I think that in order to draw an accurate answer to the questions you brought up, the idea of public space should be better defined and trimmed down. What constitutes public space? Are public universities, schools, health care systems, public parks..etc, part of that public sphere you are referring to? Many activities and life elements make up that space, and access to them enables or denies one opportunities. My point is that if so you can rely on laws that are specific to ensuring equal opportunity, and thus access. In article 6 of the constitution, the government ensures for all Jordanians equal education, work and opportunities –within its limits). This can be relied on if you can build up the argument in a way that these males/females are denied opportunity because of this ban. As for “equality before the law” article, it is an exhaustive list in my opinion, what else can justify that the rule of Islam on having two women testify in the place of one man is still in force, in addition to other state practices in relation to family law and so. Like you said there needs to be further research and pressure on the government.

As for your second question, although “privately owned coffee shops, restaurants, shops, malls, souqs …” provide services for the public, I don’t think, unlike the government, they are obliged to provide access to everyone, that’s why restaurants use dress code rules and other ways to filter the people they want/don’t want. In this case, not all males are denied, only those who are single and most of the time, who appear to be from a low-income background. This situation is sad and troubling, especially given how these kids are made to feel and how they will react in the future towards society. On another level, there was an interesting case last month about a man who was denied entry into a restaurant in Abdoun for wearing a dishdasheh. He filed a lawsuit against the restaurant, but he later dropped it as the matter was dealt with through il-jaha. It would have been interesting to see on what grounds he filed the complaint. Anyway, it is worth looking at the by-laws of such companies and shops, if they have any, local statutes and international agreements which Jordan is party to. Although international law is mainly concerned with state action rather than the private sector, but this is changing..

1. Since the constitution does not recognize gender as grounds for non-discrimination, does that mean that gender can legally be used as grounds for barring people from public spaces or discriminating against them in other ways, or is non-discrimination based on gender implicit under the banner of “equality for all Jordanians before the law”? If not, then this is an issue that requires further research and advocacy.

2. While privately owned coffee shops, restaurants, shops, malls, souqs, hotels and swimming pools are indeed private property, do you agree that they are established to provide a public service and therefore should be accessible to all? If not, would it be acceptable for example for private establishments to bar people based religion, race or language, which you mention are specifically stated as a basis for discrimination under the constitution? How about barring people due to disability for example? Wouldn’t that become an ethical question, and what would then be the legal recourse for individuals who face this kind of discrimination? What about publically owned spaces that are managed by the private sector for example an amusement park owned by the Greater Amman Municipality and managed by a private company? Who has the right to decide who can be granted or barred admission from such places?

1. Since the constitution does not recognize gender as grounds for non-discrimination, does that mean that gender can legally be used as grounds for barring people from public spaces or discriminating against them in other ways, or is non-discrimination based on gender implicit under the banner of “equality for all Jordanians before the law”? If not, then this is an issue that requires further research and advocacy.

2. While privately owned coffee shops, restaurants, shops, malls, souqs, hotels and swimming pools are indeed private property, do you agree that they are established to provide a public service and therefore should be accessible to all? If not, would it be acceptable for example for private establishments to bar people based religion, race or language, which you mention are specifically stated as a basis for discrimination under the constitution? How about barring people due to disability for example? Wouldn’t that become an ethical question, and what would then be the legal recourse for individuals who face this kind of discrimination? What about publically owned spaces that are managed by the private sector for example an amusement park owned by the Greater Amman Municipality and managed by a private company? Who has the right to decide who can be granted or barred admission from such places?

Another point of law which the writer argues is that “Barring boys and men from public spaces is against the Jordanian constitution, which grants equality to all Jordanians under the law.” There are two points which I would like to point out: First, “coffee shops, restaurants, shops, malls, souqs, hotels, swimming pools, amusement parks” cannot be considered public spaces. Most of the establishments mentioned by the writer are private companies and accordingly they have the power to draw the rules regarding who can or cannot access them. Not necessarily something i agree with but this is how things are run in the corporate business sector.

Second, i am not for the idea of claiming the existence of rights which are not granted in the constitution as the writer seems to claim. Expanding the scope of the Article 20 to include a “right to access public spaces” because we are equal before the law has no foundation at all. In fact, there is no “constitutional right of access to all public spaces” or even freedom of movement in the Jordanian constitution. Nevertheless, recently Jordan lifted its reservation on freedom of movement under CEDAW,

Jordanians at large, especially those working on the grassroots level, should be aware of the limitations of Jordanian laws in order to better address them. Giving a false impression about what rights we hold is misleading and can steer us away from acting against some of the main frameworks that are fundamental to promoting equality.

Finally, i agree with several points namely the need to have gender-mixed after school programs. Even activities for males alone are essential especially with the absence of programs addressing their needs and the traditional concentration of programs on females alone. Although young males should be able to access malls and coffee shops, investing their energies in more meaningful activities is necessary.

The puzzle is what small steps and changes we have to do as a society to actually get there. I think one of the most effective changes we can do is what Raghda mentioned about involving female teachers and even classmates in the lives of teenage boys. I can testify from my own experience growing up in an all male private high school in Jordan that kids in all male schools graduate with a disadvantage when it comes to dealing with members of the opposite sex.

Also, someone might want to make the point that we should keep in mind that most of our universities are coed anyway, so these kids are going to finish high school and then they're going to be walking and talking with members of the opposite sex, and sometimes even being taught by them in college anyway. So really what is the point of separating them in high school to begin with?!!!

How can we explain violence in universities? What about the latest problems in Ajloun, Maan, and Hay al Tafayleh…. Common people… we have to connect the dots…

One thing we can all do to about bad public behavior is address it firmly and kindly. If we are out and pack-attitudes are interrupting the general peace, I go talk to them. Encouraging them to be their best goes farther than screaming and condemning, and somehow the respect that is given them is then returned and helps them rise above a lowest common denominator of action.