Tag Archives: society

Slower than a Snail, but Moving Forward All the Same: Saudi Women’s Rights

Slower than a Snail, but Moving Forward All the Same: Saudi Women’s Rights

It’s not easy being a woman, period, in the Middle East, but in Saudi Arabia being a woman takes on a whole new meaning. Their infamous lack of rights-from not being able to drive to not being able to vote (recently ‘amended’) to not even being able to go out or travel by one’s self (and this applies to foreign, Western women tourists too)-have long been condemned by human rights groups everywhere.

Yet there is progress occurring in Saudi Arabia even as women near and far across the Middle East continue to suffer at the hands of dominating, sexist men. Just take a look at these recent measures:

A Mall Without Men

Rarely do women have any rights over men, but such was the case when it came to visiting a mall in Saudi Arabia: apparently, single men were barred from visiting the malls except for during weekday lunchtime hours so that the malls could be “family-friendly” places and women wouldn’t be harassed. Recently it was decided that the law would be changed. While this might not seem as a move towards women’s rights, since women once again might be exposed to, ahem, lustful men who stalk them in public spaces, it nevertheless is a very big step in the direction of true women’s rights: acknowledging that men and women are equal and that both should be allowed to roam the same public place, in trusting that both can behave themselves! What was that phrase from the 1950s-”Separate is NOT equal?”

A Woman at the Olympic Games

Like anything else that the West might deem “fun,” athletics are highly discouraged for women in Saudi Arabia. Women athletes do, nevertheless, exist, and as in Iran they are usually prevented from participating in sporting events abroad. Yet one Dalma Malhas may become the first Saudi woman in recent history to participate in a sporting event of such magnitude as the upcoming Olympics in London. While the decision to allow her to participate has not yet been officially declared, this is a great milestone for women athletes that the possibility is even being considered. However, the reason Dalma Malhas is even being considered is probably because she is an equestrian, which is pretty “tame” in terms of dress (watching the Hampton Classic equestrians in full riding dress in 80-degree heat always makes me sweat) as well as contact: it’s not like soccor or volleyball, where women wear skimpier uniforms and are pushing, shoving, sweating and moving in, ahem, unladylike ways. Even if she will be forced to wear a hijab or other Islamic-style dress to the Olympics, Dalma will still pave the way for aspiring Saudi atheletes.

Lingerie Shops Run by Women, for Women

Sourced from smh.com.au

Women selling lingerie to women sounds like a no-brainer: what salesman could possibly know better than a woman when it comes to how a bra fits, and what undies are comfortable yet attractive? Yet in Saudi Arabia, where women are basically forbidden to work, lingerie shops were staffed with men. Indeed, this was another one of those awkward situations that the Saudi government got itself into: women and men are so deterred from interacting, and yet if a young girl needs help buying her first bra, she’s going to have an older man hand it over to her? After lobbying  and complaining, the Saudi government finally decided to let women work in lingerie shops, thus not only creating new jobs for women but also insuring that shopping for underthings is a more relaxing experience!

Joining the Anti-Bod Squad

Out of all of these recent achievements for Saudi women, perhaps the most thrilling (and telling) of all is that women are being considered to join the Religious Police, which I have nicknamed the ‘Anti-Bod Squad’ since making sure women are dutifully covered is just one of their many arduous tasks. If Saudi women are being deemed worthy enough to judge others and take authority over even a man, than that means that they are being seen as equals. However much I applaud the shiekhs for even considering this, I do feel that allowing women to join the religious police will be a bust. What sexist man is really going to take a woman “arresting” him without putting up a fight? A woman telling a man what to do? Sacre bleu!

S-L-M

Links:

1. Saudi Women Break a Barrier: The Right to Sell Lingerie, by Thomas J. Lippman on Jan. 21, 2012:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/opinion/sunday/saudi-women-break-a-barrier-the-right-to-sell-lingerie.html?_r=1&src=tp&smid=fb-share

2. Al Ahlam http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/37664.aspx

3. Bikaya Masr http://bikyamasr.com/63741/single-saudi-men-not-welcome-in-shopping-malls/

4. http://bikyamasr.com/58754/saudi-king-suggests-allowing-women-to-join-religious-police/

Grab Your Parasol, ‘Cause it Might Rain in Europe’s Banlieus

Grab Your Parasol, ‘Cause it Might Rain in Europe’s Banlieus

From the Tunisienne Faculte Facebook page

“A burka?! You’re going to take that off for me right now!”

“Uh, by the way, you do know that you’re talking to an umbrella…”

The above bande dessinee was found shared on the Facebook page “Tunisienne Faculte,” which is actually a treasure trove of political cartoons and inspirational images if you check out their “wall photos” album. Although I am not sure whether the illustrator was French or Tunisian (or perhaps both), it pretty accurately sums up one viewpoint of the French towards Islam and, more specificially, the burka.

The man in the cartoon is shocked (and somewhat terrified, a mon avis) of the burka and want’s it removed immediately, which reflects France’s action against la voile integrale (the niqab, which covers all but the eyes, is also banned from public). The woman’s snide reaction–”Oh, the person under there is not a human being, it’s a beach umbrella”– is in effect dehumanizing women who wear full coverings. It shows how little the French care that women do choose to put these on-at least, in some places/cases-and that the veil is, for them, a symbol of their religion and faith, not something as silly as a parasol.

Whether or not your a fan of la voile integrale, France is wrong to ban it. The women aren’t walking around nude, for God’s sake-and I suspect that France would have less of a problem if there was a herd of women strolling around in their undies than their burkas. Although I am certainly not a fan of it, and understand that in some cases it can even pose a safety threat (how do you know who’s really under there?) the outrageousness of passing a “fashion law” seems a bit…..well, similar to the actions the Taliban took against Western fashion.

Europe’s queasiness concerning their expanding Muslim population was highlighted by Hishaam Aidi in an Al-Jazeera article (see below), which discusses the alienation of Muslims in their new homelands, particularly in France where they are often relegated to the banlieus. The U.S. government, apparently, is queasy about Europe’s cold shoulder towards their ‘new’ immigrants and has been trying to improve Muslim integration and participation in France and the U.K. The title of the article caught my eye for it hearkened back to the image of the U.S. as supreme “Big Stick” policeman: “Are Europe’s Muslims America’s Problem?” To answer: No, I don’t believe that they are America’s problem, but I do feel that they will be a very grande problem in Europe if these countries don’t open their hearts.

Put it this way: France, the U.K., Holland, Sweden and other European states have already opened their doors to Muslim immigrants. Now, they don’t like the results; but it’s too late to shut the door. It’s time for these governments to ‘open their hearts’ and find compassion and understanding for their new countrymen. If the United States can survive as a nation of immigrants, why can’t Europe be a mixed-bag, culture-wise, as well? The most recent edition of National Geographic describes France’s melting-pot port of Marseille as a place not only teeming with traditional Muslims, but also Moroccans, Algerians and Tunisians who go to the plage just like everyone else, strip down to their bathing suits and enjoy the sun. Clearly, not all of France’s Muslims are against integrating and enjoying traditional French pleasures, so why paint them all with the same brush?

Quite frankly, the “backlash” that Europe had to America’s “soft-power programs”-a.k.a. outreach programs run mostly by the American embassy and aimed at youth-is embarassing. The U.S. was just trying to help a bad situation which they recognized from experience: after going through the Civil Rights Movement in the 50s and 60s, it’s pretty easy for an American to see that what’s happening in the banlieus and slums of Britain is quite similar to the treatment of African Americans in the past.

To quote the author: ”Sarkozy a few years ago threatened to clean up a cité with a Kärcher, a high-pressure hose.” Not only is this reminiscent of the fire hoses used on African Americans back in the 60s, it’s also a disgusting and cruel thing to say, as though the citizens of the projects were not citizens but garbage: used and broken invisible umbrellas. What did he think that would do? Did he think he could wash all the non-white French people away? Did he think he could cleanse them of their foreign attitudes, wash away the “dirt” of their religions and traditions?

The article mentions the fear of a “loss of cultural identity” as these newcomers hold fast to their traditions. But no one is telling the French to become Muslim, attend Friday prayer, slaughter a sheep: let everyone do what they want, I say. What makes us countrymen is not if we both share the same love of baguettes or pita, wine or the a la menthe, lamb or ham: what makes people countrymen is their shared values, the love of inalienable rights such as the ability to choose to do whatever you want, even if that means donning your own personal parasol to go to the beach.

S-L-M

Links:

1.   Are Europe’s Muslims America’s problem? By Hisaam Aidi, 26 Jan 2012. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/01/201212110539569620.htmlvalentines

Grab Your Parasol, ‘Cause it might Rain in Europe’s Banlieus

Grab Your Parasol, ‘Cause it might Rain in Europe’s Banlieus

From Tunisienne Faculte Facebook page

“A burka?! You’re going to take that off for me right now!”

“Uh, by the way, you do know that you’re talking to an umbrella…”

The above bande dessinee was found shared on the Facebook page “Tunisienne Faculte,” which is actually a treasure trove of political cartoons and inspirational images if you check out their “wall photos” album. Although I am not sure whether the illustrator was French or Tunisian (or perhaps both), it pretty accurately sums up one viewpoint of the French towards Islam and, more specificially, the burka.

The man in the cartoon is shocked (and somewhat terrified, a mon avis) of the burka and want’s it removed immediately, which reflects France’s action against la voile integrale (the niqab, which covers all but the eyes, is also banned from public). The woman’s snide reaction–”Oh, the person under there is not a human being, it’s a beach umbrella”– is in effect dehumanizing women who wear full coverings. It shows how little the French care that women do choose to put these on-at least, in some places/cases-and that the veil is, for them, a symbol of their religion and faith, not something as silly as a parasol.

Whether or not your a fan of la voile integrale, France is wrong to ban it. The women aren’t walking around nude, for God’s sake-and I suspect that France would have less of a problem if there was a herd of women strolling around in their undies than their burkas. Although I am certainly not a fan of it, and understand that in some cases it can even pose a safety threat (how do you know who’s really under there?) the outrageousness of passing a “fashion law” seems a bit…..well, similar to the actions the Taliban took against Western fashion.

Europe’s queasiness concerning their expanding Muslim population was highlighted by Hishaam Aidi in an Al-Jazeera article (see below), which discusses the alienation of Muslims in their new homelands, particularly in France where they are often relegated to the banlieus. The U.S. government, apparently, is queasy about Europe’s cold shoulder towards their ‘new’ immigrants and has been trying to improve Muslim integration and participation in France and the U.K. The title of the article caught my eye for it hearkened back to the image of the U.S. as supreme “Big Stick” policeman: “Are Europe’s Muslims America’s Problem?” To answer: No, I don’t believe that they are America’s problem, but I do feel that they will be a very grande problem in Europe if these countries don’t open their hearts.

Put it this way: France, the U.K., Holland, Sweden and other European states have already opened their doors to Muslim immigrants. Now, they don’t like the results; but it’s too late to shut the door. It’s time for these governments to ‘open their hearts’ and find compassion and understanding for their new countrymen. If the United States can survive as a nation of immigrants, why can’t Europe be a mixed-bag, culture-wise, as well? The most recent edition of National Geographic describes France’s melting-pot port of Marseille as a place not only teeming with traditional Muslims, but also Moroccans, Algerians and Tunisians who go to the plage just like everyone else, strip down to their bathing suits and enjoy the sun. Clearly, not all of France’s Muslims are against integrating and enjoying traditional French pleasures, so why paint them all with the same brush?

Quite frankly, the “backlash” that Europe had to America’s “soft-power programs”-a.k.a. outreach programs run mostly by the American embassy and aimed at youth-is embarassing. The U.S. was just trying to help a bad situation which they recognized from experience: after going through the Civil Rights Movement in the 50s and 60s, it’s pretty easy for an American to see that what’s happening in the banlieus and slums of Britain is quite similar to the treatment of African Americans in the past.

To quote the author: “Sarkozy a few years ago threatened to clean up a cité with a Kärcher, a high-pressure hose.” Not only is this reminiscent of the fire hoses used on African Americans back in the 60s, it’s also a disgusting and cruel thing to say, as though the citizens of the projects were not citizens but garbage: used and broken invisible umbrellas. What did he think that would do? Did he think he could wash all the non-white French people away? Did he think he could cleanse them of their foreign attitudes, wash away the “dirt” of their religions and traditions?

The article mentions the fear of a “loss of cultural identity” as these newcomers hold fast to their traditions. But no one is telling the French to become Muslim, attend Friday prayer, slaughter a sheep: let everyone do what they want, I say. What makes us countrymen is not if we both share the same love of baguettes or pita, wine or the a la menthe, lamb or ham: what makes people countrymen is their shared values, the love of inalienable rights such as the ability to choose to do whatever you want, even if that means donning your own personal parasol to go to the beach.

S-L-M

Links:

1.   Are Europe’s Muslims America’s problem? By Hisaam Aidi, 26 Jan 2012. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/01/201212110539569620.htmlvalentines

Jealousy and Respect in a Cairo Cafe

Jealousy and Respect in a Cairo Cafe

            What do we do when we meet someone new? Depending on our culture, the norm may be to shake hands or give a small wave; it may be to give a sort of “fist pump;” we might give one or two kisses on the cheek, or a small hug, or even rub noses, as is the norm in some Asian cultures. This simple-seeming tradition is one of the most important that the global traveler must manage in order to respect local tradition.

            Nevertheless, I found myself offended the other day when meeting some of my husband’s friends at a café the other day. In Egypt, it is common for people to shake hands with each other upon greeting, even if they’re friends; girls often give a kiss on the cheek or a hug, not unlike European and Latin cultures. My husband introduced me to some of his co-workers who were already seated in the café, and I proferred my hand to say hello. One by one they shook my hand, albeit reluctantly and with a shake like a flopping dead fish. Remembering my sister’s remarks about how she hated a person with a limp handshake, I mentioned this to my husband after we had sat down.

            “It’s a sign of respect,” he said. “Because you are my wife, they don’t want to touch your hand.” They can’t touch my hand? I looked down at my hand. I was wearing woolen fingerless gloves. Was it really such a turn-on for a guy to touch a married woman’s hand? Although I had not insulted their culture—they might have felt uncomfortable shaking my hand, but when I offered it they weren’t about to refuse—I myself almost felt insulted. I wasn’t some precious cargo, meant to be hidden away behind a purdah curtain, and I disliked the fact that my married status meant that guys were afraid to even shake my hand.

            However, whereas the guys in our group seemed to be concerned with respect and propriety, the females were most certainly not. The two stylishly-dressed (and, with their blonde and red coifs, decidedly European-style) women who also happened to be my husband’s bosses barely greeted me or even gave me the time of day, even though the one was a native of Berlin, Germany, and knew perfect English. Except for the few times my husband tried to draw up a conversation between us, they basically pretended that I did not exist. I was prepared to dismiss this as a nervousness to communicate in English, or a preoccupation with the Munich vs. Ali team football match, until my husband himself brought it up to me.

            “They’re jealous of you because you’re pretty. They act like that towards the pretty employees in our store,” he explained, which in fact explained nothing. The two of them were way more stylishly dressed, and themselves pretty. I had had experience before with the petty jealousy of Egyptian girls, especially concerning those who were enamored with my husband, but it still made me shake my head. I don’t care what country or culture you’re from: wearing your jealousy on your sleeve and displaying it is disgusting. We can’t help but feel jealous at times, it’s just human nature unfortunately, but to obviously show your jealousy is just rude and classless.

            Like many of my other café-going experiences here in Egypt, this one thus came with a lesson in human interaction that did not go unnoticed. I spent most of my time willing myself not to think about the absurdity of not being able to shake hands, or female jealousy, and instead tried to concentrate on people watching through the plate-glass windows, eating my arguably-decent pizza and watching the football game (even though I am no great fan of sports.) The highlight of the night was being introduced to one of the co-workers, a man who had spent 7 years living in Queens, New York, not far from where I lived. He loved Queens, loved the people and thought the weather was fine, and had even been to my hometown! It’s a curious window that seems to open up when you meet someone who intimately knows your hometown when you’re so far from home, as though you instantly have a bond with this person that transcends niceties or cordial remarks.

            And guess what? When we said good-bye, he  shook my hand, firmly, which made me remember that no matter how far you roam, you can always find a little bit of home!

S-L-M

An Orphanage and Silver Linings

An Orphanage and Silver Linings
I have decided to keep a sort of diary about my life in Cairo, where I will be spending the next month. For the sake of letting my subscribers know that I have posted something new, I will add these diary postings to my normal post list, but you can also find them in the page entitled “The Cairo Diary.” It’s kind of nice to do a more informal musing on Arab culture. :)
“You’ll have many hassanahs because you did this,” my sister-in-law, whom I’ll call “Re,” told me as we watched her older brother and mother load bags of oranges, clementines and bananas into the back of the car. It was my first full day back in Egypt, and I had found myself volunteering  to go with some of my in-laws to bring fruit and sweets to a local orphanage.

Hassanahs are like freckles, she explained: to Egyptians (or Muslims, for that matter) hassanah’s are marks of good deeds. I don’t really believe that freckles mean that one has done good deeds, otherwise a girl like Re would be covered in them (then again, how do I know; she wears a hijab, so maybe she is).

The orphanage was located just a few blocks away, in the masjid (mosque) complex that we passed all the time. At night, the small minaret is lit up in green. We climbed all the way up with our bags of  fruit to one of the many floors, where we were let in by one of the boys. The house mother–what would you call her?–greeted us and took stock of our gifts while we sat on a pair of aging yellow couches and were greeted by the boys. There were about 13 or 14 of them, all between the ages of 7-9yrs old, and most of them had been there together as babies, as the photograph on  the wall witnessed. They were running about and watching TV, as they had finished studying for their exam, and they came up and shook our hands. I tried to utter a “salam alaykoum”–perhaps a bit too formal for a bunch of elementary-age children–and I’m sure they thought I was crazy because I didn’t speak any Arabic to them, since I don’t think anyone explained that I was, in fact, American.

Thus, as my mother- and sister-in-law chatted with the house mother, and young hijab-wearing aid girls bustled around moving a huge washing machine, I was able to observe with my usual silence. The boys lost interest in us, except for in my brother-in-law, whom they gathered around and sat in his lap. There were two common rooms with the bedrooms grouped around; to me, it didn’t look much different than the sparse flat my husband and I are staying in. A couple of the boys started playing a form of soccer with a pink balloon, and in a gesture of friendliness I would hit the balloon back to them when it came my way. We stayed for maybe an hour, and then it was time to go.

“Tell me, was it really sad? Did you feel sad?” My husband asked me when I met up with him and we went out with one of his friends to a Cinnabon (yes, that staple of every American mall exists in Cairo, and like all American brands is considered ‘expensive.’ Interesting note: I had yet to ever eat in a Cinnabon until Cairo). I looked at him and said, “Yes it was sad, of course.” I couldn’t imagine having no parents, and especially no family who would want to look after you.

But yet, at the same time, it wasn’t really that sad. Sure, those boys had no family and had to rely on donations to live. But there they were, (presumably) healthy and taken care of, getting their education and having fun. They didn’t seem sad or constantly preoccupied by their situation. In fact, I bet they mostly gave it thought when people like us came with donations and sympathetic smiles. My husband’s question got me thinking  about what I would call “set” or “stale” emotions. Set/stale emotions are those emotions that we feel that we are obligated to feel during a certain situation, like when someone dies or something seemingly bad happens. But I think that sometimes these set/stale emotions prevent us from seeing the bigger picture, and especially from seeing the good in a perhaps unfortunate situation.

If a person dies, it is certainly saddening; but what if that person was in extreme pain, with a disease like cancer? At least when they die they are at peace, and no longer suffering. Or if you lose your job: as long as you have enough money to survive until you find a new job, perhaps losing the job is a blessing because you have the opportunity to reevaluate your life and what to do. In retrospect, this is what “every cloud has a silver lining” is all about.

The boys at the orphanage were being taken care of, and they have probably learned two of the best lessons a person can learn: humility and gratitude. Those lessons alone are enough to merit a person, in my person, a hundred hassanahs.

S-L-M

Dreams of World’s Long Lost

Dreams of World’s Long Lost

“The question of the real Iran kept coming up in discussions between my parents and friends. Which was more legitimate: the ancient traditions with which the Shah propped up his power, or the strict Islamic principals of Khomeini?” (p. 119)

The Empress Farah Pahlavi of Iran and her children, courtesy of theimageworks.com

Iran was once a country where Western law ruled the land, not blown-up exaggerated Islamic shariah law. Women were at one point banned from wearing the veil, not as they are today, where they are banned from going bare in public. Art, music, friendship, religion and, most importantly of all, freedom flourished.

Likewise, Egypt was once a country were Westerner’s were welcomed, not viewed with suspicious eyes or bombarded with questions.Women were more apt to be seen in fancy Parisian-style wear, and the langage du jour was French or English or Italian, not Arabic. As in Iran, the rich and simply comfortable were able to-and encouraged-to enjoy life, drinking and attending parties.

To be sure, neither of these countries were perfect. 1940s and 1950s Cairo saw intense corruption at the hands of King Farouk. Iran’s attempts to quell religion were just as wrong as it’s attempts now to quell individualism and freedom of choice, and the Shah was not innocent in his rule. But, given the choice, I would have lived in either of these eras in a heartbeat, as they are vastly more alluring than the current climates in either one of these magnificent countries.

Things I’ve Been Silent About, acclaimed writer Azar Nafisi’s autobiography about her life in Tehran and being the daughter of two political figures, is a shocking portrait of pre- and post- Revolution Iran. Her recounting of a lovely, if a bit-spoiled childhood growing up in Tehran is almost unbelievable when one contrasts it with modern life in the city today. Although Nafisi has been accused of painting Tehran in black and white and being a promoter of colonialism, the fact remains that this is what life was like in Tehran; her life was one shared by many others.

Things I’ve Been Silent About’s literary counterpart is none other than The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit, an autobiographical look at author Lucette Lagnado’s family’s history in Cairo and their subsequent exodus from Egypt. The two books are immensely similar. Two young women grow up in cosmopolitan, worldly cities, only to one day more or less be forced to leave the countrys that they loved and cherished: Nafisi permanently moved to the USA with her family after watching Iran crumble before her, and being subjected to house arrest of a sort; Lagnado’s family was more or less compelled to leave Egypt when she was only seven. The reason? They were Jewish.

It was rather interesting to read an account of Jewish life in Cairo. Jewish life in Cairo–does that even exist anymore? There might still be a few Jewish families left, but they most likely practice their faith in secrecy behind closed doors. Lagnado’s book gave us a look at what the Middle East would look like if the governments were more accepting of all their citizens. During the 1940s and 1950s, Cairo seemed to rival any European destination for glamour, prestige, and diversity. Lagnado describes her father schmoozing with British soldiers, her mother conversing in Italian, Americans and Eastern Europeans wandering around in addition to the traditional Egyptians. Her family was Jewish, but they weren’t frowned upon nor ostracized, nor was anyone else (though she does admit that Arabs often weren’t allowed into places like Groppi’s, the upscale bakery that sounds like it would have put Paris’ Laduree to shame).

“Suzette [Lagnado's sister] remembered an exuberant culture where religion mattered, but so did going out at night and reveling in all the LEvant offered. Our father, who now all but lived at shul, was the prime example of this dual existence, where faith and ritual had in no way hindered his ability to lead a rich and pleasure-filled life. In Egypt, it was easy to be religious and worldly at the same time, but that seemed an impossibility here in America.” (p. 227)

Women on the beach in Alexandria, Egypt; courtesy of foreignpolicy.com

Religious and worldly at the same time–this is the key that Middle Eastern countries are missing. Because the wave of radical Islam has swept over so much of the land, I feel that most people have forgotten that it is possible to follow their faith, and still enjoy themselves on Earth. It was actually depressing to realize that Cairo was the city of my dreams–French-speaking, lively, raucous, fancy, open-minded–once upon a time. To compare Lagnado’s Cairo with the Cairo I have experienced was almost impossible.

In fact, Lagnado describes a situation that takes place in Brooklyn that sounds more akin to what I have experienced in Cairo than anything else she describes that actually takes place in Egypt. Her sister Suzette attends a wedding in a sleeveless dress, only to have the older women run over to her with a jacket to cover herself, as they find the outfit inappropriate. The strangeness of this act is not lost on Suzette, who recalls these very women wearing all sorts of baring fashions back in Egypt.

“That was when she’d sworn to herself that she would leave, and have nothing to do anymorewith this community of expatriats who called themselves Egyptians but bore no resemblence whatsoever to the people she had known back in Egypt.” (p. 228)

It is a strange phenomenon, how people can suddenly forget the traditions and habits that they grew up with. Often times we change because of a great life-altering in our lives; in this case, the Jewish-Egyptians in Brooklyn were most likely changed because they had been uprooted from their homes and might have looked to more traditional interpretations of their faith, since faith was the only thing they had left. In any case, the situation reminds me of my experience dressing every day in Cairo, and how dumbfounded I was when I was told that my husband’s mother wore mini skirts in 1960s Cairo, but now wore a hijab. What was the life-altering event, I wondered, that caused her to shed her old ways? Why is it, in the case of the Middle East, that people have become so traditional and so strongly seem to reject most facets of the “modern world,” whereas people elsewhere in the world don’t put up such a fight?

Granted, I realized that the worlds that Nafisi and Lagnado had lived in were highly privledged worlds; the average Iranian or Egyptian didn’t have an endless parade of servants calling cars for them, or trips to custom tailors, or dinners with the leading politicians of the country. Nafisi and Lagnado, one could say, lived highly westernized lives; Nafisi’s book doesn’t so much as make one mention of her own Islamic faith, in that as I read the book I truly felt as though I was reading the autobiography of a Western girl with a family problems, albeit family problems that included her prominent father being jailed. As Nafisi claims,

“Political dissent in Iran is treated as a form of criminality; most offenders are tried on bogus charges and there is little room for defense.” (p. 140)

Isn’t this the case in most Islamic countries nowadays? Disagree with the regime, and you’re branded for life; the police will never leave you alone. Nafisi’s father was indeed jailed on bogus charges,and indeed had little room to defend himself. Although Lagnado’s family doesn’t have run-ins with the law, there is one incident that occurs which sparks their final decision to leave Egypt, in which her older sister is arrested for hanging out with foreign sailors. She didn’t do anything wrong, except fraternize with foreigners: at that point in time, Egypt was slowly becoming xenophobic and wary of those who bore any resemblance to the colonizers who had once lived in the land. Lagnado, reporting on her recent visit to Egypt (she was granted entry, despite signing papers never to return), describes a realization she makes about Egyptians:

“Malaka Nazli hadn’t simply been a place I realized but a state of mind. It was where you could find an extraordinary, breathtaking level of humanity. What it lacked in privacy, what it failed to provide by way of modern comforts–hot runningwater, showers, electric stoves, refrigerators, telephones–it more than made up for in mercy and compassion and tenderness and grace, those  ethereal qualities that make and keep us human.” (p. 332)

Her realization is important for several reasons, namely, that it shows that the people of Cairo hadn’t changed since her family had fled many years ago. This statement shows that in their hearts, the people of Cairo–and any other Islamic country–are still kind, empathizing human beings, and that it is the governments that try to dictate what the people want, that try to change society, that try to set the morals and values even when they are in strict contradiction to those that already existed. This is true in Iran–did Nafisi and her friends allow their hearts to be changed by the repressive revolutionary regime? No–it is true in Egypt, as Lagnado shows (after all, the new occupants of her old neighborhood building Malaka Nazli are all Muslim and yet they show her respect and true kindness) and it is most likely true in every other Islamic country where regimes have taken over regardless of what the people were or wanted.

Beyond what these two autobiographies teach the reader politically and culturally, at their heart they are open revelations of a family’s intimacy and secrets. Both Nafisi and Lagnado were deeply affected and moved by their overbearing and strong-willed parents, and their lives were shaped not only by society and increasingly oppresive governments but also by their families. In the end, it was their families that gave them a sense of who they were; it was their families that kept the traditions and cultures that they had held so dear alive. The ending quote of Things That I’ve Been Silent About sums it up best:

“After the Islamic Revolution I came to realize the fragility of our mundane existence, the ease with which all that you call home, all that gives you an identiy, a sense of self and belonging, can be taken away from you. I learned that what my father had given me through his stories was a way to make a home for myself that was not dependent on geography or nationality or anything that other people can take away from me. These stories could not gaurd me againstthe pain i felt at my parents loss; they did not offer consolation or closure. it was only after their deaths that i came to realize that they each in their own way had given me a portable home that safegaurds memory and is a constant resistance against the tyranny of man and of time.” (p. 314)

S-L-M

Hello, I Shall Seduce you with My General Womanliness

Hello, I Shall Seduce you with My General Womanliness

Books are not particularly sexy. A person’s eyes can be seductive, depending on the person. And wearing a headscarf and a bulky full-length coat? In general, not very sexy at all.

According to the Saudi  Commitee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (also known as the morality police), women with attractive eyes might now be forced by law to cover them up. The ‘Virtue vs Vice

Even eyes are deemed too beautiful to be shown. Courtesy of allrashidmall.com

‘ committee (it appears that many Islamic countries have one of these) always makes me want to cry and laugh at the same time: cry, because they almost always are demeaning to women and the idea of such a committee is so against human rights; and laugh because, well, I cannot believe that these people are  permitted in the government when they clearly have issues.

Just when things seem to be looking ‘up’ for Saudi women (i.e. women were recently granted the right to vote in elections…in 2012) something as absurd as this happens to keep the freedom level in check. Hello, the barbaric men who go crazy at the sight of a woman’s eyes should be covered up (or, better yet, have their lusting hands handcuffed!), not the women. I’m guessing sunglasses might become a la mode if this ban takes place, but what I really want to know is:

Who’s going to be the Beauty Queen judges and decide what constitutes as a ‘seductive’ pair of eyes??

Next up on the banning block are books, or more specifically, Islamic Sex, a sort of “Sex manual” advocated by the Obedient Wives Club in Malaysia.  The Malaysian government wants to ban the book, which is odd when one considers that the book insists that wives be “subservient” and give in to their husbands  sexual needs.

Even still, the government ban on the book is not too surprising, given that sex is usually a touchy and private subject in Islam.   But the book is actually promoting a strict, stern way of thinking,and even though it’s line of thought is narrow-minded, it wouldn’t hurt the society to learn something about a topic that they often know little about.  What was most disturbing about this situation was the fact that the book was read by an organization called the Obedient Wives Club.

Who convinced these women to call themselves the ‘Obedient Wives Club’??

Scarves haven’t been banned in Iran, as they are part of the uniform women must wear when they leave the house, along with a manteau, or long coat. In Jafar Panahi’s 2000 film The Circle or Dawayeh (the same director of Offside)

A still of Nargess in her chador (from Dayereh). Courtesy of Iranian.com

follows several different women over the course of one day, highlighting the inequalities women face. Pari,a recently released convict, tries to enter a hospital to see an old friend. She is barred from entering unless she wears a chador, the traditional longblack cloack that Iranian women hold closed with their hands.  Never mind  that she already wears a scarf over her head and a long shapeless coat; apparently, that is deemed too sexy for any of the glum people visiting the hospital.

The women in The Circle  have officially been stripped of their physical sexiness, and society tries-as we see-to strip them of that other highly admirable quality: strength. A mother is stripped of her  child and pride when she decides to leave her daughter on the street. Nargess, another ex-convict, is stripped of her strength and power when she realizes she is too scared to board a bus for Azerbaijan. Physical or highly overt sexual objects-such as a woman’s hair, or a sex manual-are easily banned in Iran, but society just can’t resist desexualizing (and effectively dehumanizing) women further.

Towards the end of the film, we meet a woman moonlighting as a prostitute -her excuse? “Honey, will you pay the bills?”-who is caught when she enters a man’s car. Banned from the normal wiles that a prostitute would use to attract attention (heavy make-up; flashy, tight clothes) the woman is dressed like any other in Iran: in a head scarf and baggy attire. Yet her normal attire doesn’t stop a man from picking her up, nor does it stop the police from arresting her.  Even if she was wearing a burqa, the woman could still be picked up a prostitute. The scarf can’t be banned. So what’s next?

Are we going to star banning women? Because to a man, there isn’t a more sexual object than the mere presence of a woman, whether or not she  is baring her eyes, her skin, or is sexually knowledgeable!

S-L-M

Links:

1. “Saudi Women with Attractive Eyes Forced to Cover”: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063143/Saudi-women-attractive-eyes-forced-cover-resolution-passed.html

2. “Malaysia to Ban ‘Obedient Wives Club’ Islamic Sex Book: http://bikyamasr.com/47242/malaysia-to-ban-obedient-wives-club-islamic-sex-book/

Struggling for Song in “No One Knows About Persian Cats”

Struggling for Song in “No One Knows About Persian Cats”

The other night I watched the film No One Knows About Persian Cats, a 2010 Iranian film released by IFC which, like most foreign films, is completely unknown to American viewers and thus totally dishonored.  The film, which highlights actual Iranian bands as it follows the loosely-scripted real-life story of the band Take It Easy Hospital (composed of Ashkan Kooshanejad and Negar Shaghaghi) as they try to get a backing band for their group in order to play in London, UK. Filmed in a documentary-cum-music-video style, with great shots of a country seldom seen to the West and an interesting soundtrack, the film blends Western ideas with universal wants on an all-too-Middle-Eastern background which presents an overall captivating but agenda-less work.

Box art for No one Knows about Persian Cats. Courtesy of the IFC website.

To an American who lives in a world of free speech, where every teenager with half an ounce of vocal or musical talent believes that they’re the next pop star, “Persian Cats” stands in an astonishing contrast. Here we have bands that, because of their lyrical content or style, are not allowed a permit, which is the only way one can legally play (even practice!) music in Iran. This sounds like it would crush the dream of every 14 year-old Iranian who dreams of thumping rock metal or gyrating like Britney Spears, but as the film shows, artists without permits will go to great lengths to continue their craft, even when the stakes are high (at the begining of the film, Ashkan and Negar are released from prison after being caught preforming without a permit). The camera follows the actors (it feels almost wrong to call them actors, and yet here they are, reinacting their story; perhaps docu-drama fits better?) as they tunnel through room after room, down multiple sets of stairs and alleyways, ducking into basements and past doors covered in sheets or up into tiny attics. What’s with the maze? The musicians have to find the most removed, isolated studios for their clandestine craft-thus underlining literally the meaning of “underground artists.” In the USA, “underground artists” mean artists that simply aren’t well known. In Iran, it means being oppressed musically and being forced literally, underground. One group even resorts to playing on a rooftop shack they built, and wait until their neighbors exit the building to commence the drums.
With some of the bands, one can easily see why the Iranian government would refuse them a permit. One band (which goes so far as to practice in a cowshed when their neighbors force them out) plays heavy death metal with Persian lyrics and death stares. Another one (which we meet on a floor of a construction site overlooking Tehran) is a rap group speaking about the injustices of poverty in their country. But some of them don’t seem so bad: take, for instance, the group that Hamed Behdad (Ashkan and Negars “manager”) sings in: it has a Persian rhythm to it, and male Persian dancers preform a clearly traditional dance as he sings.

The injustice that these bands cannot legally preform-let alone practice- is only tempered by the realization that, next door in Afghanistan, music itself was forbidden under Taliban rule, a fate that seems unbelievable. Ashkan and Negars band itself is pretty tame: Take it Easy Hospital (despite it’s emo name) is full of slightly-off-tune indie pop, the sort that contains lyrics that don’t seem to match up. Perhaps the Iranian government disliked the band simply because it is composed of a guy and a girl, who are in fact a couple, although the movie never, ever seems to make light of this.
Indeed, Negars presence in this movie seems, well, I wouldn’t say shocking but it certainly seems unusual. We find (or she finds herself) constantly surrounded by men: whether it’s in one of the clandestine meeting practice studios or

An image of the bands playing in a clandestine basement. Courtesy of the NY Times.

meeting with Hamed or riding on the back of a scooter, she is usually  the only girl ever present. As such, the viewer almost forgets that she is a girl, because no one seems to notice this distinction or make note of it. She wears black hipster glasses that underline her seriousness (she is always the voice of reasoning and practicality, gently nudging the boys along and verbalizing her and Ashkan’s wants in her soft-but-not-girly voice) and baggy clothes; perhaps if she dressed more overtly girlish or sexy her presence would be more formidable. Omnipresent is a large olive-coloured backpack that she wears in most scenes, as if to prove that she is a woman, for she is the burden bearer.

Negar seems free from restraint: there is no older brother or parent demanding to know where she is, that she come home; money doesn’t seem to be an objection, nor is the fact that she wanders around Tehran alone (as she does in the opening scene, where she arrives at a “real” recording studio and talks in her lost-and-delirious way with one of the studio producers). She even appears to have her own car, as evidenced by the fact that we  see her driving the band around. When a policeman pulls her and Ashkan over, he does not berate her for being in a car alone with a man: instead, he takes her dog away from her.
Thus, the Tehran that we are introduced to seems uneasy, unsure, a little bit lost. While there is an agenda, a plot to the film–the band is trying to get to London–and we are introduced to the themes/ideas of people struggling to speak freely, the film doesn’t push these ideas in one’s face. This is not a typical presentation of a clashes between ideals, East vs. West, old vs. new, although these forces do come out. Negars is a prime example: she wears a headscarf, but it is casually wrapped around her head so that her light-brown hair is clearly visible, as though she is torn between wanting to respect tradition and religion but also represent herself. In wearing the scarf undone, it appears that she is unsure of herself. Nader likes to speak English, and one day overhears Negars critiquing him for this, which is somewhat odd when one considers that her band preforms entirely in English.

Uneasiness seems to reign: perhaps it’s OK to sing in English, because it’s commercial and goes with their indie style better, but to speak English amongst Iranians is perhaps pretentious. The bands make some comments about the Americans, yet their music is clearly Western: modern rap, of the variety that the rap group preforms, was born in the urban frontiers of the USA; screamo-rock bears the influence of grunge a la Nirvana and Take it Easy Hospital’s brand of indie pop wouldn’t be out of place at a hipster bar in Brooklyn.The bands dream West, where they can play their music in the open, all except the rap group, which smartly states that their music “is for here, Tehran.” Indeed: their words speak to the public, to the government; their words critique their, Iranian, society, and would be out of place in the Western world of freedom. As I watched the movie, I couldn’t help but wonder what is the point? What is the point of making music if you’ll never get to play it for an audience? To never have your cries of social freedom and justice heard?
The answer is both literal and figurative. Negar and Ashkan defy the government by planning a secret concert in an underground room, always with the help of Hamed, himself a good study in the struggle of East vs. West. Hamed, who parrots bootleg DVDs and likes to drink alcohol–what does he get out of helping Negars and Ashkan? What is the point for helping struggling musicians who might never get anywhere? It certainly seems like they’ll be going nowhere, when the old man forgering their passports gets arrested. Hamed, who’s hopes and dreams seemed to be escaping back to London with the band, seems to question the reality of their musical struggle and subsequently gets drunk. No one knows about Persian Cats, as the film’s title suggests: no one knows about these bands, but to the bands, this does not matter. They seem determined that one day, some how, their words will break free of their cages and prisons and inspire the people they were meant for.
“I’ve been here alone/I’ve been here with you/…it’s a jungle out there,” go the lyrics in Take it Easy Hospital’s song “Human Jungle,” easily their best song (and, in my opinion, the best song in the movie; it certainly replayed in my ears after I’d finished watching). Is she talking about the tricky, dangerous jungle of Tehran, where police hide behind every corner, waiting for a bit of music to play? Is she talking about the jungle that is the world beyond Tehran, the West where the band has their eyes focused on? She could be talking about either one: no one knows, but it’s a fitting bit of lyricism.

At  the end of the film, when Negar and Ashkan go to rescue Nader from a party, the police arrive: to escape capture, Ashkan jumps out the window; the last we see of him, he’s being rushed to the ER. The very last image of the movie shows Negar appearing to back flip off a roof. It is a very vague scene that asks a million questions. Is she really on a roof? Is she trying to emulate Ashkan’s seemingly suicidal jump? If this was an American movie, the film would have ended with the band playing their planned concert triumphantly, basking in the glow of an audience. It would have ended on a note of hope and victory. Negars jump does not seem to be very hopeful: it seems like she has given up. Or has she? Perhaps she is escaping her cage.  No one knows.

S-L-M

The Hefty Price of Honor, as shown by Jan Goodwin

The Hefty Price of Honor, as shown by Jan Goodwin

Not since Fast Food Nation have I read a more epic, cringing and flat-out astonishing (not to mention well-written) piece of non-fiction than Price of Honor, written by Jan Goodwin. Goodwin, an investigative journalist, spent four years in the Arab world interviewing everyone from poor peasant women on the street to high-ranking shiekhas to even the Grand of Al-Azhar himself, in order to (as it states on the cover) “lift the veil of silence on the Islamic World” regarding Muslim women.

The result is mesmerizing: whereas it takes me just a few days to finish a book, this one took me a few weeks. Several times I wanted to put it down and not continue, for I felt that every chapter was more crushing than the next. The

A personal photo taken in Egypt with my husband and some of his family. Hard to believe these women once dressed in mini-skirts like me!

book is so loaded with information and observances that one could easily write a paper on each chapter. What is nice about Goodwin’s style is that she doesn’t simply throw the facts at you, nor does she simply make a list of all the horror stories (although they are a-plenty). Instead, she includes an overview of each country she visits, giving time to their political and economic situations which play a very large role in the treatment of women; as is stated several times, “When Islam is powerful and strong, the treatment of women is good; when Islam is weak or precarious, women are the first to feel the burn.”

Price of Honor was first published in 1994, and a revised edition came out in 2003. My copy happened to be the first one published in 1994; thus, there was no talk of 9/11, no talk of Saddam Hussein being overthrown; Osama Bin Laden was not mentioned anywhere.  One might dismiss this earlier copy as useless, given that it is quite behind current events, but I found it intriguing to see this snapshot of the Middle East from more than 10 years ago. It was interesting to compare what I know now of today’s Middle East with the Middle East that is described in the book.

A surprising note: reading about Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Gaza did not tear at me as much as the other nations did, even though the conditions for women in these countries are by far the worst. I understand that these were/are war-torn countries, countries that were/are poor and where everyone lives in deplorable conditions. What galled me more was the injustice taking place in the countries like UAE, or Egypt, or Kuwait. These countries are exposed to Western people and values and yet still women are looked down upon.  The thought of being able to live a life materialistically identical to any Westerner’s and yet to be fully deprived of your right to even leave the house without permission is beyond comprehension. I guess it was because I identified with these women’s lifestyles the most, and the thought of having to bow down to family tradition chilled me.

Perhaps the worst of all the various quotes that stood out to me were those uttered at a Koran class in Kuwait. The women attending the class were not Kuwaitis: they were American women married to Muslim Kuwaiti husbands, and all remained heavily covered. The hostess, Mia, was a blatant anti-Semite and uttered such disturbing and untrue statements as:

“The American media are controlled by Jews. Prostitutes in the United States are Jews; men who run the striptease industry are Jews….Islam should be the religion that controls the world!” (p. 184) -Mia
 How can an American-born woman be so ignorant? Aren’t there prostitutes of every race and ethnicity-and religion-here in the US? And no religion should control the world; everyone is entitled to their own way of thinking. The backwards-thinking reached a zenith with Hind, their Kuwaiti teacher who had been educated in the West:
“A woman’s beauty should only be seen at home by her husband…A Western woman has to go out by herself, do everything by herslef. This is not freedom. Freedom is to be safe. I do not want eyes following me as i walk….my voice should not be heard by a male who is not my relative….A woman does’t need to work, her husband should take care of her, provide for her.” -Hind (p. 187)
It is nice that most Arab women have such tight family networks and never have to venture out alone for something as simple as going to the corner grocery, but this is not realistic. What if a woman isn’t married? What if her parents are dead? What if she moved across the country for a job? She thus needs to provide for herself. This way of thinking might be nice in theory, but it severely limits women the ability to make something out of themselves. If a woman cannot even go out to buy groceries because the cashier might be a man and will thus “her voice will be heard by him,” well, that is ridiculous and it is certainly not mentioned in the Koran!
As one can see, there is a dearth of quotes in Price of Honor. Here, a look at both anti-women and pro-women sentiments:
Anti-Feminists

“In the United States there are so many different religions that it must be confusing.” -Lubna, a shiekha in the United Arab Emirates. (p. 141)

“It will give my children a bad idea if they see their mother out in the world, working in an office.” -Amal, a young student in the UAE. (p. 143)
“I could never live as you do in America; I would be afraid….you are alone. No, I don’t want what you foreign women call freedom. Our way is better, kinder, i think.” -Sarai, an Afghani woman. (p. 91)
“The role of women has deteriorated because of so-called modernization in the West. Your fashions, short skirts, dancing, women having boyfriends and not husbands, having babies and not being married–this is unlawful. It is also against all women.” -Muslim Sisterhood founder Zeinab al-Ghazali of Egypt. (p. 328)
“Medically, doctor’s say a man’s heart is stronger than a woman’s. Women’s bodies and brains are weaker than man’s, and they are particularly weak when they have their menses.” -Mullah Azad of Pakistan. (p. 64)
“Doctor, we care for you, but we are afraid you will go to Hell because of the way you dress.” –Several Islamist students at a Jordanian university to their professor, Aaara al-Amiri.
Pro-Feminists
“I am sixteen, this is my youth. I should be having fun. Instead, I am here dressed like a peasant grandmother to mourn a dead old man who hated beauty.” -A young girl at the Iranian celebrations of Ayatollah Khomeini’s death. (p. 127)
“I am not against Islam. It is part of my identity, but it is also time that educated women read the Koran for themsleves and make their own interpretations of it, not live with the misinterpretation of Islam that goes against their rights.” -Professor Aara al-Amiri of Jordan (p. 279)
“The Saudi’s are blockheads regarding women and driving. What is better, to have a woman travle in a taxi with a male drivrwho is a stranger or for her to drive her own car.”–A religious man in Jordan. (p. 275)
“As if the government shouldn’t be engaged in more important things than who cuts a woman’s hair.” -A Kuwaiti woman. (p. 160)
“Morality has nothing to do with hiding the face…the fundamentalists always focus so much of their energy on women because they want to divert people from the serious problems of the day.”-Nawal al Saadawi, an Egyptian woman. (p. 332)
S-L-M

Jews, Christians and Muslims, oh my! The Koran continues.

Jews, Christians and Muslims, oh my! The Koran continues.

“Truth has come and Falsehood has departed. Falsehood was bound to be routed.” (17:75)

So asserts the Koran in surah 17, al-Isra or The Night Tale. It is a beautiful but hopeless statement: surely, many times a day people are confronted with truths and do not dispel of the falsehoods they believed. Mankind would rather believe that he, himself, is always right, rather than concede to a truth. Yet look at the truths that man will believe!

“You shall not falsely declare: ‘This is lawful, and that is forbidden,’ in order ot invent a falsehood about God. Those who invent falsehoods about God shall never prosper.” (16:115)

Despite such an admonition from the Koran, Muslims (particularly the Taliban and fundamentalist terrorist organizations) falsely declare what is lawful and what is not. Is listening to music or painting a picture of animals sinful and unreligious? The Koran does not ban such acts, but the Taliban in Afghanistan in it’s heyday sure found fit to declare such false truths.

A church and mosque in Cairo, Egypt. Cohabitation IS possible! Photo taken by myself.

They foist daughters upon God (glory be to Him!) but for themselves they choose what they desire. When the birth of a girl is announced to any of them, his countenance darkens and he is filled with gloom. On account of the bad news he hides himself from men: should he put up with the shame or bury her in the earth? How ill they judge!” (16:55)

Yet another false truth that has been believed by all people, be they Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus or whichever religion, since the dawn of time: that the birth of a daughter is something shameful, something to cry about. Here, the Koran attempts to admonish mankind’s unfair attitude towards it’s daughters by denouncing the practice of burying alive newborn females. A practical truth: without women, mankind would not continue to exist! But yet:

“He created man from a little germ; yet he is openly contentious. He created the beasts which give you warmth and food and other benefits. How pleasant they look when you bring them home to rest and when you lead them out to pasture! (16:1)

It’s admirable how the Koran mentions man starting out as a “little germ.” Did mankind yet know how pregnancy works at that time? And how contentious man–any man!–can be. It is understood that there are many people (especially in the Western world) that are not religious, but it is not wrong to follow some of the values that books such as the Bible and the Koran extoll. Yet it is amazing that such quotes such as the one below are read by pious people who then twist it their own way:

“If you punish, let your punishment be commensurate with  the wrong that has been done you. But it shall be best for you to endure your wrongs with patience.” (16:223)

This quote from An-Nahn (The Honey Bees) begs a look into the justice system of any nation. It sounds plausible to punish only when one has been wronged, and to punish commensurately; but what about the laws that exist that wrong no particular person? Many laws than come into question: driving without a seat belt, for example. Yes, everybody should as it could save your life–but does a person have to be fined for it?  This quote should be pasted in every bureau of the interior in Arab governments. Is the woman who goes out without a male chaperone wronging somebody? Is the woman swimming in the men’s pool wronging someone? Is drinking alcohol wronging someone? These are personal choices, not laws, for if they hurt someone, they hurt the person who does them.

This reading of the Koran touched more on the topic of Jews and Christians. The story of Moses was mentioned several times, as were Biblical figures such as Jonah. At the following quote, I couldn’t help but laugh, as it is the same thing that an elderly woman I work with says before she leaves for the day:

“Do not say of anything: ‘I will do it tomorrow ‘ without adding: ‘If God wills.’” (18:21)

Honestly, if there was anything that I learned from reading the Koran, it is that Jews, Christians and Muslims are not that different from each other. Each religion is just an extension of the previous. Does this make Islam, ultimately, the correct ‘sect’ to follow? I view them almost as one mightthe different sects of Christianity, such as Catholicism and Lutheranism. The traditions and rites might be slightly different, but it’s the same God, isn’t it? The same Eden?

“Had God not defended some men y the might of others, monastaries and churches, synagogues and mosques in which His praise is daily celebrated, would have been utterly destroyed.” (22:37)

The Koran seems to be echoing my thoughts, for surely isn’t it showing here that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all praising and following the same God? “His praise?” God is defending members of all three “sects.” Therefore, it kind of seems besides the point for the three to fight each other, for wouldn’t God be on all of their sides? Or perhaps now he will only save the Muslims, for they believe in his final word.

“As for the true believers, the Jews, the Sabaens, the Christians, the Magians, and the pagans, God will judge them on the Day of Ressurection. God is witness of all things.” (22:14)

Again, there is some ambiguity to this quote. Is he including Jews and Christians as “true believers?” or is it jsut the way this passage is translated? In truth, I believe the Koran is just saying here that everyone on Earth will be judged, though why not jut say “everyone” instead of singling them out? The Koran’s mentioning of the Jews and Christians is often ambiguous, saying that they have plausibility, reason and light but yet they are considered demons who are wrong and blind to truth. Many people, Muslim or not, seem to fit this description.

“Have they never journeyed through the land? Have they no hearts to reason with, or ears to hear with? It is their hearts, and not their yees, that are blind.” (22:42)

S-L-M