Amazon.com Widgets
I’m not mad.  Really.

About Ramblings of a Hopeless Khowaga

Welcome to my Web site. My name is Chris, and I’ll be your host. I live in Austin, Texas, with my partner, Ray, and our child dog, Mocha. You can read more about me, learn 100 random things about me, and if you’re wondering what the heck a khowaga is, click here. Feel free to browse, read, and leave comments!

Tag: ‘women’



Man, it’s been a shitty month

Friday, November 6th, 2009

The stars need to realign, now, please. This is going to be a lengthy post. Grab a cuppa and sit down.

Let me recap the last week for you.

Thursday

Thursday afternoon, I went up to Dallas to go to a conference. We go to this conference every year, and it’s good for us on a business level.  It is, however, a clusterfuck year after year, because every year a new host committee takes over and there’s no continuity between the years.  In other words, there are no lessons learned from year to year, so if something goes wrong one year, it’s just as likely to go wrong the next.

We always have an exhibit booth.  The chair of the exhibits has proven, year after year, to be the least competent member of the team.  This year was particularly bad.  I don’t know why certain concepts are so difficult — send an acknowledgement when you get my check? — but they are.  The communication this year was a gem: every message from the exhibit guy started the same way: “Exhibitors: Dave here.  Checking in about things.”  Are we in the military?  Did DADT get repealed when I wasn’t looking?

So, we arrive at the exhibit hall to find that the extra table that I ordered wasn’t there, and that the actual exhibition company had no record of the order.  Neither did four of the five people at the exhibit booth have name badges, even though I sent them to “Dave” when he asked for them.  Interestingly enough, I had two name badges for myself, apparently in case I brought along my evil twin with the same name.

The actual conference itself went fine, once we learned that we couldn’t actually rely on the exhibit team for anything and learned to troubleshoot stuff ourselves.

Cut to …

Saturday

My session, which I was presenting by myself, was the last session of the day at a teacher’s conference … on Halloween.  So, I considered the 17 people who turned up a blessing.  It wasn’t my best presentation, but they seemed to enjoy it, so wah.  Natalie and I were driving back together — the other two members of our consortium had pulled rank because they have small children and needed to get home for trick-or-treating.  I packed up my stuff and left the room, wondering where Natalie would be, since I hadn’t actually arranged this in advance.  I found her standing at a table not far away, with her cell phone in her hand and a confused look on her face.

“I just got the strangest call from Sue,” she said.  “Neguinho just died.”

Neguinho do Samba was a musician from Salvador da Bahia, in northeast Brazil, who is probably best known in these United States as being the founder of the samba-reggae movement, and one of the founders of OLODUM, the drum corps featured heavily on Paul Simon’s album The Rhythm of the Saints and in the video for Michael Jackson’s They Don’t Care About Us.  (If you click through to the video, Neguinho is the guy in the green shirt with the white hat and long hair leading the drum corps.)  More recently, Neguinho founded Banda Didá, the first all-female drum corps in Salvador, which focuses its work among lower-class, black women (Salvador being the most African of Brazilian cities).

Natalie met Neguinho and his partner Viviam in 2004 when she took a group to Salvador for a month long seminar, and has been working with Didá extensively since then.  She brought them up for a residency a couple of years ago, and she’s been back to Salvador several times, always spending part of the trip with Neguinho and Viviam.  She was planning another seminar for the summer that would work more exclusively with Didá (and I had already invited myself along).

I met Neguinho once — literally, “Hi, nicetameetcha” — and I was shocked, to say nothing of Natalie and her friend Sue, both of whom have cultivated a close working relationship with Didá over the years. Sue had been contacted by a friend who saw the ambulance pull up at Neguinho’s house in the Pelourinho and heard the news from Neguinho’s daughter, who was with him when he died, and she had called Natalie right after with little more information than that.

I wound up driving home so that Natalie could make and receive phone calls from various people — and there were various people calling from as far away as São Paulo.

Cut to …

Monday

I took Monday off, partly because of the conference, but mostly because Mom had asked me to go with her while Dad had eye surgery.

Backstory: a couple of weeks ago, I called Mom on a night when (unbeknownst to me), Dad was back in Columbus doing a training session for a group up there.  She mentioned that she had had an ocular migraine.

“Oh, yes,” said I.  “I’ve had those.”

Lemme ‘splain if you’re not familiar: a migraine is a constricting of the blood vessels in the head.  The most common is the type that involves the constricting of blood vessels around the brain, which causes the massive pain that most people associate with migraines.  However, it can also happen in the eye, which tends not to involve pain.  Instead, you get a bright flashy light that devolves into a ring that looks like the “marching caterpillars” you get whenever you select something in Photoshop.  The ring usually widens out–now, here’s the tricky bit.  Until the migraine wears off (usually about an hour or so), you have only peripheral vision functioning, giving you the bizarre sensation of not seeing things that you’re looking directly at.

Over the course of this conversation, it transpired that she had been having these daily.  “Have you seen the doctor?” I asked.
“Well,” she said, “my GP is on vacation, but I’m going to see the eye doctor again.”

Anyway, the reason this is relevant is that Mom wanted me around on the day of the surgery in case she had another one and wasn’t able to drive.  And, sure enough, while we were sitting at the house getting ready to leave for the surgery center, she had another one and Dad had to drive to his own surgery.

While we were waiting, I asked about the doctor visit.  “Well, my GP is still on vacation, but my eye doctor wants me to get an MRI.”
“Sounds like a good idea,” I said.

So we went back to the surgery center and we waited.  And waited.  And waited.  Dad’s surgery was scheduled for 2, and it was supposed to take an hour.  At 4:05, Mom went to the front desk because no one had told us a bloody thing.

“Oh,” said the receptionist (who, I might add, had the sort of personality and work ethic that makes Amanda from Ugly Betty look like a superstar), “they’re in surgery now.  The doctor is running late.”

When we finally got to see the doctor (4:30), he apologized and said that the surgeon who had booked the room in the morning had overrun his schedule by 2 hours.  “They should have let you know that,” he said, “I gave them strict instructions.” — thus sending my opinion of the receptionist through the sub-basement.

We finally got out of there around 5:15, just in time to sit in rush hour traffic and take an hour to get them back home.

Tuesday and Wednesday

Tuesday morning I came in to work, started my e-mail, and realized that I wanted to leave again immediately.

I’m on a volunteer committee that seems to be as determined as possible to make things as complicated as humanly possible for no other reason than they can.  Furthermore, I’m not really supposed to be running it — I agreed to be co-chair this year with the idea of easing in my replacement, but somehow it still seems like I’ve done all the work.  So, there was that drama.

I’m also working on a project here at work that I’ve been co-opted into, that doesn’t particularly interest me, and that I’ve been dragging my feet on.  I’d been asked to comment on a working document, and every time I open it up, it’s the closest I think I’ve ever come to what some guys refer to as “thinking of nothing.”  I remind me of Steve from Coupling, trying to pick out sofa covers.  “I almost had an opinion about that one.”

And the annoying keeps on coming.  Budget cuts.  Everyone is tense.  People are getting laid off.  If I don’t have someone coming into my office to ask me how to do something that’s not part of my job (“I know, but you’re so good at explaining things.”), I’ve got someone wanting to know what I know about who might get laid off (absolutely nothing), and the occasional student who wants to stop by and have a lengthy conversation about life, the universe, and everything.  Normally I welcome all of this, but right now, I just can’t take it.

I’ve been working with my door closed a lot.

Thursday

Thursday continues much the same as Tuesday and Wednesday.  I’m running another exhibit booth next weekend in Atlanta, and the person I’m supposed to be organizing it with … we’re on the same page.  I think one of us is writing with charcoal, and the other is writing with one of those oversized clown pencils, though.

I finally escape from the office and get home with the intention of laying waste to the pork chops that I made Ray buy the other night.  I just got my Cook’s Illustrated annual, and I started laying out the stuff to make crunchy pork chops (they’re yummy).

I had meant to call my parents on Wednesday night to see how everyone was doing, but Mom doesn’t like it when I call from the car (my therapist is in South Austin, and the drive home takes about 45 minutes — it’s a good time for long phone calls to anyone except them), even though my new car stereo is now bluetooth equipped, meaning that it’s hands free in the truest sense.  I don’t even have to take my phone out of my pocket.

This was funny because when I called and Dad answered, I had the vent hood on the oven running and he asked if I was in the car.  I asked how he was, and my very literal minded father answered the question: he’s fine, the bandages are off, etc.  After about five minutes of the update on him, as I’m thinking the conversation is about to wind down, he says, “Your mother isn’t doing so well.”
“Why?” I ask.  “She had the MRI … yesterday?”
“Yes,” he said.  “It turns out she’s not having ocular migraines.”
“What is it?”
“Well, it seems that she’s had a stroke.”

?whatthefuck?

Long story … and, yes, this is a long story … short: she had a mini-stroke, and it has caused some damage to the part of her brain that controls the vision.  They’re trying to devise ways of keeping the vision problems from happeneing — and I’m unclear about whether she’s having occular migraines that are caused by the damage, or whether it’s something else altogether.  And apparently, as mini-strokes go, it was a mild one, and there is a possibility that she’ll regain function in the damaged part of her brain.

Needless to say, she’s freaked out.  So am I.

By the time I got off the phone last night, I was no longer suspicious — I know for certain: the stars are just aligned badly.  Everyone I know has had a spectacularly shitty month … and y’know what?  It’s time for this shit to be over.

And that’s been my week.  How was YOURS?

Civility FAIL

Thursday, September 10th, 2009

The president gave a speech last night.  I didn’t watch it.  I need to be able to read the synopsis of political speeches these days because I can’t quite stomach the queasy feeling I get half the time.

And so, I missed the moment everyone’s talking about this morning: South Carolina senator Joe Wilson yelling, “You lie!” when President Obama said that his vision for reformed health care wouldn’t cover illegal immigrants.

Here it is in case you missed it:

YouTube Preview Image

I find myself in a quandary here.  I’m not entirely sure where I stand on health care reform (yes, the system is broken, and I am mystified by people who think that a government run plan will be more of a burden than a privately run one, apparently on the basis that it’s more “American” to have corporations do it, because corporations are never, ever evil), but I know where I stand on this.  (And if you don’t know, you clearly didn’t read my post from Monday).

The New York Times, in its fact-checking recap of the president’s speech (interesting read), points out that the president is speaking true on this point (and most others … although some of them need to be read creatively).

I keep going back to this: W. was president for 8 years.  He stood up in front of Congress year after year and bragged about how well the war on terror was going and how Iraq was always under control.  Did anyone stand up and yell, “You sent our men and women to fight a war whose sole benefit was to line the pockets of the Vice President?”  No, they didn’t. And it would have been a far more intelligent thing to say.

In fact, this morning, both parties are at pains to remember any occasion on which a presidential address was interrupted in such a manner.  This is not the British Parliament.  We do not have a system that encourages smart retorts in Congress (and, let’s face it, it’s more fun to watch it happen with British accents.  The Brits are so much better at coming up with deep-cutting nasty comments that sound perfectly reasonable on face value).

I keep coming back to this: it’s obvious that the political rhetoric in this country is such that the president has to keep proving his worthiness of being in the office of president … the one that he was elected to, and by a much more definitive margin than his predecessor ever received in two terms.  It’s like people just assume that he’s less than human and not fully American, and it’s up to him to constantly prove otherwise.

In more amusing news, a California state assemblyman from Yorba Linda, one of the true champions of pro-family legislation (that would be pro-conservative definition of family, natch), resigned after bragging to a colleague about an affair without realizing that his microphone was on and that his comments were going out on public access television and preserved on tape for posterity.

Not only that, but it seems that this was his second mistress.  He wasn’t only cheating on his wife — he was cheating on his other mistress, too.

So much for pro-family values!  Although, he did put his money where his mouth is: part of the bragging included the revelation that he didn’t use a condom.  So maybe he’s a true Christian™ after all.  God wants babies!  They’re delicious!

So You’re Back, Then?

Sunday, July 26th, 2009

It’s been over a week since my last blog post.  This probably makes me a Bad Blogger, but whatevs.

It’s also been a little over a week since I flew back from the Middle East.  I had a slow weekend that involved going few places and seeing no one, and then it was time to go to work on Monday.  Needless to say, as I mentioned in my last post, returning to work was not something that I was actively looking forward to.

My office was a mess.  I had been running a workshop right up until I left and had left a couple of piles of things in my office to deal with when I got back.  Normally, when I go on vacation, I try to leave the house or my office in as good a shape as possible, so that when I come back I don’t have exactly the kind of reaction that I had when I walked into my office on Monday: “Oh, fuck.”

My office is still a mess.  There’s still workplace drama.  It’s like the never ending cycle of birth, death, rebirth, and the occasional Bollywood epic describing it.

What my being out of the way has meant, however, is that I haven’t been able to touch base on what one friend called Celebrity Death Fest 2009.  (Yeah, it’s kind of a tasteless term … but it does have its merits.)

All over the Middle East, the one thing everyone wanted to talk about was Michael Jackson … but not for the reason that I thought.  In addition to the obvious question (“What do you think about Michael Jackson dying?”  Seriously, folks, what answer is there to that question??) came this stumper: “Was Michael Jackson Muslim?”

Before you give yourself whiplash trying to figure out where that question came from, lemme ‘splain: when Jermaine made the public announcement of MJ’s passing, he ended with a prayer to ‘almighty Allah.’  Jermaine is Muslim.  Michael … I never heard nothing about.

However, since the Muslim world loves a good conspiracy theory bar none (they include themselves–most of the theories involved local politicians I’ve never heard of, and some of them weren’t about which ones had slept with Sylvio Berlusconi), this was immediately taken as a Sign that the entire Jackson family was Muslim and that the Islam-hating Western media had covered it up.

Clearly they’ve never seen Janet.  Or maybe they ought to, I dunno–depends on whether you think Islam is pro- or anti-feminist … and whether you think Janet is pro- or anti-feminist.  She’d certainly present a different face of Muslim women than a woman in a burqa, that’s for darned sure.

In one of my more sardonic moments, I responded to someone in the Istanbul bazaar, “Right now, the public face of your religion is Osama bin Laden.  Do you really think a gender neutral accused child molester is a step in the right direction?”  Fortunately for me, his English wasn’t good enough to understand most of what I said.  (It was kind of tasteless … even if there’s just the faintest hint of truth in there.)

As for what I think … well, the sad truth was that the likelihood was that his story wasn’t going to end well.  I feel sorry for the guy.  He was surrounded his entire life by people that wanted stuff from him, and he was always alone.

I never got asked what I thought about Farah Fawcett, Billy Mays, Karl Malden, or Ed McMahon.

Anyway.  It’s still hotter than blue blazes here in Texas (everyone in Turkey kept apologizing for the heat–I finally had to break out with, “It’s 44 at home!  It’s only 36 here!  We’re loving it!”), with no end in sight.  If anyone has sway with the Powers that Be, some rain would be great, mmkay?

And maybe some throat lozenges … I think my long-anticipated summer cold might finally be materializing.

The Queen Boat, Reconsidered

Tuesday, November 11th, 2008

It’s been quite a while since I’ve written one of my long boring posts, so if you don’t like them, well, I’m sorry.

We had a guest lecturer on campus yesterday who got me thinking (which I am wont to do from time to time) about stuff I haven’t thought about in quite a while.  I’m not going to use his name because he made himself a bit infamous for reasons that have nothing to do with the talk he gave, and I don’t want people stumbling across my blog by seeking him out in Google.  If his topic sounds interesting, e-mail me and I’ll point you in the direction of his article.

The gist of his talk is something to the following effect: he argues that what he calls a “sexual binary”–namely that one must either identify as hetero- or homosexual–is a western notion that is being imposed on the rest of the world.  If this sounds post-colonialist, you’re not wrong (if you don’t know what post-colonialism is, don’t worry about it — I’m only passingly familiar with it as I think the concept that your thoughts have to be limited by a school of thought is kind of stupid).

His specialization is the Arab World, and his particular grief is that the West is imposing this sexual binary on the Arab World when human rights groups, NGOs, etc., identify a certain subset of the populace as gay or lesbian, even when those people may not identify as gay themselves.

For the record, I started having problems with this guy’s talk when he contradicted himself by suggesting that Arabs have learned the concept of being exclusively “gay” or “lesbian” from the West, but then later said that he knows there are Arabs who do identify as gay or lesbian and that’s OK.

Now, he’s not one of these guys suggesting that homosexuality is a western disease and that it’s an unnatural behavior learned from the West — what he’s saying is that in a good chunk of the world, sexuality is more polymorphous than a simple binary.  Men who are married to women and have children also have sex with men, for example, and that these societies have constructed space to allow this behavior.  What he’s arguing is that the insistence from outside that these people be recognized as “gay” and given rights that they’re not asking for is actually causing more harm than good.

And then he brought up the example of the Queen Boat.  The story is recapped as follows: in May 2001, police raided a nightclub in Cairo (the Queen Boat — it was one of the nightclubs that’s on a large boat that goes out for a two or three hour cruise on the Nile that are popular among tourists and Egyptians alike) that was a reputed gay hangout.  52 men were arrested and charged with debauchery (there being no law against gay sex in Egypt), and the trials spanned over months.

Several international gay rights organizations picked up the banner and pressured western embassies to take up the cause of Egypt’s “repression of homosexuality.”  The western gay press ran stories about “Egypt’s Stonewall.”

The problem was this: none of the men arrested identified themselves as gay, even under allegations of torture.  The gay press attributed this to a long-standing social stigma against homosexuality, but Our Speaker suggested another explanation: none of the men actually considered themselves gay.  Many, in fact most of them were married and had children.  Instead of being Egypt’s Stonewall, it was a trial that went nowhere, and with the exception of two men who’ve been in jail for years, most of them were free within a couple of months, badly embarrassed at having been accused of “licentious behavior.”  Several of them have since emigrated from Egypt (with wives and children).

Our Speaker argued that the international attention did more harm than good–Egypt at the time had no law against homosexual acts.  Parliament is now considering them, however, in response to the Queen Boat incident.

I was trying to digest all of this–I think he’s got a point, although I think there are problems with his analysis–when a friend of mine, an Egyptian doctoral candidate in history, raised her hand and made a counterpoint that I’d been waiting for.  The Egyptian government was, at the time, facing rising opposition from Islamist parties who were accusing the government of being corrupt and amoral, and were holding themselves to be the protectors of virtue.  Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian government sanctions a raid on a well-known gay nightclub that’s been operating for years and charges everyone on board with amoral behavior.  Coincidence?  She doesn’t think so, and neither do I.

Another example our speaker brought up was the novel/film ‘Omaret Ya’qubian (The Yacoubian Building), which was very popular the last time I was in Cairo in 2006.  Among the characters in the novel–which is a sort of Egyptian Peyton Place, following the lives of the inhabitants of an apartment building in downtown Cairo–is the self-identified homosexual character Hatem, who engages in a relationship with a Nubian soldier, Abed Rabbo.

Our Speaker argued that the novel is essentially Islamist in tone, even though the author clearly thinks he’s being very sophisticated.  Hatem, who lives alone and is the passive partner in the relationship (read: “bottom”) is identified as شاظ “shadh” (or “shaz,” as the Egyptians would pronounce it) which means deviant or pervert, but is also common street slang for gay.  (I started to have problems with his talk around this point, because he was saying that the book was mistranslated into English because shaz used to only mean “deviant” in a much broader sense, even though now anyone who reads the book would read it as “homosexual,” which the author is on record as having said is what he meant).

Abed Rabbo, on the other hand, is married and has a son, and is never identified as a shaz.  (Abed Rabbo later murders Hatem … well, it’s complicated).  Hence, Our Speaker puts forward the suggestion that the behaviour is only deviant because Hatem has sex exclusively with men, and exclusively in the passive role, for which he is “punished” with death at the end of the novel.

Again, he kind of has a point here, although I kind of think that Our Speaker would do well to review, for example, The Celluloid Closet for examples of early gay and lesbian characters in film, who almost always met a tragic end.  One of the explanations of this is that it helped anyone in the audience who was having conflicted issues about feeling sympathetic toward the gay character feel better when he or she “got what they deserved.”  Indeed, audiences who watched the film version of The Yacoubian Building were reputed to cheer Hatem’s death, even if they had been sobbing moments earlier when Abed Rabbo’s son took ill and died.

And then this got me thinking about Prop 8.  I know, it’s kind of crazy that thinking about the tenuous relationship between Islam and homosexuality in Egypt might have gotten me thinking about Prop 8 and the enormous backlash against the Mormons for funding it.  Believe me, I’m all for holding the church accountable for their part–but Californians actually voted for it.  I find it interesting (anthropologically speaking) that someone could stand in the election booth and vote for Barack Obama, arguably one of the most liberal Democrats to run for office in years, on the one hand while voting for Prop 8 on the other and see no contradiction.

What, I wonder, was the tipping point?  I don’t believe that it’s as simple as “the Mormons poured a bunch of money into the campaign and that’s why it passed” (note to Michael: I’m not saying that I don’t think it’s A reason, I’m saying that I don’t think it’s the ONLY reason.)

I don’t have answers to this, I’m merely posing the question: what made the people of what is, next to Massachusetts, considered the most liberal state in the Union decide not only to ban gay marriage but to retroactively alter the state constitution, thus potentially invalidating 18,000+ marragies already on the books?  The LDS campaign may have pushed it over the top (in fact, I’m fairly sure it did), but there was already a solid base to begin.

How could we have made history by electing our first black president and shattering the racial glass ceiling, but reaffirm separate-and-unequal status in several states all in one fell swoop?  Are we the sacrificial lamb being offered up?  “We’ll elect a black guy, but the immorality has to stop” — is that it? Trust me, I’m kind of used to it.  I live in Texas.

But it doesn’t make me happy about any of this.  It just makes me wonder what’s really going on here.

If I have any more thoughts, I’ll share.  You can, too.

When Bad Governments Happen to Good People

Wednesday, November 15th, 2006

I’ll bet you all think I’m about to talk about the U.S. government, don’tcha? Well, you’d be wrong.

On the heels of reading the depressing news out of Iran that I saw earlier (scroll down; I’m too lazy to look up the link right now) and the even more depressing response to it in the comments section of the blogs that have covered it (lots of blanket statements from people who are justifiably upset but directing their anger to the wrong place), I ran across the following article in the New York Times:

Silence and Fury in Cairo After Sexual Attacks on Women.

This caught my eye for obvious reasons – after all, if you know me, you know how I feel about the time that I’ve spent in Egypt and my general affinity for the Egyptians.

In the midst of downtown Cairo — in the same neighborhood where many of the government ministries are located, along with the parliament building — a story has emerged via the blogsphere that illustrates the problem that I think many people in the west just don’t grasp: namely, that most of the authoritarian regimes in the Middle East don’t give a whit about their own populations.

It seems that during the recent celebrations during the Eid al-Fitr holiday at the end of Ramadan, when the streets are filled with revelers and there’s a general party atmosphere, there were a few groups of sexually frustrated young men who chose to express their sexual frustration by chasing down young women in packs and groping and fondling them in public. Consider that this is a conservative society where most people are virgins until they get married and holding hands in public is frowned upon. Since this is also an honor-based society, there were several witnessed who decided to get involved and try to help these women — mostly shopkeepers who were working, since Eid is one of the busiest times of the year.

There was something of a public outcry: where were the police? Why didn’t the state security forces step in to help out? They were in the streets in force to keep order, but somehow they just vanished while all of this was going on. Instead of investigating what went wrong, however, the government response has been to discredit and intimidate the witnesses. After all, you can’t investigate mistakes if they were never made, right?

This has caused an even bigger stink, with the usual sorts of denunciations coming from the state-controlled press — denunciations of the “subversive elements” who are trying to “discredit the state,” that is. The blogger who broke the story on his Web site “The Egyptian Conscience” (الوعي المصري — only in Arabic, but there are pictures and some video), was forced into hiding for a couple of days, and has been denounced in some of the pro-government newspapers for propagating “lies.”

The basic theme coming out of all of this is that the state is trying to protect its own reputation rather than protect its citizens from raving bands of hooligans. Egyptians have grown tired of their government’s inability to provide them with basic services and human rights — fortunately, they happen to live in a state that’s closely watched by the West, so they have some ability to protest and raise their voices in opposition. Some. That’s not to say that human rights violations don’t occur, but they’re not on the scale of some other countries in the region (*cough*iraniraqsaudiarabia*cough*).

If I may be permitted a moment on my soapbox, allow me to ‘splain something that needs ‘splaining. As an American citizen, I have never really had any problems traveling in the Middle East. Arabs are well-known for their hospitality, and I have enjoyed the fruits of that reputation. I was in Cairo while bombs were falling on Baghdad in 2003, the opening salvos of a war that was — and is — extremely unpopular in Egypt and the rest of the Arab world. When I was in Egypt in 2005, I got into a cab one day while a massive anti-war protest was taking place in another part of the city, and the driver asked me where I was from, and then just as casually asked if I was going to the protest. I’ve never experienced a problem because of my nationality because people in that part of the world are perfectly happy to disassociate people from their governments. The simple reason for this is that their governments don’t represent them in any way, shape, or form, and they don’t assume that anyone else’s government does, either.

As much as I get tired of the whole “we’re better than they are” rants that others seem to be inspired to write when, say, Iran hangs someone for being gay — in this case, we ARE better than they are. We have a government that remembers that it’s supposed to provide us with basic services and protect us. Our system ain’t perfect — no system is. Sometimes our government wants to protect us a little too much from tubes of lipstick on airplanes, but would I rather be faced with the alternative described above?

The problem is the lack of popular expression in the Middle East. People are frustrated because their governments don’t give them what they need or want. The gap between rich and poor is growing. And most of the dialogue about change is taking place between governments — governments that don’t have the concerns of the people at heart.

Real change in the Middle East isn’t going to come from the top down, it’s going to come from the ground up, and we would do well to remember that. Otherwise, when the change finally comes, we’re not going to be too happy with the results.

 

Blog Theme by LJP & SLR Lounge