en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1719146 Comments by Rawan http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/02/06/all-that-is-solid-melts-into-air-including-our-words/#IDComment123586760 in many ways it makes sense that languages would start to vanish as the industrialized countries ruled the world. There is no longer a good reason for people to gather around their elders and learn about the language once spoken by their ancestors because they would have the more modern version of it. I once sat next to an old italian woman on the plane and she told me that she was going to Palermo for the 2nd time that year. I noticed how thick her italian accent was when communicating with her grandchildren in english and I wondered why the parents never bothered teaching their kids their grandmother's language. It turns out the kids (16 and 20) couldn't even speak italian. the woman expressed to me her sadness about going to Palermo for the first time in 50 years and finding no one that spoke the way she did. She was devastated when she couldn't even find her home or the streets she grew up in. I asked her to teach me something from this almost dead accent and dialect and she did writing the phrases for me on a piece of napkin so that I wouldn't lose it. I don't know why I'm talking about this but I just realized that I lost that piece of napkin and that many people around the world are watching as their language disappears or is altered. this reminded me of how most second generation immigrant youth choose to assimilate into the US lining and culture discarding the language of their parents and the culture it colors and carries in its letters and sounds. if i was to immigrate to the US and later have children I'd like them to speak arabic and to know that their features or the color of their skin is the result of having a rich culture that grows with them even when they are away from the actual community harboring the culture. Lnguage preserves a culture and keeps it alive because the native speakers can read and learn about the works that resulted from their cultures and this knowledge can be passed to generations to come. Tue, 25 Jan 2011 04:44:53 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/02/06/all-that-is-solid-melts-into-air-including-our-words/#IDComment123586760 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/could-g-d-be-a-she-119-blog/#IDComment123581547 i am actually willing to put my own personal religious opinion aside and consider this statement. could god be a "she" or have a feminine energy. i suppose it depends on which culture you present this to. men were considered to be the ruling gender for most of the ancient times and up till the time of jesus christ and mohammed (pbuh). i think god isn't man nor female but to make it easier for the people to listen to his words he had to simplify his existence so that his name could be linked to how males are perceived: powerful, wise, just. if god were to present himself as a female goddess figure i doubt any man's ego would let him follow mohammed's god 1400 years ago. the idea of being ruled by a woman was ludicrous and the same applies to the time of most of the prophets. however, there is one religion that really captured my attention in my religious studies class that, at some point, considered god to be of female energy. the indus vally were one of the earliest hindu civilizations that depended on agriculture and farming. they viewed fertility as a sign of wealth and so their ultimate symbol of power had the figure of a fertile woman. for these ancient humans it was natural for god to be a woman because there is a strong belief behind it. unfortunately, the aryan culture came after that and it was mostly concerned with war and masculine sky gods instead of earthly gentle female ones. in that culture someone who claimed that god is a woman would be ridiculed because she was viewed as a gender that wasn't as capable or powerful as a man. this belief system still exists in many countries and even in the US women have to work twice as hard as any man to get recognized as an equal. Personally, I don't reject the female aspect of my god or "Allah" because I like to think that's the merciful side of him and what is known to us as male is just another side of him. I don't know if this is considered blasphemy but i know this for sure my God is bigger than a pronoun that I slap before his holy name. Tue, 25 Jan 2011 04:01:28 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/could-g-d-be-a-she-119-blog/#IDComment123581547 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/liberal-media-gone-wild/#IDComment123577950 ok I wont talk about this as a specific incident but as one of many phrases that have been uttered by governors (ex. paladeno about denouncing gay parades) these statements offended many american citizens and I understand that. i also understand the christian faith and that's why I think it's unfair what the media is doing to tamper with its image. nowadays christians are used by the media as vessels with which they spread equality by enraging different groups of people. the purpose sounds really great except every christian with a certain set of beliefs is now a bigot and a menace to society. i want to ask you, what has happened to freedom of speech? or do americans pick and choose where that can be applied. south park makes fun of the most important figure of the islamic faith for over 65% of american muslims and people are suddenly very concerned with freedom of speech then a governor expresses his religious beliefs and the public is outraged because how could he say such a thing (to me it just seems like he was trying to show his acceptance to people of other religions by saying "and I want to be your brother" even if most christians disagree with him.) I am mostly confused by this picking and choosing of what constitutes freedom of speech. Tue, 25 Jan 2011 03:36:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/liberal-media-gone-wild/#IDComment123577950 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9ca%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123349269 This account hasn't been done properly. Could you please re-do it. Mon, 24 Jan 2011 01:05:02 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9ca%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123349269 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cs%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123296700 interesting choice of name! Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:29:36 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cs%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123296700 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9co%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123296033 Hello to you too!! See you on Wednesday!! Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:27:25 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9co%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment123296033 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/11/07/arab-on-youtube/#IDComment123069337 I can't say I've seen a person from the gulf vlogging before, or any arab person for that matter. I don't really know if having a Kuwaiti on Youtube does anything for the middle east. I mean it's not like anyone's regulating what is shown on the site and what isn't as it is on TV. Nevertheless, this dude is increasing Arabs visibility by + 1% to the world which is a good thing because people on Youtube are most likely to be young and open minded to receiving new information. In that aspect he isn't just vlogging, he's offering a glimpse of the Arab day to day life. We don't know if he's religious as he didn't mention Islam at all but it's even better because Arab and Muslim shouldn't be linked. For all we know he could be the most liberal person in Kuwait. The clip about his brother was super cute I thought it was nice that this guy was being genuine and laid back. Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:33:01 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/11/07/arab-on-youtube/#IDComment123069337 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/12/06/disney-teaching-prejudice-against-arabs/#IDComment114775500 Sorry I'm still in shock after reading the first comment. I suppose this is why film makers should be careful when they present something that isn't familiar to the public and lacks positive exposure. I was initially going to say that I think Disney did a good job with Aladdin because they didn't hint at anything political and offered an entertaining movie starring a minority group; supposedly Arabs (even though the characters seem to me more Indian but I will leave that for someone more familiar with the indian culture.) All cultures were violent at some point. I mean it's common knowledge that the people of old England enjoyed watching public hangings and that people were killed and imprisoned for stealing a loaf of bread or insulting someone of the higher class. Violence is present everywhere even nowadays, kids watch all sorts of things on television and they play games like Call of Duty. Will this result in aggressive individuals in the future? I highly doubt it. So why doesn't the same apply to an animated movie. I have a problem with the lack of visibility on cable and shows that families get together to watch on primetime television. We have some asians, latin shows, african american shows, christian, jewish, even indian characters but there's not a single show about normal Arab characters that are an active part of society. In my opinion that's what shapes your view on certain cultures. The things you watch on tv that slowly embed themselves in your subconscience and are later hard to shake off. Thu, 9 Dec 2010 22:36:10 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/12/06/disney-teaching-prejudice-against-arabs/#IDComment114775500 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/11/29/u-s-health-care-not-so-muslim-woman-friendly/#IDComment113243011 I don't see a reason why Muslim women should receive special treatment in a hospital. I understand the religious reasoning some women have behind preferring a woman to treat them but I don't think they're logical. If a Muslim woman makes an appointment at a private hospital with a woman doctor that's her choice but for a female muslim to go to a public hospital that is usually short on staff and time and demand a woman doctor; it's ludicrous. I come from a very conservative part in the middle east and some of the very old muslim women won't even agree to show their faces to the male doctor even if he was the only doctor in the hospital. The fact that older women are doing this indicates that women can't separate between someone doing his job and a random man on the street. This male doctor has no interest in viewing the woman sexually. He has over 20 cases to look at every day and then he's presented with a woman who "demands" a woman doctor. What difference does it make? They're both professionals and won't harass you for the sake of not losing their own jobs! So what if he sees an ankle that he's treating or an arm? Have we reached this level of naiveness that we take everything in our Holy book without seeing the logic behind it. It isn't a sexual act, it isn't intimate and shouldn't be viewed that way. Also I didn't like the remark that muslim women prefer to be treated by a muslim male than a non-muslim male. I'm sorry, where does it say that every muslim male is a saint that won't take advantage of the poor woman with severe paranoia. Religion isn't a blanket we slap on people's backs and comfort ourselves with. It's also not a good reason for women to ask for female doctors. The only reason a woman should be asking for a doctor from her own gender should be because she is a woman and feels more comfortable being treated by another woman not merely to use our religion in every silly situation in life. Islam is much more than avoiding a male doctor. Why we reduce it to such trivial cases I still don't know. If I didn't know any better I'd say it's a successful way to distract us from what's happening in the world and to prevent us from seeing how liberating Islam can be and how logical and forgiving it really is. Thu, 2 Dec 2010 00:19:57 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/11/29/u-s-health-care-not-so-muslim-woman-friendly/#IDComment113243011 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/30/what-would-you-do-how-muslims-are-treated-in-us/#IDComment108279833 I now realize that the American quilt consists of a million shades and colors and I don't necessarily have to agree with them all nor do they have to agree with me. This is the beauty of America; you have ultimate and absolute freedom of speech. You can say anything anywhere in any manner and nobody has the power to stop you. Whether you want to burn the Quran or demand rights for the LGBT community, it's your opinion and you are entitled to it regardless of any opposition. This video brought tears to my eyes because kindness still effects me. It's hard enough to stand up for your own people these days and for those individuals to take the time to defend someone that belongs to a different demographic is really humane and it shows the true colors of America, an image that is seldom seen abroad. This also makes me wonder. Are the people segregating against muslims segregating against other minorities? The white supremacist would love to be able to refuse to deal with a black man or a korean woman but they can't because the rights of certain groups have been set and agreed on by society. This leaves the Muslims who are still underrepresented in the media and rarely acknowledged as a part of the american lining. I don't think they're the group to be bullied next but I know those who have a problem with anything that isn't white-american would take the rare opportunity of Muslims being depicted in the ugliest manner in the media to strike and be as racist as they can be until society looks down at those who do. Just like the case of the board member in a school who commented on the deaths of the gay kids. Who knew the US would see a day when the News Channels defended the homosexuals after CBS's "The Homosexuals" in 1960. I wonder who's the next victim though. The browns, the asians or perhaps a breed of aliens. Only time can tell. Sat, 6 Nov 2010 22:21:42 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/30/what-would-you-do-how-muslims-are-treated-in-us/#IDComment108279833 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/19/christian-invaders-the-full-lecture/#IDComment106770049 When he said would you fight american soldiers I couldn't raise my hand and I realized just then that I refused to think like an Iraqi because I spent most of my life making it clear that I was arab and muslim but I wasn't "one of them" the ones who were under attack by their government and by american troops. My friend who was standing next to me shot his hand up so fast it startled me. That he didn't even need to think about it. "If someone attacks my land, kills my family and steals our natural resources I would fight. I'm not a coward. I'd fight and I'd be willing to die to save the people I love," he said. I remember I just shook my head and said, "But that isn't what Islam taught us." and what he said made me realize how much I'd brainwashed my own middle eastern mind, "National defense is just another way of saying Jihad. Jihad doesn't mean blowing yourself up in public places it means joining the army and fighting for your land, your people, to save your own life." Extremists aren't the result of the Islamic faith they are the result of harsh lives and dysfunctional leaders. But are all the people fighting in Iraq extremists? That's one question I never asked myself. What would I do if all I knew was that the US was out to get me. I'd be afraid. Would I do the unthinkable? I don't know but it's certainly something to think of. Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:06:14 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/19/christian-invaders-the-full-lecture/#IDComment106770049 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/03/25/in-her-own-words/#IDComment106765309 haha i can't believe you called the vagina your Mecca. Ok I guess I get where you're getting at but I don't think this is what Laurie was talking about. Women don't want you to go study menstruating in depth or anything. They only want men to realize that they go through hormonal changes, that their mood swings are justified and that it hurts like &*^^%&(*^. The question isn't: why aren't you interested in knowing all the details (which, I realize is your personal nightmare) The question is: why do women have to deny it and act as if nothing is happening to their bodies when in public. No, really, think about it. Is having cramps a good excuse to miss class? How many teachers that you know will accept this and how many girls will actually admit to it. I have a brother and his reaction to me demanding a uterus dissection is really funny. He looks at me sideways and says, "we both know what's going on here but I'm really uncomfortable with you sharing this with me." So, to him it's like, I don't even want to acknowledge that women bleed to begin with. How then am I supposed to explain why I can't go hiking on Sunday, why I don't have to pray today or why I don't fast for 5 days of Ramadan. (In the muslim faith women don't have to pray or fast when they're menstruating.) So in my case it's even more awkward and uncomfortable because my friends and family would know without me having to say anything. Besides how exactly do men engage in unprotected sex without keeping track of their women's cycle. The cycle should be holy too because it's an indication for when the woman is ovulating and when she is not. This is a technique that can be used for birth control, or well, just making a baby. I don't want dudes to go research our cycles but I want to be able to say, yes I have my period and that is why I am a little hysterical today and popping three kinds of pain killers. It isn't because women are crazy. It's because menstruating makes us a little crazy and you have to admit, that's why you love us. Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:29:38 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/03/25/in-her-own-words/#IDComment106765309 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/29/englands-most-popular-baby-name/#IDComment106759890 I cringed a little when one man said he was shocked because he wanted the indigenous people’s names to be from the indigenous people themselves. Well, so what if the jews called their children Moses and the Muslims called them Muhammed. It’s just them acknowledging the greatness of their prophet and naming their babies muslim names. If I was to convert to Judaism I’d probably change my name to something more fitting because when you change your religion in a non-muslim country it must mean something to you. You aren’t in a population with a bunch of Muslims with Muslim names. No, you choose to be a Muslim and you are proud of it. In Lebanon religions vary and the leaders of the country carry different religions and religious sectors so many are called George or Emile “French” (indicating that they aren’t muslims), many are called Jamil (indicating that they are arabs) and Muhammed (indicating that they are Muslims.) It doesn’t mean anything. What! are we going to ban the name Muhammed now just because it’s also linked to Islam? The world is taking this whole Islam-Paranoia to a whole new level. “10% of the people are from migrant background,” that’s such a small figure I’m still having a hard time understanding why that is a bad thing. Also, why people think that 4.6 % of the Muslims in England can disrupt anything. It’s amusing to see the anti-muslims reaction. It’s violent, non-accepting and ignorant but it’s also surprising and shocking to me as a Muslim. I was always under the impression that the English were more accepting of people with different religions. Or perhaps it is only Islam. Seeing the British reaction has made me wonder what the American reaction would be towards having “Muhammed” be the most famous name for babies in the US. I’m sure it will create a hate-rage somewhere which just blows my mind because this is the country that pretends to be a melting pot, accepting and color blind. Well, the Muslims have always been in the US. They are a part of this social structure and this culture even if they are seldom shown on television. Everyone says they know Islam isn’t violent and that they would accept a muslim like any other stranger. But what would the Americans say if Muslims became more than just a minority? Would they be accepted here then? On a personal level this really upsets me and it makes me wonder how long we are going to continue to pay for what the extremists have done to our faith and the way people view us. Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:46:43 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/29/englands-most-popular-baby-name/#IDComment106759890 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/06/interview-with-pastor-terry-jones/#IDComment105133627 I'd like to say that the media are interested in this guy because he presents a unique point of view of radical christians, at least I'd have more respect for him and the media presenting him on national television. Unfortunately, the media is as shallow as the people it's reflecting and this is what the majority of the public finds interesting. I'm not going to talk about him as a person or what he represents because of three opinions he expressed that completely lost me 1- everyone who isn't Christian is going to hell. ( But Buddhists are so peaceful, doesn't that count for anything? No? Moving on.) 2- Muslims are violent when they are the majority. 3- He said he doesn't need to read anything. From this last sentence alone I can see what kind of game the media is playing on us by using this man. See, 10 years ago the media had a message for the american people, the terrorist attacks stem from Islam = Islam is the religion of most Arab and Middle Eastern countries = Arab Muslims are the enemy. Ok that worked for a while and people were united in hating the same demographic group of people, or were bombarded with news about them every time they turned on their TVs. Time passes by and the media wants to change things up so they bring the most ignorant christian extremist they could find who is naive enough to think that they have taken an interest in him and his group because of their point of view, when in fact they're just using them. They're shamelessly exploiting this little radical church to bring new reactions from the public. It's all about the staging of an issue. When you portray someone, or in this case their religion, as the victim people will side with them. All you have to do is listen for one minute to this guy before you find yourself supporting whoever it is he's attacking. The reporter is inclined to some leverage of political freedom so he's voicing what the channel expects the people to be thinking. This is how the media dealt with homosexuality when it first became a big deal. They turned them into the enemy and portrayed them as freaks on shows. Nowadays there's always a bigot or a radical christian that channels people's emotions away from homosexuality itself and into supporting someone they can connect to and feel like they have to support because he/she is being attacked by an ignorant buffoon. I honestly don't mind this man saying whatever he wants and I am not offended even though I am Muslim because this is America and in America people do and say what they please because it is their right. The media can also manipulate and brainwash our minds because they can. What we can do is be smart viewers and not give it more attention than it deserves.. 20 minutes, that was interesting.. Moving on. Thu, 21 Oct 2010 01:15:45 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/06/interview-with-pastor-terry-jones/#IDComment105133627 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/04/a-phase-is-all-you-can-have/#IDComment104711841 The American Gay Rights movements started in the early 1920's. In 1993 "Don't ask, don't tell" was instituted in the US military permitting gays to serve but banning any homosexual activity. Even when Clinton tried to revoke the prohibition he was met with a strong opposition. Gay rights have come a long way since then. When we look at the Middle East, countries that are torn by war and others that prefer not to speak openly about sensitive subjects, gays are allowed to do whatever they please as long as they do not attract any attention to themselves. The same applies to finding prostitutes and drinking in areas where alcohol is banned. People find a way around it because they know that they have an image to sustain in a society that doesn't accept anything out of the ordinary. So, it's wrong to say the Middle East has a majority of Muslims that believe being gay is wrong. Many of these so called Muslims commit sins everyday. It isn't about the religion, it's about society. It's hard to start a Gay Rights movement because no one wants to talk about the issue. On talk shows transsexuals and homosexuals are always attacked by the audience and praised on their courage by the host. These shows are increasing in the Middle East but there doesn't seem to be any indication that society will accept homosexuals any time soon only because nobody wants to talk about it. It took the US media a very long time to start representing gays the right way, and it is still very unsatisfying but at least they embraced that 1.5% of the population admits to being gay and demands a set of rights. In the Middle East you won't find anyone talking about their gay friend or the cute lesbian girl at the shop. It's not even taboo it just doesn't exist. And I'm torn because I can't decide what's worse, telling someone that they should come out and live however way they want then be discriminated against by a big portion of society or being honest with them and making it clear that if they speak up it will hinder their chances of success in society. I'll leave this to time and the bold new generation to decide. Tue, 19 Oct 2010 02:43:05 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/04/a-phase-is-all-you-can-have/#IDComment104711841 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/04/a-phase-is-all-you-can-have/#IDComment104711568 Part 1 A phase is all you can have in many different communities not only the Middle Eastern one. Last week was coming out week and October 11th was National Coming Out Day. Sure, compared to the West the Middle East seems very backward. But why is that? Is it because most Arab countries are ruled by Islam, which forbids same sex marriage? Or is it something else, embedded in society itself and not in the government or religious affiliation of the people. What leads me to saying this is because homosexuality is frowned upon in many religions not only Islam. Christianity and Judaism hold the same stance against homosexuality. Of course now there is Reconstructionist Judaism which accepts homosexuals into society but I highly doubt this is taken from the Torah, so I'm going to say it is man-made just like the struggles the homosexual man/woman has to face on a daily basis. The LGBT community existed in the days of ancient Greece and Rome, also in the emperors' palaces in ancient China and Japan. But somehow engaging in a homosexual act and carrying that persona out in public was never acceptable. Which means millions of people are in conflict about their sexual orientation yet have to suppress it for society. "Coming Out" became a big thing in the US when people realized that they live in a free country that is "supposedly" not run by the church or a rigid constitution. African americans won their rightful position in society, women too, this left the homosexual community to find their spot as well. Tue, 19 Oct 2010 02:40:10 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/04/a-phase-is-all-you-can-have/#IDComment104711568 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/08/men-free-but-women-sacred/#IDComment103944082 Your perspectives aren't devalued in this middle eastern dialogue because of the great influence the West has on the Middle East. The middle east has so much of the "western" essence and way of life. Also, feminism is evident in many Arab countries in the Middle East as most women now receive equal salaries and job opportunities as the men do. The concepts are there but they have different meanings when taken across borders. I don't like the usage of the term "patriarchal system" because I believe it exists in all societies. There is always a man behind the lens dictating what women should look like on ads and whether or not the new female applicant will be accepted. In the US women fought sexism, phallocentrism and the heteronormative point of view to create a bit of themselves in society and the media. With political equality value is, for one reason or another, sacrificed. Western women receive equal opportunities but are strangely marginalized without being appreciated, objectified in the media and stripped of any special rights. Women In the Middle East are allowed to work and go through life in any manner they please as long as they do not harm their reputation that is automatically going to be linked to their current and future families. In a way women are the backbone of society, they reflect their family's values and education and are therefore expected to be so much more than just a replica of the working man. Their freedom does not hinge on being treated exactly like a man but on more realistic grounds. Thu, 14 Oct 2010 05:33:03 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/08/men-free-but-women-sacred/#IDComment103944082 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/14/protesting-the-french-ban/#IDComment103939476 I suppose the idea is very clever; because there's a ban on niqab this was the only way they could prove a point and get away with it. However, that is not what I thought before reading the text. The first thing I thought of was: these two women are ridiculing women who wear the niqab. My logic from there was that by walking around France's streets and causing all this commotion nobody knew who they were therefore the point they were trying to get through was that women wearing the niqab aren't wearing it for religious reasons but rather because it makes them anonymous, faceless, untraceable. I can't say the niqab isn't problematic in a lot of areas around the world. People that are not accustomed to it feel detached from the woman inside and cannot communicate with her while others are overwhelmed by her obvious "so-called-oppression." In many cases in countries governed by Islam women might be forced into wearing it (the ban is just as backward and repressive in the sense that it's stopping a woman from practicing what she believes her religion is asking of her.) In countries where it is common women wear it as to not be detected in public when doing something that is unapproved by their families or/and societies. I see these women going out in all black then following their "date" into his car. This is their way in rebelling against their societies, but by the end of the day these women aren't hurting anybody but themselves and their own reputation. Sure, where I come from that's a big deal and the religious police think it's their duty to call this girl's parents and take her home, but this is freaking France and as a civilized, educated, European country there should be a certain amount of religious tolerance and respect towards women who are covering their faces in a society that doesn't even accept it. It's a difficult decision that they made by themselves. This ban just takes them to point zero where they feel helpless because they can no longer make a choice, it's already decided for them. This also leads to people like these two girls, protesting the ban, only to insult the religious wear of an entire demographic group. Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:42:36 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/10/14/protesting-the-french-ban/#IDComment103939476 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/09/24/respect-reserved-only-for-marriage-potential/#IDComment102217147 I don't really know how I feel about this issue or if I should tackle it objectively rather than from a Saudi point of view. It's very easy to label the situation and say that this is clearly racism and people shouldn't be doing this but in order for us to understand why this is happening we need to go back and study the social structure of the Gulf. Men and women residing in the Gulf countries are ruled by their traditions, at least when making major decisions such as marriage. A man or a woman marrying someone from a far away country happens often but it is still frowned upon by society. This could potentially be problematic for the spouse who has to either assimilate into the culture or be overwhelmed by traditions and eventually decide to leave. When it comes to women unveiling in front of international men that work for the family, this doesn't mean it's because they think less of them or find them unsuitable for marriage. Veiled women will cover up from all men including those who don't share the same traditions or beliefs. However, in a society where the veil is an indication of the family's good reputation unveiled women find themselves more inclined to taking it off in front international men just like they take it off when they travel, even if it's to a close country such as Lebanon or Jordan where being unveiled isn't as big of a deal as it is in the Gulf countries. This might be because these other Arab countries have people of different religions whereas in the gulf the locals are all Muslims that share the same set of beliefs with small changes in traditions when moving from one region to another. Mon, 4 Oct 2010 04:02:26 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/09/24/respect-reserved-only-for-marriage-potential/#IDComment102217147 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/09/24/can-you-call-it-racism/#IDComment101055328 “Everyone was two things at the same time,” that’s a very clever way of putting it and a keen observation as well. Arabs in the Middle East pride themselves in having a heritage that speaks volumes on Arab hospitality and 20% of the non-Arab population in the Middle East believes in the Muslim prophet’s words, “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white - except by piety and good action.” From this Hadith we can conclude that the Islamic faith came to bring people together, make them more humble and tolerant towards other religions. But how many of those Middle Easterners are able to embrace this message and how many of those Arabs are willing to shed years of unspoken resentment towards people of different sectors. In the United States segregation against the blacks was violent and when they were given their rights it was all anyone could talk about until this day. The Middle East has had similar segregations between people of different nations and beliefs but it was never two specific countries or two specific sectors so that people could deal with the issue effectively. As time goes by the hatred may still remain but people will never admit to it. On the surface it would seem as if no one was bullying a certain group of people because of their skin color or religion but really they are only being civil to each other while patronizing them mentally. Is this racism? The answer is no and yes. It’s racism because there are known limitations of people that believe in a certain religious sector and it isn’t racism because no one walks in the streets and blatantly kills or discriminates against someone who’s roots are from Africa instead of Asia or who’s sector is Sunni instead of Shi’a and vice versa. It’s much more complex than it is the US and because there are so many Arab countries that don’t see eye to eye and many religions, languages and sectors it’s hard to tackle this problem from a certain angle. This issue requires an in depth study of the entire Middle Eastern and Arab structure, society, religions, people and how they interact with one another. Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:59:32 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/09/24/can-you-call-it-racism/#IDComment101055328