I produced this piece for a segment called "Top Spots in Boston."
For for information about Boston Paintball.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Do We Communicate too Much?
Cell phones are a modern convenience many Americans enjoy, and sometimes overuse. With the advent of text messaging all applications available on "smart phones," people rely on cellphones to communicate. People talk on the phone while walking down the street and grocery shopping. To the dismay of law enforcement, despite laws prohibiting people from talking and texting while driving, it is still a common practice.
We rely on cellphones so much that it is shocking to think people survived in the pre-cellphone era. Instead, while out of their homes, people relied on pay phones to communicate. However, it was, and I argue is still, rare to see someone having a lengthy, in-depth conversation on a public telephone. Why? It is time consuming to figuratively attach oneself to a public phone and chat up a friend for a substantial amount of time.
Problem solved! With the cell phone people can have long phone conversations while going about their daily routines. I'm sure the people you sit next to on the subway or walk alongside down the street are interested in hearing about your medical problems, boyfriend troubles or mother issues. Cellphone convenience is wonderful, except for people who have to endure listening to someone's play-by-play about her steamy night with her best friend's boyfriend (true story).
From phone conversations on crowded buses and trains to talking while you are checking out at a store, people who have a cellphone permanently attached to their ears are annoying. I would venture to say that many of them overuse their cellphone in public to validate their social status, because obviously someone who is always on the phone has many friends. In reality, it is impossible to know if the person talking on a cellphone walking next to you down the street is actually talking to someone. Maybe they are pretending.
Environmental activists and Save The Children employees crowd Boston's Kenmore Square soliciting passersby to donate money to their cause. Although many of these people are well intentioned, they can be overbearing. Honestly, how many college students have $50 a month to spare? I have no problem volunteering my time to cleanup a park or do other philanthropic work. But, these organizations don't want my time. They want my money. And, I have major issues with cutting a monthly check to an organization who just cares about my money. When I do not want to deal with this "do-gooders," I pretend to be on my cellphone. Surprisingly, I am not the only one who does this.
Aside from avoiding tree-huggers, cellphones are great for getting out of other uncomfortable situations. To avoid an awkward run-in with an ex, all a person needs to do is pretend to be talking on the phone. Add a casual wave and maybe a smile, and it is the perfect recipe to get out of what has the potential to be a painful situation.
Cellphones are a wonderful convenience. However, it seems as though people use this communicative crutch to avoid real-life interactions. 2010 has more technology than 1980 had. But, has our overabundance of technological mediums led to the regression of face-to-face communicative skills?
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Unveiling Saudi Arabia
America is “the land of the free and home of the brave” according to the country’s anthem, the “Star Spangled Banner.” This phrase is ingrained in the American psyche. However, with criticism of other countries based on ignorance constituting the majority of Americans’ knowledge of foreign relations, it may be time for a refresher course in America’s founding principles, which are enthusiastically spewed, seldom understood and too often molded to fit political policies.
America fought for its sovereignty against the British in the American War of Independence. However, America’s recent initiatives to undermine the sovereignty of Middle Eastern countries in the name of democracy and freedom are loosely reminiscent of President Woodrow Wilson’s failed “self-determination policy.” The bottom-line: America is the defender of freedom, as long as the freedom it is defending is the freedom to emulate America.
After the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, Americans fell deeper into a black hole of cultural-centricity characteristic of Vietnam War ethos. The unofficial and never spoken motto: Our way is the only way.
When patriotic fervor subsided and terrorism-reporting angles were exhausted, America needed new bait to substantiate its world-policeman role. Cloaked in good intentions, America set out to combat terrorism by delegitimizing countries whose practices it claimed suppressive and whose ways of life it argued bred terrorists.
The target: Islam.
Islam
Muslims believe Islam is an all inclusive faith gradually revealed to humanity. Islam recognizes and respects the other biblical religions, Christianity and Judaism. Islam upholds their prophets, including Adam, Moses, and Jesus of Nazareth, as a series of G-d’s revelations. However, Muslims believe the Qur’an, as revealed to the prophet Muhammad in the 7th century AD was G-d’s final revelation to mankind.
Unlike the old and new testaments, the Qur’an is not narrative. Instead, the holy book of Islam, the Qur’an, is divided into suras, roughly translated in English as chapters, which are guidelines for a just society. Non sequential, the Qur’an is written so a person may open to any page at any time and obtain guidance from a passage, whereas the narrative old and new testaments require more in depth reading of complete stories to obtain moral guidance.
At the core of Islam are the “Five Pillars of Faith,” which Muslims believe if completed or attempted makes them true Muslims.
Shahadah: The profession of faith to and the existence of one G-d, Allah.
Salat: The participation in the five daily prayers.
Zahah: The act of giving alms, a percentage of a person’s income, to the poor.
Sawm: The act of fasting during the holy month of Ramadan.
Hajj: The act of traveling, making the pilgrimage, to the holy city of Mecca at least once.
Although the five pillars are the foundational principles of Islam and required of all Muslims, the Qur’an accommodates for situations when Muslims are excused from fulfilling a duty. One example is the exemption of a pregnant or nursing woman from fasting during Ramadan.
Concepts not contained, or loosely explained in the Qur’an are subject to ijtihad, an Arabic word meaning independent reasoning. Ijtihad allows for discussion and consensus on an Islamic approach to circumstances not described in the Qur’an. Ijtihad illustrates the adaptability of Islam to modern times.
Islam is a complex religion whose principles, manifested in G-d’s revelation to Muhammad (the Qur’an) and the prophet Muhammad’s sayings and actions (the Sunna) are the guiding doctrines of Islam. Together, the Qur’an and Sunna constitute the sharia, the Islamic rules and regulations that guide Muslims in their relationships with G-d, amongst other Muslims, and with outside communities.
The fundamental principle of Islam, the first pillar of faith, is monotheism. In Arabic, the word hakiyima refers to the sovereignty of G-d. Since G-d created the laws and principles of the Sharia Muslims do not acknowledge any individual or entity as being above G-d’s sovereignty.
The Intermarriage of Religion & Government
Hakiyima legitimizes Islamic governments. Islam does not distinguish between religion and government, so G-d’s laws, as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad, should be the basis of government. Islamic governments maintain legitimacy to rule a Muslim population by adhering to the guidelines and maintaining the moral principles of G-d’s laws. If an Islamic government fails, in the eyes of its people, to abide by this criteria it loses legitimacy. Thus, an Islamic government requires the consensus of those it governs to maintain authority.
As of 2009 there are only two Islamic governments: Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Controversy Over the Kingdom
Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam and al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden, became a target of international criticism after the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States.
Western democracies and media have condemned the Saudi monarchy’s practices as repressive and demoralizing, specifically toward women.
In Saudi Arabia women wear an abaya, a floor-length, shapeless robe. This traditional garb is criticized by western countries and international organizations as gender discrimination (men do not wear the abaya) and repressive of individuality.
Shaima al-Husseini, a Boston University graduate student from Saudi Arabia described the origins of the burqa, which is misunderstood as the legally mandated dress for Saudi women. “Tribal Bedouin women wore the burqa to protect their faces from the sand,” she said. “Nowadays because of modernization and so on people don’t wear the burqa as much, but some Bedouin women still wear it to show pride in their heritage.”
Skewed reporting and ignorance of differences between Saudi tradition and law are the catalysts of controversy and are simultaneously referenced to substantiate claims of Saudi tyranny and repression of its female population.
A 2007 episode of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher criticized Saudi restrictions on women with a segment Maher called “The Fifth Annual Fall Fundamentalist Fashion Show.”
“Whether you are on the go, or simply knowing your place, nobody does repression like the House of Saud,” Maher narrated as an individual wearing an abaya came onstage. He provoked laughs with witticisms like, “This outfit screams look out world, I am a woman of the twelfth century.”
Maher’s biggest mistake was faulty, or perhaps lack of, research. He called the garment worn by Saudi women a burqa. An abaya is the dress-like garment worn by Saudi women. The hijab is a head covering.
The burqa is the piece of cloth that covers a woman’s face.
Comical to some, the spoof reinforced stereotypes while insulting a society and displaying American ignorance and feelings of cultural superiority.
Others, like Maher, have expressed disgust for the second-class status of Saudi women. However, do advocates of Saudi reform know the origins of and reasons for the traditions and laws of the kingdom and difference between the two? Possibly more important, do they make an effort to understand?
Wahhabism is a Movement, not a Religion
After the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, Islamic fundamentalist movements, including Wahhabism (sometimes called Salafiyya), the dominant Sunni ideology in Saudi Arabia, were investigated as possible ideological breeding grounds for Islamic terrorist groups.
The term “fundamentalism” is commonly misused to describe terrorist organizations. However, “fundamentalism” refers to
Saudi Arabia does not have a constitution like those of western democracies. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, whose royal family, the Saud Family, rules based on Islamic law. The kingdom’s “Basic Law of Government,” written in 1993, identifies the Qur’an as its constitution. Article 1 states:
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital.
A strong relationship between the monarchial family and the Wahhabi religious establishment predates the kingdom’s creation in 1932. Article 23 of the “Basic Law of Government” reflects Wahhabi thought, advocating adherence to Islamic law.
The state protects Islam; it implements its Shari'ah; it orders people to do right and shun evil; it fulfills the duty regarding God's call.
Wahhabism, which is often identified as the dominant form of Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia, is not a form of Islam but a movement to guide Muslims to live Islamic lives as defined by the shariah.
Feda al-Tuwajri, a Boston University graduate student from Saudi Arabia said Saudis do not use the term Wahhabism.
“Using the term Wahhabism is actually counterproductive to what he [Muhammad ibdn Abd al Wahhab] was trying to do,” al-Tuwajri said. “We don’t see it [the Wahhabist Movement] as something new. We don’t say we are Wahhabi. We say we are Muslim.”
Women and Modesty
Verse 24:31 of the Qur’an addresses women’s modesty, hijab an Arabic word meaning to cover or to veil.
And tell the believing women to subdue their eyes, and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall cover their chests, and shall not relax this code in the presence of other than their husbands, their fathers, the fathers of their husbands, their sons, the sons of their husbands, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, other women, the male servants or employees whose sexual drive has been nullified, or the children who have not reached puberty. They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake and reveal certain details of their bodies. All of you shall repent to GOD, O you believers, that you may succeed.
In this verse, the Qur’an states women should dress modestly. However, the Qur’an does not define modesty.
There is no law requiring women to wear an abaya, burqa, or hijab in Saudi Arabia. Many women choose to wear an abaya and hijab out of respect for their family and cultural traditions.
“Modesty is a religious idea and it is something that can take on many forms,” said Feda al-Tuwajri. Wearing a bright red blouse and denim jeans, modesty, she said is not only expressed in physical appearance but in mannerisms. “The abaya is something that is part of our traditions, not our religion. It is our traditional dress that we are very proud of.”
Six female Saudi college students interviewed about life in the kingdom concurred with al-Tuwajri’s pride in wearing the abaya.
Saudi women are not legally restricted to wear an abaya, hijab, or burqa. Women who wear the abaya and hijab do so by choice. If this is true, why does the media condemn the house of Saud for repressing women?
al-Tuwajri explained all misconceptions are based on fact. Some women in Saudi Arabia wear the burqa, but it is not the norm. Saying all women in the kingdom wear a burqa is the equivalent of stating all American women own Prada handbags. Pictures of women in burqas do not justify a generalization of Saudi women anymore than pictures of celebrities and posh purses quantify a generalization of American women.
Saudi women are not repressed in dress, but are second-class citizens. Right?
Women and Education
A common misconception is Saudi women are uneducated and confined to domesticity.
Saudi Arabia instituted publicly funded education for females in 1960, only six years after public male education became publicly funded.
In 2003 Saudi Arabia had a 70.8% literacy rate among Saudi women, partially attributable to advancements in women’s education and the establishment of all female colleges. Currently 58% of the student population in Saudi Arabia is female.
Women are not limited to pursuing higher education within the kingdom. The government offers its students, both female and male, study abroad opportunities.
Established by the Saudi government in 1951, the Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission (SACM) to the United States administers educational and cultural programs to Saudi students studying in the United States. As part of Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Higher Education, SACM aims to improve the educational and cultural relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States while affording Saudi students opportunities to pursue higher education outside the kingdom’s educational system.
The Six Saudi women interviewed are students at Boston universities pursuing undergraduate or graduate degrees. Scholarship recipients, their education and living expenses are fully funded by the Saudi government. All of these women said after completing their degrees they plan to return to the kingdom and join the Saudi workforce.
Despite a highly educated female population, women constitute only 5.4% of the Saudi workforce.
“I know the unemployment rates for women aren’t high,” said al-Tuwajri. “But I don’t know what the unemployment rates for women that are seeking a job are.”
In 2005, the Saudi Government issued a five-year development plan to increase the percentage of working women. Reforms aim to influence future and current mothers. According to al-Tuwajri mothers who work are provided prenatal and delivery care and paid maternity leave with a guarantee of being able to return to their position.
Maha al-Sweilem, a Simmons College graduate student from Saudi Arabia said there is a high demand for women in professional fields in Saudi Arabia. “It’s like the booming time for women that are willing to enter the workforce.”
A recent graduate of a Bentley College graduate studies program, Reema al-Sweilem said she is currently interviewing for several positions in Saudi Arabia and is hoping to return to the kingdom in the next couple months.
Young Saudi women have many professional, female role models within the kingdom. TV correspondent Naila al-Sowayel was the first woman in Saudi Arabia to appear on television without an abaya or hijab. In March 2009 King Abdullah’s appointed Noor al-Fayez minister of women’s education. Fayez is the first female to serve in the Saudi Council of Ministers.
Although the employment rate of Saudi women is low it is not a result of restrictive laws or lack of choices.
If Saudi women do not feel like second-class citizens why do media portray them as such?
No Society is Perfect
All societies have problems. However, when identifying these imperfections it is essential to concurrently consider actions being taken toward improvement. The Saudi Monarchy is not the repressive government portrayed by mainstream media, but it is not perfect either.
Although women are educated and able to pursue professional goals there are still several cultural restrictions placed upon women that underlie the patriarchal character of Saudi society. Two such restrictions are women may not drive a vehicle and women require a male relative chaperone when in public.
In Riyadh, the kingdom’s capital, fifty women orchestrated a demonstration against the unofficial ban on women’s driving on November 6, 1990. The women dismissed their drivers and drove throughout the city.
The government, which legitimizes its authority on the ability to uphold Islamic principles, responded to the demonstration with the Ministry of the Interior officially banning women’s driving. However, the Qur’an does not prohibit women from driving.
Using qiyas, an Islamic principle of drawing analogies between current issues not addressed in Islamic law but for which rough equivalencies in the Qur’an exist, it is arguable women should be permitted to drive. In the time of the Prophet Muhammad women were permitted to “drive” camels, which would be equivalent to women driving cars in the 21st century.
However, the Supreme Council of Islamic Research issued a fatwa, a religious ruling on Islamic law, stating “women should not be allowed to drive motor vehicles as the shari’a instructs that things that degrade or harm the dignity of women must be prevented.”
The legitimacy of the government’s ban and the religious fatwa on females driving is questioned in the international community as well as among many Saudi women who are fighting for the government to repeal the driving ban.
In 2007 more than 1,000 women petitioned King Abdullah to repeal the driving ban. Although female driving remains illegal the social inequality is recognized and does not deter women from actively pursuing reform.
Another imperfection in Saudi society is that Saudi women commonly travel in public with a male relative (husband, father or brother). Unlike the driving ban, traveling with a male escort is not legally mandated, but it is an accepted and common custom.
Portrayed by the international community as a degrading policy that ensures the dependency of women to men, the tradition originated as a way to ensure respect for women who society feared, if unattended, would be unwarrantedly harassed.
Referencing Islamic law the custom is justifiable. The shari’a states women should be prevented from activities that could result in their physical or moral degradation. Accordingly, the practice is rooted in the protection not punishment of women. In America a comparable custom would be a father insisting on meeting his daughter’s boyfriend. This tradition is not legally imposed, but many fathers (and sometimes mothers) engage in this practice with the goal of protecting and serving the best interest of their daughters.
Women do take action to reform societal customs with which unhappy. With only 5.4% of females in the Saudi workforce lingerie businesses in the kingdom are mostly operated by men. Saudi women have recently expressed discomfort discussing and buying their unmentionables from a man who is not their husband.
Like the women pursuing driving rights, these women are actively pursuing reform. In March 2009 a group of fifty women started a boycott of male-operated lingerie stores. Additionally, approximately 1,700 women have signed a petition to implement Labor Law 120. The law, created in 2006 but never enforced, states, “only females may be employed in women apparel and accessories stores." The Saudi women’s initiative is also using the social networking medium Facebook to initiate global support for their campaign (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=20469931029).
The inconclusive conclusion is that Saudi Arabia, like all countries, has its fair share of problems. Maybe the kingdom’s problems can be solved with a good dose of modernization and democratization.
Shades of Modernity
Superficially, Saudi Arabia’s “problems” seem rooted in culture and tradition predating the monarchy’s birth in 1932. If a valid diagnosis, what is the cure? “Modernize!” shouts the West.
“Modernization” is a loaded concept, because it can be interpreted differently among different people.
Saudi Arabia is inseparable from Islam. As the guardians of the two holiest Islamic sites, Mecca and Medina, and with the consent of its people, the monarchy will maintain authority to rule so long as it governs based upon Islamic principles and the shari’ah. Thus the western principle of “separation of church and state” cannot and will not be accepted by the Saudi people.
Saudis main transportation is not the camel. They do not live by biblical standards, and Islam is not a stagnant religion. Ijtihad is a driving force of modernity within Islam. Independent reasoning on issues not discussed in the Qur’an is a means to find Islamic solutions to modern issues. Boston University Visiting Assistant Professor of Women’s Studies Roberta Micallef asked, “If we can have Christian Democrats in Germany why not Islamic Democrats in Saudi Arabia?”
Laura-Ann Lamprou is an undergraduate student at Boston University. Born in Greece, Lamprou’s formative childhood and teenage years were spent in Saudi Arabia where she lived for thirteen years before moving to the United States. “Saudi is so modern,” Lamprou explained. “Their mall has British and American stores. Their supermarkets had every American cereal possible, and they got a Starbucks before Greece.” Lamprou, who lived in the kingdom during the 2003 Iraq War when several American compounds were bombed, raved about Saudi Arabia’s modernity and said she would love to go back. “I only had positive experiences.”
With government funded and accessible education, and modern conveniences and luxuries from shopping malls to Starbucks, can Saudi Arabia legitimately be classified a backward, desert kingdom?
Lamprou said no. “I honestly don’t think they [Saudis] are unhappy. As much as some may say they are being oppressed, I actually think they [Saudis] are perfectly comfortable.”
Lamprou said she believes change is determined by internal, not external pressures. “If enough women want it [change] they can bring about their own change,” said Lamprou.
During the late 1960s and throughout the 1970s Saudi Arabia experienced an explosion of development that included increased openness to the Western world.
However, Islamic conservatism resuscitated itself in 1979 with the fear that rapid modernization was resulting in the disintegration of the state’s Islamic identity.
Two 1979 events catalyzed reawakened Islamic conservatism as strong social force: the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the siege of the Grand Mosque in Mecca by religiously conservative critics of the monarchy.
Ayatollah Khomeini, the political leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, called for the overthrow of the Saudi monarchy. He criticized Saudi society for adopting Western influences and accused the monarchy of being “un-Islamic.” Khomeini’s allegations threatened the legitimacy of the monarchy’s authority, who used Islamic conservatism to reconstitute its authority.
The same year as the Iranian Revolution and Khomeini’s allegations of an illegitimate Saudi government, religiously influenced Saudi militants seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca, calling for decreased Western influence in Saudi Arabia. Although the majority of Saudis disagreed with the militants’ actions, the masses did empathize with the militants’ appeal for less Western influence and a rejuvenation of Islamic values.
Together, these events justified the monarchy’s return to Islamic conservatism. Islamic Conservatism, which dominated Saudi society in the 1980s and, arguably at present, revived many traditions concerning women, many of which are sources of Western criticism.
Is there closure?
Despite challenges within the kingdom, Saudi women are intelligent, motivated forward thinkers.
Professor Micallef said most Saudi women would probably say, “We’re not helpless, dependent, voiceless people. We know what we are doing and what we want, and we are striving to get it.”
Media has done a monstrous disservice to Saudi Arabia by reinforcing narrow minded and demeaning characterizations of a country that attempts and undertakes modernization in a way that allows it to maintain its identity as an Islamic state. The solution is simple: the media needs to report acurately, problems should be addressed, but positives should not be ignored. Implementing the solution requires an overhaul of the journalism trend that emphasizes negative news.
Despite media portrayals, neither Islam or Saudi Arabia is incompatible with modernization. The Islamic State of Saudi Arabia will achieve the modernization it seeks on its own terms and on its own schedule.
America fought for its sovereignty against the British in the American War of Independence. However, America’s recent initiatives to undermine the sovereignty of Middle Eastern countries in the name of democracy and freedom are loosely reminiscent of President Woodrow Wilson’s failed “self-determination policy.” The bottom-line: America is the defender of freedom, as long as the freedom it is defending is the freedom to emulate America.
After the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, Americans fell deeper into a black hole of cultural-centricity characteristic of Vietnam War ethos. The unofficial and never spoken motto: Our way is the only way.
When patriotic fervor subsided and terrorism-reporting angles were exhausted, America needed new bait to substantiate its world-policeman role. Cloaked in good intentions, America set out to combat terrorism by delegitimizing countries whose practices it claimed suppressive and whose ways of life it argued bred terrorists.
The target: Islam.
Islam
Muslims believe Islam is an all inclusive faith gradually revealed to humanity. Islam recognizes and respects the other biblical religions, Christianity and Judaism. Islam upholds their prophets, including Adam, Moses, and Jesus of Nazareth, as a series of G-d’s revelations. However, Muslims believe the Qur’an, as revealed to the prophet Muhammad in the 7th century AD was G-d’s final revelation to mankind.
Unlike the old and new testaments, the Qur’an is not narrative. Instead, the holy book of Islam, the Qur’an, is divided into suras, roughly translated in English as chapters, which are guidelines for a just society. Non sequential, the Qur’an is written so a person may open to any page at any time and obtain guidance from a passage, whereas the narrative old and new testaments require more in depth reading of complete stories to obtain moral guidance.
At the core of Islam are the “Five Pillars of Faith,” which Muslims believe if completed or attempted makes them true Muslims.
Shahadah: The profession of faith to and the existence of one G-d, Allah.
Salat: The participation in the five daily prayers.
Zahah: The act of giving alms, a percentage of a person’s income, to the poor.
Sawm: The act of fasting during the holy month of Ramadan.
Hajj: The act of traveling, making the pilgrimage, to the holy city of Mecca at least once.
Although the five pillars are the foundational principles of Islam and required of all Muslims, the Qur’an accommodates for situations when Muslims are excused from fulfilling a duty. One example is the exemption of a pregnant or nursing woman from fasting during Ramadan.
Concepts not contained, or loosely explained in the Qur’an are subject to ijtihad, an Arabic word meaning independent reasoning. Ijtihad allows for discussion and consensus on an Islamic approach to circumstances not described in the Qur’an. Ijtihad illustrates the adaptability of Islam to modern times.
Islam is a complex religion whose principles, manifested in G-d’s revelation to Muhammad (the Qur’an) and the prophet Muhammad’s sayings and actions (the Sunna) are the guiding doctrines of Islam. Together, the Qur’an and Sunna constitute the sharia, the Islamic rules and regulations that guide Muslims in their relationships with G-d, amongst other Muslims, and with outside communities.
The fundamental principle of Islam, the first pillar of faith, is monotheism. In Arabic, the word hakiyima refers to the sovereignty of G-d. Since G-d created the laws and principles of the Sharia Muslims do not acknowledge any individual or entity as being above G-d’s sovereignty.
The Intermarriage of Religion & Government
Hakiyima legitimizes Islamic governments. Islam does not distinguish between religion and government, so G-d’s laws, as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad, should be the basis of government. Islamic governments maintain legitimacy to rule a Muslim population by adhering to the guidelines and maintaining the moral principles of G-d’s laws. If an Islamic government fails, in the eyes of its people, to abide by this criteria it loses legitimacy. Thus, an Islamic government requires the consensus of those it governs to maintain authority.
As of 2009 there are only two Islamic governments: Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Controversy Over the Kingdom
Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam and al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden, became a target of international criticism after the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States.
Western democracies and media have condemned the Saudi monarchy’s practices as repressive and demoralizing, specifically toward women.
In Saudi Arabia women wear an abaya, a floor-length, shapeless robe. This traditional garb is criticized by western countries and international organizations as gender discrimination (men do not wear the abaya) and repressive of individuality.
Shaima al-Husseini, a Boston University graduate student from Saudi Arabia described the origins of the burqa, which is misunderstood as the legally mandated dress for Saudi women. “Tribal Bedouin women wore the burqa to protect their faces from the sand,” she said. “Nowadays because of modernization and so on people don’t wear the burqa as much, but some Bedouin women still wear it to show pride in their heritage.”
Skewed reporting and ignorance of differences between Saudi tradition and law are the catalysts of controversy and are simultaneously referenced to substantiate claims of Saudi tyranny and repression of its female population.
A 2007 episode of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher criticized Saudi restrictions on women with a segment Maher called “The Fifth Annual Fall Fundamentalist Fashion Show.”
“Whether you are on the go, or simply knowing your place, nobody does repression like the House of Saud,” Maher narrated as an individual wearing an abaya came onstage. He provoked laughs with witticisms like, “This outfit screams look out world, I am a woman of the twelfth century.”
Maher’s biggest mistake was faulty, or perhaps lack of, research. He called the garment worn by Saudi women a burqa. An abaya is the dress-like garment worn by Saudi women. The hijab is a head covering.
The burqa is the piece of cloth that covers a woman’s face.
Comical to some, the spoof reinforced stereotypes while insulting a society and displaying American ignorance and feelings of cultural superiority.
Others, like Maher, have expressed disgust for the second-class status of Saudi women. However, do advocates of Saudi reform know the origins of and reasons for the traditions and laws of the kingdom and difference between the two? Possibly more important, do they make an effort to understand?
Wahhabism is a Movement, not a ReligionAfter the September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, Islamic fundamentalist movements, including Wahhabism (sometimes called Salafiyya), the dominant Sunni ideology in Saudi Arabia, were investigated as possible ideological breeding grounds for Islamic terrorist groups.
The term “fundamentalism” is commonly misused to describe terrorist organizations. However, “fundamentalism” refers to
the strict adherence of religious texts, which are considered the “fundamentals” of a religion.
Wahhabism, the Islamic revivalist movement started by Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab during the 18th century in the Arabian Peninsula, is a fundamentalist movement (when the term is used properly). Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab’s movement originated as a response to Muslims’ participation in polytheistic practices. Islam, a monotheistic religion, does not condone practices that undermine the sovereignty of G-d and thus the principle of monotheism. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab aimed to correct Muslim society’s internal problems by eliminating societal excesses, such as the developed celebration of the Prophet Muhammad’s birthday. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhad advocated returning to a strict adherence of Islamic law.
Wahhabism, the Islamic revivalist movement started by Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab during the 18th century in the Arabian Peninsula, is a fundamentalist movement (when the term is used properly). Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab’s movement originated as a response to Muslims’ participation in polytheistic practices. Islam, a monotheistic religion, does not condone practices that undermine the sovereignty of G-d and thus the principle of monotheism. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab aimed to correct Muslim society’s internal problems by eliminating societal excesses, such as the developed celebration of the Prophet Muhammad’s birthday. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhad advocated returning to a strict adherence of Islamic law.
Saudi Arabia does not have a constitution like those of western democracies. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, whose royal family, the Saud Family, rules based on Islamic law. The kingdom’s “Basic Law of Government,” written in 1993, identifies the Qur’an as its constitution. Article 1 states:
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital.
A strong relationship between the monarchial family and the Wahhabi religious establishment predates the kingdom’s creation in 1932. Article 23 of the “Basic Law of Government” reflects Wahhabi thought, advocating adherence to Islamic law.
The state protects Islam; it implements its Shari'ah; it orders people to do right and shun evil; it fulfills the duty regarding God's call.
Wahhabism, which is often identified as the dominant form of Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia, is not a form of Islam but a movement to guide Muslims to live Islamic lives as defined by the shariah.
Feda al-Tuwajri, a Boston University graduate student from Saudi Arabia said Saudis do not use the term Wahhabism.
“Using the term Wahhabism is actually counterproductive to what he [Muhammad ibdn Abd al Wahhab] was trying to do,” al-Tuwajri said. “We don’t see it [the Wahhabist Movement] as something new. We don’t say we are Wahhabi. We say we are Muslim.”
Women and Modesty
Verse 24:31 of the Qur’an addresses women’s modesty, hijab an Arabic word meaning to cover or to veil.
And tell the believing women to subdue their eyes, and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall cover their chests, and shall not relax this code in the presence of other than their husbands, their fathers, the fathers of their husbands, their sons, the sons of their husbands, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, other women, the male servants or employees whose sexual drive has been nullified, or the children who have not reached puberty. They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake and reveal certain details of their bodies. All of you shall repent to GOD, O you believers, that you may succeed.
In this verse, the Qur’an states women should dress modestly. However, the Qur’an does not define modesty.
There is no law requiring women to wear an abaya, burqa, or hijab in Saudi Arabia. Many women choose to wear an abaya and hijab out of respect for their family and cultural traditions.
“Modesty is a religious idea and it is something that can take on many forms,” said Feda al-Tuwajri. Wearing a bright red blouse and denim jeans, modesty, she said is not only expressed in physical appearance but in mannerisms. “The abaya is something that is part of our traditions, not our religion. It is our traditional dress that we are very proud of.”
Six female Saudi college students interviewed about life in the kingdom concurred with al-Tuwajri’s pride in wearing the abaya.
Saudi women are not legally restricted to wear an abaya, hijab, or burqa. Women who wear the abaya and hijab do so by choice. If this is true, why does the media condemn the house of Saud for repressing women?
al-Tuwajri explained all misconceptions are based on fact. Some women in Saudi Arabia wear the burqa, but it is not the norm. Saying all women in the kingdom wear a burqa is the equivalent of stating all American women own Prada handbags. Pictures of women in burqas do not justify a generalization of Saudi women anymore than pictures of celebrities and posh purses quantify a generalization of American women.
Saudi women are not repressed in dress, but are second-class citizens. Right?
Women and Education
A common misconception is Saudi women are uneducated and confined to domesticity.
Saudi Arabia instituted publicly funded education for females in 1960, only six years after public male education became publicly funded.
In 2003 Saudi Arabia had a 70.8% literacy rate among Saudi women, partially attributable to advancements in women’s education and the establishment of all female colleges. Currently 58% of the student population in Saudi Arabia is female.
Women are not limited to pursuing higher education within the kingdom. The government offers its students, both female and male, study abroad opportunities.
Established by the Saudi government in 1951, the Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission (SACM) to the United States administers educational and cultural programs to Saudi students studying in the United States. As part of Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Higher Education, SACM aims to improve the educational and cultural relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States while affording Saudi students opportunities to pursue higher education outside the kingdom’s educational system.
The Six Saudi women interviewed are students at Boston universities pursuing undergraduate or graduate degrees. Scholarship recipients, their education and living expenses are fully funded by the Saudi government. All of these women said after completing their degrees they plan to return to the kingdom and join the Saudi workforce.
Despite a highly educated female population, women constitute only 5.4% of the Saudi workforce.
“I know the unemployment rates for women aren’t high,” said al-Tuwajri. “But I don’t know what the unemployment rates for women that are seeking a job are.”
In 2005, the Saudi Government issued a five-year development plan to increase the percentage of working women. Reforms aim to influence future and current mothers. According to al-Tuwajri mothers who work are provided prenatal and delivery care and paid maternity leave with a guarantee of being able to return to their position.
Maha al-Sweilem, a Simmons College graduate student from Saudi Arabia said there is a high demand for women in professional fields in Saudi Arabia. “It’s like the booming time for women that are willing to enter the workforce.”
A recent graduate of a Bentley College graduate studies program, Reema al-Sweilem said she is currently interviewing for several positions in Saudi Arabia and is hoping to return to the kingdom in the next couple months.
Young Saudi women have many professional, female role models within the kingdom. TV correspondent Naila al-Sowayel was the first woman in Saudi Arabia to appear on television without an abaya or hijab. In March 2009 King Abdullah’s appointed Noor al-Fayez minister of women’s education. Fayez is the first female to serve in the Saudi Council of Ministers.
Although the employment rate of Saudi women is low it is not a result of restrictive laws or lack of choices.
If Saudi women do not feel like second-class citizens why do media portray them as such?
No Society is Perfect
All societies have problems. However, when identifying these imperfections it is essential to concurrently consider actions being taken toward improvement. The Saudi Monarchy is not the repressive government portrayed by mainstream media, but it is not perfect either.
Although women are educated and able to pursue professional goals there are still several cultural restrictions placed upon women that underlie the patriarchal character of Saudi society. Two such restrictions are women may not drive a vehicle and women require a male relative chaperone when in public.
In Riyadh, the kingdom’s capital, fifty women orchestrated a demonstration against the unofficial ban on women’s driving on November 6, 1990. The women dismissed their drivers and drove throughout the city.
The government, which legitimizes its authority on the ability to uphold Islamic principles, responded to the demonstration with the Ministry of the Interior officially banning women’s driving. However, the Qur’an does not prohibit women from driving.
Using qiyas, an Islamic principle of drawing analogies between current issues not addressed in Islamic law but for which rough equivalencies in the Qur’an exist, it is arguable women should be permitted to drive. In the time of the Prophet Muhammad women were permitted to “drive” camels, which would be equivalent to women driving cars in the 21st century.
However, the Supreme Council of Islamic Research issued a fatwa, a religious ruling on Islamic law, stating “women should not be allowed to drive motor vehicles as the shari’a instructs that things that degrade or harm the dignity of women must be prevented.”
The legitimacy of the government’s ban and the religious fatwa on females driving is questioned in the international community as well as among many Saudi women who are fighting for the government to repeal the driving ban.
In 2007 more than 1,000 women petitioned King Abdullah to repeal the driving ban. Although female driving remains illegal the social inequality is recognized and does not deter women from actively pursuing reform.
Another imperfection in Saudi society is that Saudi women commonly travel in public with a male relative (husband, father or brother). Unlike the driving ban, traveling with a male escort is not legally mandated, but it is an accepted and common custom.
Portrayed by the international community as a degrading policy that ensures the dependency of women to men, the tradition originated as a way to ensure respect for women who society feared, if unattended, would be unwarrantedly harassed.
Referencing Islamic law the custom is justifiable. The shari’a states women should be prevented from activities that could result in their physical or moral degradation. Accordingly, the practice is rooted in the protection not punishment of women. In America a comparable custom would be a father insisting on meeting his daughter’s boyfriend. This tradition is not legally imposed, but many fathers (and sometimes mothers) engage in this practice with the goal of protecting and serving the best interest of their daughters.
Women do take action to reform societal customs with which unhappy. With only 5.4% of females in the Saudi workforce lingerie businesses in the kingdom are mostly operated by men. Saudi women have recently expressed discomfort discussing and buying their unmentionables from a man who is not their husband.
Like the women pursuing driving rights, these women are actively pursuing reform. In March 2009 a group of fifty women started a boycott of male-operated lingerie stores. Additionally, approximately 1,700 women have signed a petition to implement Labor Law 120. The law, created in 2006 but never enforced, states, “only females may be employed in women apparel and accessories stores." The Saudi women’s initiative is also using the social networking medium Facebook to initiate global support for their campaign (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=20469931029).
The inconclusive conclusion is that Saudi Arabia, like all countries, has its fair share of problems. Maybe the kingdom’s problems can be solved with a good dose of modernization and democratization.
Shades of Modernity
Superficially, Saudi Arabia’s “problems” seem rooted in culture and tradition predating the monarchy’s birth in 1932. If a valid diagnosis, what is the cure? “Modernize!” shouts the West.
“Modernization” is a loaded concept, because it can be interpreted differently among different people.
Saudi Arabia is inseparable from Islam. As the guardians of the two holiest Islamic sites, Mecca and Medina, and with the consent of its people, the monarchy will maintain authority to rule so long as it governs based upon Islamic principles and the shari’ah. Thus the western principle of “separation of church and state” cannot and will not be accepted by the Saudi people.
Saudis main transportation is not the camel. They do not live by biblical standards, and Islam is not a stagnant religion. Ijtihad is a driving force of modernity within Islam. Independent reasoning on issues not discussed in the Qur’an is a means to find Islamic solutions to modern issues. Boston University Visiting Assistant Professor of Women’s Studies Roberta Micallef asked, “If we can have Christian Democrats in Germany why not Islamic Democrats in Saudi Arabia?”
Laura-Ann Lamprou is an undergraduate student at Boston University. Born in Greece, Lamprou’s formative childhood and teenage years were spent in Saudi Arabia where she lived for thirteen years before moving to the United States. “Saudi is so modern,” Lamprou explained. “Their mall has British and American stores. Their supermarkets had every American cereal possible, and they got a Starbucks before Greece.” Lamprou, who lived in the kingdom during the 2003 Iraq War when several American compounds were bombed, raved about Saudi Arabia’s modernity and said she would love to go back. “I only had positive experiences.”
With government funded and accessible education, and modern conveniences and luxuries from shopping malls to Starbucks, can Saudi Arabia legitimately be classified a backward, desert kingdom?
Lamprou said no. “I honestly don’t think they [Saudis] are unhappy. As much as some may say they are being oppressed, I actually think they [Saudis] are perfectly comfortable.”
Lamprou said she believes change is determined by internal, not external pressures. “If enough women want it [change] they can bring about their own change,” said Lamprou.
During the late 1960s and throughout the 1970s Saudi Arabia experienced an explosion of development that included increased openness to the Western world.
However, Islamic conservatism resuscitated itself in 1979 with the fear that rapid modernization was resulting in the disintegration of the state’s Islamic identity.
Two 1979 events catalyzed reawakened Islamic conservatism as strong social force: the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the siege of the Grand Mosque in Mecca by religiously conservative critics of the monarchy.
Ayatollah Khomeini, the political leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, called for the overthrow of the Saudi monarchy. He criticized Saudi society for adopting Western influences and accused the monarchy of being “un-Islamic.” Khomeini’s allegations threatened the legitimacy of the monarchy’s authority, who used Islamic conservatism to reconstitute its authority.
The same year as the Iranian Revolution and Khomeini’s allegations of an illegitimate Saudi government, religiously influenced Saudi militants seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca, calling for decreased Western influence in Saudi Arabia. Although the majority of Saudis disagreed with the militants’ actions, the masses did empathize with the militants’ appeal for less Western influence and a rejuvenation of Islamic values.
Together, these events justified the monarchy’s return to Islamic conservatism. Islamic Conservatism, which dominated Saudi society in the 1980s and, arguably at present, revived many traditions concerning women, many of which are sources of Western criticism.
Is there closure?
Despite challenges within the kingdom, Saudi women are intelligent, motivated forward thinkers.
Professor Micallef said most Saudi women would probably say, “We’re not helpless, dependent, voiceless people. We know what we are doing and what we want, and we are striving to get it.”
Media has done a monstrous disservice to Saudi Arabia by reinforcing narrow minded and demeaning characterizations of a country that attempts and undertakes modernization in a way that allows it to maintain its identity as an Islamic state. The solution is simple: the media needs to report acurately, problems should be addressed, but positives should not be ignored. Implementing the solution requires an overhaul of the journalism trend that emphasizes negative news.
Despite media portrayals, neither Islam or Saudi Arabia is incompatible with modernization. The Islamic State of Saudi Arabia will achieve the modernization it seeks on its own terms and on its own schedule.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Beautiful People
Airbrushed faces peer out from glossy magazine pages in waiting rooms and on news stands. Television shows and movies cast supermodels to play "the girl next door." Although they claim to be "ordinary," these people are far from average. Let's face it ... Not everyone has a personal trainer, chef and assistant. Nor does the "average" person have the financial resources to even contemplate such luxuries. The "average" person does not dine on caviar and champagne or dress in designer fashions. The average person, although likely deserving of more than his bank account will allow, lives on a budget.
However, superficiality has invaded. tries to and sometimes succeeds in overtaking the average person's life. Obsession with celebrities and their extravagant lifestyles is unhealthy. Possibly more unhealthy are Americans' unwarranted judgement of others.
Everyone is supposedly searching for his/her perfect match or soul mate. With peoples' reliance on technology continuing to exponentially increase, single people are trying creative ways to search for their "matches." Websites such as eharmony.com and match.com, provide many people with the opportunity to fit dating into hectic lives that are inconducive to meeting new people.
People create profiles, list their likes and dislikes, and of course post photographs of themselves. As the old saying goes, "A picture is worth a thousand words," and it is probable that many online daters are judged on appearance before the written contents of their profiles. Although this may seem unfair, it is important to remember that people are attracted to different things in a potential partner. Just because one person dislikes someone's profile picture doesn't mean that another user won't fall head-over-heels in love at the sight of the same picture.
However, a new dating website has taken online superficiality to a new level. BeautifulPeople.com is "an exclusively beautiful community, founded for the purpose of creating personal and professional relationships."
But, how does one gain entry into this elite online-dating realm? You have to be voted in!
"BeautifulPeople is the first community of its kind. To become a member, applicants are required to be voted in by existing members of the opposite sex. Members rate all new applicants over a 48 hour period based on whether or not they find the applicant ‘beautiful’. Should applicants secure enough positive votes from members, they will be granted a full membership to the BeautifulPeople Network."
The ultimate question is: Has our society's obsession with looks gone too far?
However, superficiality has invaded. tries to and sometimes succeeds in overtaking the average person's life. Obsession with celebrities and their extravagant lifestyles is unhealthy. Possibly more unhealthy are Americans' unwarranted judgement of others.
Everyone is supposedly searching for his/her perfect match or soul mate. With peoples' reliance on technology continuing to exponentially increase, single people are trying creative ways to search for their "matches." Websites such as eharmony.com and match.com, provide many people with the opportunity to fit dating into hectic lives that are inconducive to meeting new people.
People create profiles, list their likes and dislikes, and of course post photographs of themselves. As the old saying goes, "A picture is worth a thousand words," and it is probable that many online daters are judged on appearance before the written contents of their profiles. Although this may seem unfair, it is important to remember that people are attracted to different things in a potential partner. Just because one person dislikes someone's profile picture doesn't mean that another user won't fall head-over-heels in love at the sight of the same picture.
However, a new dating website has taken online superficiality to a new level. BeautifulPeople.com is "an exclusively beautiful community, founded for the purpose of creating personal and professional relationships."
But, how does one gain entry into this elite online-dating realm? You have to be voted in!
"BeautifulPeople is the first community of its kind. To become a member, applicants are required to be voted in by existing members of the opposite sex. Members rate all new applicants over a 48 hour period based on whether or not they find the applicant ‘beautiful’. Should applicants secure enough positive votes from members, they will be granted a full membership to the BeautifulPeople Network."
The ultimate question is: Has our society's obsession with looks gone too far?
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Courteous Traveling
There should be pubic transportation decorum. People use public transportation for many reasons. Environmentalists want to cutdown on pollution emitted by personal cars. When it's cold outside or the distance is too great, poor college students rely on public transportation.
Strangely, some people enjoy public transportation. Short distances are manageable, sometimes tolerable. But, long distances on public transit or inter-city transportation can be, and often is, unbearable. With lavatories aboard and modern conveniences such as wifi, it seems inconceivable how comfort-oriented transportation can be so uncomfortable. How is it possible?
The luxuries often found on inter and intra-city transportation does not override the obnoxious and inconsiderate fellow travelers. Companies such as Megabus and Boltbus are wonderful, especially for travelers on a budget. Despite financial savings, nothing can compensate a traveler for dealing with rude people...
Who are these people?
1. People who listen to their music at a volume at which half the bus can hear their music.
2. People who have lengthy, often loud, phone conversations.
3. People who ignore their children and/or allow their children to run amuck.
4. People who are, in general, unnecessarily loud.
Perhaps I am oversensitive. But, I find the aforementioned descriptions to be unwarranted.
Why?
1. Music can be enjoyed at a reasonable volume. Just because one person enjoys listening to certain tunes does not mean everyone surrounding him will appreciate the musical selection.
2. Cell phones are wonderful devices enabling people to stay in constant communication with anyone and everyone. However, there is a time and a place to shoot the breeze. That time is not on a crowded bus. No one wants to hear someone's personal business, nor did anyone pay to listen to someone blab for several hours.
3. Children can be bundles of joy. However, parenting does not end with popping a kid out and clothing and feeding him. Parents are responsible for teaching their children how to behave in public. Children need rules. Parents should teach their children, set rules and enforce them.
4. Communal transportation is a monastery or convent. Talking is permitted. However, screaming is unnecessary.
Although a four-hour bus ride may never be enjoyable, it can be tolerable. No amount of modern conveniences can compare to consideration for fellow travelers. If you want to listen to music loudly, talk on the phone, be loud in general or allow your children to go berserk, please refrain from using intra and intercity transportation.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
International Students in Boston Celebrate the Chinese New Year
Despite distance from their families and home country, Chinese students in Boston find ways to commemorate the Chinese New Year, which is the biggest cultural holiday for the Chinese.
"It's tradition not to bathe the first day of the new year," Iao said. "It's like washing your luck away." Iao said her family honors several Chinese traditions to celebrate the new year, but stated she is not superstitious.
Boston University sophomores Claudia Iao and Michelle Arawwawela are from Hong Kong. Although educated in an international school taught in English, both Iao and Arawwawela identify with their Chinese heritage and traditions.
Arawwawela identifies the Chinese New Year with its commercialism. "My dad works in the hotel industry," Arawwawela said. "The Chinese New Year is a big time for tourists." Arawwawela said she primarily relates her father's business connection to Chinese New Year celebrations. "There's a huge lion dance in the hotel," she said. "My Sri Lankan father is in a Chinese lion dance." Arawwawela also talked about the people dressed as lions throwing raw cabbage at people. She said the cabbage symbolizes luck.
Iao has different memories of her family's Chinese New Year traditions.
"It's tradition not to bathe the first day of the new year," Iao said. "It's like washing your luck away." Iao said her family honors several Chinese traditions to celebrate the new year, but stated she is not superstitious.One tradition both Arawwawela and Iao identify with is the giving and receiving of money. It is customary for older, married family and community members to give red envelopes with crisp, new bills inside to younger, unmarried people. The color red symbolize good luck and is supposed to ward off evil spirits.
"Everyone carries them [red envelopes] with them," Arawwawela said. "If you run into someone they just give you an envelope." Monetary sums range from a couple of dollars from acquaintances to larger sums
from relatives.
Unable to be in Hong Kong with their families, both Arawwawela and Iao said their parents sent them red envelopes this Chinese New Year. Just because they're not in Hong Kong, does not mean friends and family have forgotten them this past new year. "My mom accepted red envelopes from people for me," said Iao.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)