marries a Emirati man, maybe Emirati law requires that she becomes an Emirati citizen, so she stops being a Saudi citizen. This is speculation, though.

[1] https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/3fb9eb6d2.pdf

A married female is the property of her husband, therefore the investment is being made by a non-saudi national if she is married to a foreign national. Just your everyday Saudi sexism.

To spare writing -ism words about Saudi, just write barbarism.

A married woman is not the property of her husband. Stop spreading lies and hate.

I was curious about the issue and found this article which has some details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_rights_in_Saudi_Arab...

In Saudi Arabia, women need permission from their male guardian to perform a variety of activities:

> The anti male-guardianship campaign is an ongoing campaign by Saudi women against the requirement to obtain permission from their male guardian for activities such as getting a job, travelling internationally or getting married.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_anti_male-guardianship...

While maybe not property (just like how children are not property of their parents in the US), it does seem that women’s rights are limited in Saudi Arabia compared to most other countries.

Can single or married Saudi women purchase Aramco stock in this sale or do they need permission from their husband/guardian? That’s what I was trying to understand originally. Reading between the lines, it seemed to be saying that only divorced women who are responsible for kids can buy shares, and other women cannot (maybe with permission of their guardian?)

> [...] it does seem that women’s rights are limited in Saudi Arabia compared to most other countries.

I would like to nominate this for comment for 'Most Valuable Understatement' of the day.

Trolling aside, yes, it is very restrictive for females living in Saudi Arabia compared to pretty much any other country on Earth. I have hope that in my lifetime this will change.

Why don't you enlighten us to women's role is Saudi society, instead of telling me I'm wrong tell me how woman are viewed.

There's lots wrong with Saudi laws but 99% of HN readers, including yourself I am sure, know that no woman is the property of any man in Saudi. I've seen many comments about Islam from hyperbole to downright lies intended to promote hate. These comments are frequently allowed to slide without any rebuttal or attempt at moderation. What might seem like hyperbole to you is read as truth by others, and there is a tidal wave of hate and filth out there (not on HN) relating to Islam and muslims. In future I intend to call these comments out on HN instead of ignoring them as I have lazily done in the past, because in some ways they have a bigger impact than the simple slavering on right wing hate sites. My karma will almost certainly run dry at some point, because of the human tendency to dislike being called out for this sort of stuff, at which point I will have to return to letting it slide once more.

Call me out on it if it's wrong, to me it was more a generalisation, I don't actually think they are considered property. But women in SA have fewer rights and many of these are dependent on the male relative (father or husband). So feel free to call out inaccuracies here on HN, but know it goes both ways. Make sure you call out the inequality of women in SA and don't gloss over it. So in your initial response to me you should have said I was wrong, they are not property, but they are certainly considered second class citizens with SA. To say "they aren't property" and leave it at that is disingenuous at best.

It also looks like thy couldn't subscribe if they don't have children, while presumably Saudi men can subscribe if married to a foreigner, if they have children or not. It's fascinating what goes through the heads (or doesn't) of people writing rules like this.

Yes, that is the implication. Saudi Arabia oppresses women.

Who knew feminism and climate awareness would tie up so nicely in the end? More renewables -> less oil -> less money for Saudi arabia