An article in the Telegraph from the UK considers the issue of American journalist and recently freed hostage Jill Carroll and why the Conservatives are attacking her. One of those attacks was for wearing a Burka when she was released and before leaving Iraq.
One conservative blogger even called this behavior "treason."
What is the difference between this American freelance journalist and a prison of war?
The captive soldier is held as an enemy combatant. We have tortured our Iraqi war prisoners.
This American civilian hostage, in an attempt to promote America's First Amendment free press in a war zone that we started, was berated and humiliated by her captors, but she was not tortured.
Hmm...
I'm not surprised that there are people willing to make their prejudicial comments public, insulting her for respecting the culture where she was at the time. Remember, she was trying to be inconspicuous when she was in Iraq. As a woman with sensitivity and intelligence would do, she wore traditional Muslim clothing where such a custom was expected of women.
Now, maybe you are a woman who has visited this type of culture. Did you wear a headscarf? Many do. The journalist Yvonne Riddley, who was raised in England singing in the church choir, found herself captured by the Taliban.
You should read her story. She converted to Islam and now works for Al Jazeera, which is a representation of free press ideals in the Muslim world and based in Dubai, of the Dubai Ports scandal that Bush supported so strongly as trusted friends.
Still, others don't agree with this behavior. Take Condaleeza Rice and Karen Hughes, who met with Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority, to discuss developing US policy so that the issue of returning women to equal status under the law would be a nonnegotiable issue in forming any new government in Iraq. (
Read the Time article about Burkas for more.)
I don't believe there's anything to be ashamed of by refusing to wear a burka while in these fundamentalist cultures.
In the church I grew up in, which was fundamentalist Christian in the extreme and proudly so to this day, there was a time when a woman could not wear pants to church or mutilate her body by piercing her ears. That was an enforced custom, punishable by shunning from the community. Nobody would have tortured someone for such behavior, but she certainly would have been shunned.
To be fair, men had appearance restrictions as well, such as tattoos and piercings. However, exceptions were made because of the redemption of being baptized and the desire to increase membership. Men raised in the church didn't qualify for such exceptions.
In Muslim countries, these communities are larger than they were where I grew up. The US had communities of this size, with laws enforcing dress codes and corporal ethics, just 3 generations ago. That's my grand and great-grandparents.
If a Pakistani had come to town, the gentleman would have worn clothing appropriate to our culture. Think Ali Hakim in the musical Oklahoma!
In 387 AD, St. Augustine traveled outside his religious culture and discovered that the citizens of Milan did not fast on the Sabbath (Saturday). Concerned about what he should do, he wrote to the head of the Roman Church in Milan, St. Ambrose, who replied, "When I am at Rome, I fast on a Saturday; when I am at Milan, I do not. Follow the custom of the Church where you are." This wise philosophy for Christian travelers became an English idiom - when in Rome, do as the Romans.
Why? Out of respect. I had my ear pierced in college - a rebellious act that I recall fondly in spite of the social pangs it caused, which were few and isolated to just a few individuals that I knew. But, I knew that this type of behavior wasn't accepted in my family's home. And so, out of respect, I never wore any ear jewelry when I was visiting my family. This decision was definitely passive, because the real problem was the piercing itself, not the jewelry. I guess I didn't have the courage of other women in my generation who forced their community to deal with these issues by confronting them head on with the church elders, and winning their case. Instead, I depended on my theory that these cultural norms were so threatened by the revelations of the cultural revolution of the 60s and 70s that advocates would rather stay silent about their dissent rather than risk more confrontations. And, I was right.
My point in this little story is that fundamentalist and religious norms that are truly cultural prejudices and injustices are resolved within their own community. Anyone outside that community has no influence whatsoever. An outsider who wishes to visit and has an invitation to do so would be wise to respect the local customs, even if they seem odd or unjust.
And, I'll go one step further. A visitor to one of these cultures has a moral obligation to either conform or stay at home.
Doesn't that sound like the way Jesus would behave?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
