I came across this article in Ode Magazine today. It talks about what the West can learn from the rest of the world and highlights some key values, habits and priorities in countries in Africa and Asia. As someone from the ‘rest of the world’, and because India featured more than once, it was interesting to see that some things that one considers rather commonplace in one’s own culture are thought of as worth learning by someone, somewhere else. Undoubtedly, if I put together a similar list, it would reflect things about other cultures that they take for granted.

Anyway, the article talks about learning humility from Sri Lanka, community and raising children from Kenya, democracy from Ghana, work from Nigeria, the village from Tanzania, and ingenuity, non-violence, yoga and food from India. My favourite is happiness from Bhutan:

The king of Bhutan introduced the concept of gross national happiness (GNH), which is based on the idea that true development of society takes place when material and spiritual development occur side by side to complement and reinforce each other. That’s why for the past two decades, happiness has been incorporated as a guiding principle in Bhutan’s policies.

Over the years, we’ve made Bhutan greener than most countries and despite the advent of satellite TV and the Internet, the social fabric is still intact. These policies have also made Bhutan more secure than ever before. To us, these are all indications that our policies are beginning to realize the goal of making people happy. And that’s what all of us want: to find more ways we can engage in the pursuit of happiness.

An entire country which pursues happiness — what can be more fabulous than that? No countries from South East Asia and the Middle East feature. Zen and the art of eating fish from Japan? Martial arts and food from China? Well, I suppose it’s impossible to be really inclusive in any list.

Increasingly, there’s a lot of thrust on cross-cultural learning and the importance of understanding other cultures because of the shrinking world we live in. With the Internet at our disposal, it’s easier than ever before to know about other cultures — at least at a prima facie or superficial level. Whether or not, this fuels more unity is still debatable. In some case, knowledge does equal understanding and better empathy. But in others, a single cultural tradition or habit that you find distasteful or unethical can turn you off a particular culture and prevent you from caring enough to find out about other aspects. Sometimes, there is an uneasy balance of respect of repugnance. On the whole, I would say it’s better to know rather than not. I think one of the measures of the Internet’s success is that there is still a great deal of communication and harmony between individuals in different countries today despite overwhelming counter factors like terrorism and war.

The Centre for Intercultural Learning and the Cultural Profiles Project are great sites for those who want to know more about people elsewhere in the world. Go on, take a virtual dip into another culture. Have fun!

Some time back, genital mutilation in Egypt came into sharp focus when a thirteen-year-old girl died on the operation table. Now, the tides may be shifting slowly, but undeniably. According to this NYT article:

But now, quite suddenly, forces opposing genital cutting in Egypt are pressing back as never before. More than a century after the first efforts to curb this custom, the movement has broken through one of the main barriers to change: It is no longer considered taboo to discuss it in public. That shift seems to have coincided with a small but growing acceptance of talking about human sexuality on television and radio.

For the first time, opponents said, television news shows and newspapers have aggressively reported details of botched operations. This summer two young girls died, and it was front-page news in Al Masry al Yom, an independent and popular daily. Activists highlighted the deaths with public demonstrations, which generated even more coverage.

At the forefront of this movement is anthropologist Marie Assaad who has been fighting the barbaric practice for around 50 years. In the beginning, she started off with outright condemnation but realizing that this was not working, she employed more strategic moves. She got Islamic scholars and health care workers to endorse her views and dispel illusions. She also managed to garner support from other powerful women in the country.

I think there’s much to be learned from her strategy when it comes to overthrowing age-old, ingrained customs and patterns of behaviour. Give people arguments they can relate to. Win supporters in different key groups, especially the ones most likely to oppose you. And be tenacious.

Even as recently as 2005, a government health survey showed that 96 percent of the thousands of married, divorced or widowed women interviewed said they had undergone genital mutilation. The battle is far from over, or even close to the finishing line. But at least, it has started in earnest.

An earlier post about this is here.

This article in New Statesman talks in detail about China’s efforts to “civilize” Tibet. As part of this “civilizing mission”, China is using economic growth as the primary method of infiltration into this quiet land where matters of the spirit have long taken precedence over those of the wallet.

Traditional Tibetans may be as devoutly Buddhist as ever, but modern China worships Mammon. More than half a century after the Chinese invasion of Tibet, and 48 years after the Dalai Lama fled into exile in India, China’s Communist rulers are hoping that an economic boom will help them consolidate control over the recalcitrant region. Last year, 2.5 million tourists and business people - some westerners, but most Han Chinese - visited Lhasa. Now the new railway from Beijing has reached the Tibetan capital, the number is expected to increase by 80 per cent this year alone.

Historically, Tibet has been an independent nation and since China invaded it 50 years ago, the Dalai Lama has been leading the people in non-violent resistance but China has continually notched up horrific levels of human rights violation in Tibet. The outlook has never been very hopeful because China does not really show signs of letting go. From this slightly old report on the subject:

Pessimists think it is impossible for China to change its policies toward Tibet because China needs Tibet as an armed camp for military security. They also think China needs Tibet’s vast territory and natural resources for its economic prosperity, and that China must save face in the global arena by not admitting that past policies were misguided and inhumane.

China seems to have changed tack in the last few years though and insidious colonization is taking the place of outright brutality. According to the News Statesman article:

…these days the Chinese attitude tends to be more patronising than brutal. It is official policy to tolerate ethnic minorities and their religions, provided they are loyal to the party and the state. “The government pays full respect to ethnic customs,” says Mr He. “Tibetan culture is an exotic flower among Chinese cultures. It has existed for more than 2,000 years. But we will help them remove bad or backward habits, and lead them to a more civilised life.” As part of its civilising mission, and to integrate Tibetans into the modern economy, the government has resettled 25,000 nomadic and farming families into “new socialist villages”. The plan is to settle 80 per cent of rural Tibetans in the next five years.

Tibetans have feared and protested against cultural genocide for years now and there were protests against the new railway as soon as it was announced last year. This article last year talked about the multiple ways in which the Golmud-Lhasa railway linking Tibet to several Chinese cities would affect the region.

The Golmud-Lhasa railway is expected to strengthen the iron grip that China has over Tibet and increase the militarization of the region. It would allow the rapid deployment of Chinese troops and facilitate the deployment of missiles, including nuclear weapons. The environment in Tibet will also suffer. The railway will be also facilitate the exploitation of Tibet’s natural resources, which are already plundered without any concern for the ecological impact and without collective benefit for Tibetans.

The Dalai Lama expressed that it was “politically motivated to bring about demographic change”. Their worst fears appear to be coming true. The engine of cultural obliteration is chugging fast. Whether it will succeed in overrunning a people who have held onto their beliefs despite all odds for so long remains a question. We can only pray that it will be answered in one way rather than the other.

For more information on the Free Tibet Campaign, visit their site. The Save Tibet website also offers information and updates on the situation.

Internationally acclaimed writer Elif Shafak talks about how Abdullah Gul’s election as president is causing ripples in Turkish society about its political and secular beliefs. The crux of the matter is that Gul is a former AK Party member, which is often referred to as an Islamist party, and his wife Hayrunisa Gul (now the first lady of Turkey) wears the headscarf, a problematic symbol that is at the heart of the controversy. But Shafak points out that:

Not all covered women are giving a political message. Similarly, not all covered women are “ignorant” or “repressed”.

More significantly, the structure of the Turkish family constantly brings together covered and uncovered women.

Sometimes the mother-in-law is covered but the daughter-in-law is not. One sister is covered but not another.

Even taking a stroll along a crowded street in Istanbul will show us how covered and uncovered women live together all the time.

Turkey’s role in history has always been significant. Not only does it lie at the intersection of two continents, it also combines other forces.

Within the amazing diversity of the Muslim world, Turkey occupies a unique place.

In an age when the number of people who believe in a clash of civilisations escalates every day, here is a country that is predominantly Muslim and staunchly secular at the same time.

The discussion on the president’s wife and the position of women in Turkey lies at the centre of all these massive political debates.

It will be interesting to see how Turkey reconciles this latest challenge to the coexistence of divergent views. Meanwhile, Hayrunisa Gul has asked an Austrian couturier of Turkish heritage to redesign her headscarves. Perhaps, in a bid to prove that headscarves can be modern too?

An earlier post about Turkey here.

The NY Times asks its readers an interesting question:

A charter school in Florida has come under fire for tying its Hebrew-language based curriculum to religion. Opponents of the Ben Gamla Charter School say that it is impossible to teach Hebrew — and aspects of Jewish culture — outside of a religious context.

How do you feel about publicly financed schools that cater to particular languages or cultures?

I think the question can be broadened to how important a role culture should play in education at all, which demands a closer look at the interplay between culture and society. The Dictionary of Modern Sociology defines culture as “the total, generally organized way of life, including values, norms, institutions, and artifacts, that is passed on from generation to generation by learning alone.” So culture is both integral to a person and inherited from the past. Because it defines so much of how a person should live, it forms a crucial component of his or her identity.

But in an increasingly globalized world, people often have to learn new ways of life and unlearn what has been passed down to them. This can lead to people feeling confused, overwhelmed or unanchored from their identity — psychological conditions that can have far-reaching impact on social interaction and relationships. Increasing globalization, travel and immigration are creating more subcultures within nations, which means that questions surrounding this are assuming center-stage.

Traditionally, the tricky business of culture has been negotiated in different ways. Countries have adopted approaches ranging from monoculturalism (when in Rome be as the Romans are) to multiculturalism (be yourself even while in Rome) and melting pot (do whatever comes naturally). But the thorniest angle of culture is always values.

In a perfect world, we would all believe in the same basic values and uphold the same fundamental rights. But this is not really the case, is it? Varying rules and attitudes regarding relationships, sex, marriage, divorce and recreation prevail in different cultures. Where does one draw the line between respecting other cultures and condoning heinous practices? How far should a state go to maintain and encourage subcultures without endangering the fundamental principles of its nationhood? Walking the tightrope between respecting cultural diversity and building a world that is safe and free for all remains one of the key challenges of our times.

I tend to agree with this view on the politics of culture:

When culture is treated as nothing more than an innocent accretion of solutions and practices, and each culture is seen as something inviolate, then all cultures are accepted at face value and cultural relativism is the suggested standard. So we hear that we should avoid ethnocentrism and respect other cultures. To be sure, after centuries in which indigenous cultures have been trampled underfoot by colonizers, we need to be acutely aware of the baneful effects of cultural imperialism and of the oppressive intolerance manifested toward diverse ethnic cultures within our own society.

But the struggle to preserve cultural diversity should not give carte blanche to anyone in any society to violate basic human rights. Many patriarchal cultures, for example, are replete with “sacrosanct customs” that, on closer examination, promote the worst kinds of gender victimization, including the mutilation of female children through clitorectomy and infibulation, and the sale of young girls into sexual slavery.

If one applies to this to the debate around education, the answer seems simple enough — conditional support. But examining what these conditions should be and defining them accurately and precisely is required as a first step towards a pluralistic world that still has some basics in common.

“Bullfighting is a dramatic ritual in which the death and suffering of life find their ultimate poetic expression.”

So says Pedrito, Portugal’s most famous matador, who had to pay a hefty fine of $137,000 when he ended one of his fights by killing the bull. This is because killing a bull is considered murder in Portugal and it was outlawed in 1928, unlike in Spain where this rather bloodthirsty sport originated. Pedrito’s case apparently sparked of a nationwide debate.

His supporters argue that a death-free struggle is a sacrilege because the culmination of a bullfight should reflect man’s ultimate triumph or defeat against the bull, while critics contend that Portugal must retain its civility and show humanity to animals.

One place that supports Pedrito is Barrancos, a bullfight-loving town near the Spanish border that persisted so stubbornly in encouraging the killing of bulls that the government relented in 2002 and gave it a dispensation from the ban.

Despite the conflict with animal rights and vigorous protests by some groups, bullfighting has prevailed because it is deeply entrenched in culture. The history of tauromachy goes as far back as 2000 BC. Bullfights were popular in Rome and an important part of life in the Iberian Peninsula. Many Spanish people feel that abolishing bullfighting would be an unforgivable interference with the country’s cultural traditions.

But the voices of dissent may be getting louder. TIME reports that two days from now, a pro-animal rights group Andalusian Collective Against Animal Mistreatment (CACMA, according to its Spanish initials), will stage the first demonstration ever in Malaga against bullfighting. The article goes on to say that according to a Gallup poll, only 8% of Spaniards consider themselves bullfighting fans but the grisly sport is popular in other parts of the world — Portugal and France of course, but also far-flung countries like China, Armenia and South Korea.

Meanwhile, animal rights groups in some countries are trying to do their little bit by exhorting people to boycott bullfights when they visit Spain, Portugal or France. The Irish Council Against Blood Sports is appealing to the humane side of tourists. It says:

Seeing a cut-up bull stumbling weakly around a bullring with blood spurting from its back and spraying from its mouth and nostrils is sure to leave a dark shadow across holiday memories. In fact, many who venture into bullrings out of curiosity leave in disgust as the animals are mercilessly killed before their eyes.

Shark Online, an animal rights group, has some seriously disturbing pictures on their website. Animal lovers are advised to steel themselves. The League Against Cruel Sports has launched “Boycott the Bloodbath”, a campaign against bullfighting and gives some very specific steps that people can follow. FAACE, an organization in the UK, tells you how you can help the animals through donations and other means.

This San Francisco Chronicle columnist says it with biting humour:

I don’t buy into that Hemingway-inspired mythology of bullfighting as metaphor for life one iota. It’s not graceful. It’s not artistic. And it’s certainly not sport. What it is, is torture of large animals for the amusement of smaller ones. Namely, people.

Therefore, I take great amusement in watching and reading about idiots in white judo pajamas and dashing red bandanas getting gored by bulls in Pamplona. Serves ‘em right. Go, bulls!

But right now, Pedrito’s sentiments seem to be on the winning side.

“Good bulls are noble: They humiliate the bullfighter and do not fear him,” he says. “When I kill a bull, I don’t think about it. It is just another movement in a bullfight, and this movement is to kill.

Cultural essential or abominable cruelty — what do you think?

The 15th Erase Racism Carnival is up at Racewire. A note of explanation for those who’re unfamiliar with this, the Racism Carnival is basically a monthly blogosphere event. Every month, a different blog gathers the best blog posts on racial injustice issues and presents them in one place. This month, they’ve looked at some important topics like Race and the Green Economy, Black-Brown Relations and — something that’s increasingly important in the global context — Immigration and Migration. There are a host of interesting posts under Race and Gender in Media, including this one on how French cosmetic brand L’Oreal was guilty of racism during a recent direct marketing campaign.

L’Oreal unit Garnier has been found guilty of excluding non-white women when it recruited people to hand out its samples of its shampoo and discuss styling with shoppers. The company had set out exactly what size it expected the women to be, and also specified that they needed to be “BBR”, the initials for bleu, blanc, rouge, the colors of the French flag. Anyone who has spent time in France knows that BBR is code used by the the far right. For employers, it’s code for whites only. Asians, North Africans and Africans needn’t apply.

Eric Stoller’s views on why he blogs, in the Whiteness Revisited section, are heartwarming.

Sometimes I think about shutting the whole thing down. Then I am reminded by an internal alarm that tells me that yes, as a white heterosexual man, I can walk away from this blog. I can go through my entire life on this planet and never have to think about my race, my gender, or my sexual orientation. It’s the combination of a set of unearned privileges. However, I am an anti-racist, feminist, ally. My dignity is linked to those who are oppressed because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. My dignity is maimed and suffers because of racism, sexism, homophobia, heterosexism, etc.

I don’t approach my blog posts as if this is a debate. This is personal for me.

Some fantastic stuff. Go read.

Budour Ahmad Shaker died while undergoing female circumcision in Egypt. She was 12. Hopefully, her tragic death will not be forgotten. The horrific incident and resulting public protest has prompted Egypt’s health minister to announce a formal and absolute ban on female circumcision, or female genital mutilation.

Female circumcision involves the removal of the female clitoris, which conservative families believe is a way of protecting a girl’s chastity. The practice is common among Muslim as well as Christian families in Egypt and other African countries. According to The Economist report, a nationwide survey carried out in 2005 revealed that 97% of married women claimed to have been circumcised. But a more disturbing trend is that two-thirds of circumcisions are performed by doctors.

The Guardian says that female circumcision was made illegal in Egypt in 1997. But there were loopholes that many medical professionals took ample advantage of. Shaker’s untimely death has brought to the forefront something that too often we relegate to the back of our minds. Not only is this a primitive rite that reinforces discriminatory attitudes towards women, it is also painful, sadistic and potentially deadly!

Of course, it will take more than mere legislation to change something so ingrained. It’s important that doctors (whom we think of as ‘healers’) be held to task for wielding scalpels of destruction. But unless the larger cultural issues are addressed, people will continue to practice it on the sly and endanger the lives of their little girls by taking them to quacks. I think it’s important to sensitize people, especially parents, about the dangers of this practice and hold them accountable as well. Shaker died because of the effects of anaesthesia. No doubt the doctor was responsible (and he has been arrested). But were the parents any less culpable?

The BBC website has a discussion on the issue of FGM and the counterpoint comes from some people who say that if a woman chooses to have the operation, there’s nothing wrong with it. Well, firstly, a lot of girls are circumcised before they become women so the question of choice is a little irrelevant. Secondly, to make an informed choice on the matter, a woman should have equal access to information about the pros and cons, which I doubt is the case most times.

The defense for practices like FGM, which are deeply entrenched in any society, is usually the protection of culture. But what is culture? Not a static museum piece but an evolving phenomenon. As we move into an increasingly globalised world, we need to arrive at some things we universally agree on — the meaning of words like murder, genocide, suicide; what constitutes human rights violation; what constitutes child abuse. By all means, let’s celebrate our differences and protect our individual cultures. But let’s not forget that at the core, we are all human beings.

Did you know that “hygge” is an integral part of Danish culture? There’s no exact translation for hygge, which is pronounced hu-gah. The word incorporates a multitude of fuzzy, feel-good concepts–cozy sofas, candle light, a steaming cup of hot chocolate, or a glass of warm red wine, bonhomie and intimate conversations with friends. According to this website, some refer to hygge as the Art of Creating Intimacy (with yourself, friends and home). Delightful idea, isn’t it?

The story goes that Danes developed the concept of hygge as a way of dealing with the long, dark winter months from October to March. What started off as survival mechanism gradually evolved into an art form. The Germans have a concept called gemütlichkeit, which means very similar things, while the Dutch have gezellig and the Russians ujut. Apparently, there are words for the same concept in Sweden and the Netherlands as well. All of these are countries that face severe winters and have to actively guard against Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD).

I haven’t come across any equivalent words in tropical countries. It stands to reason that people in hotter places will be less eager to light candles or sink into warm fabric of any sort. Instead, there is an abiding romanticism about the rain. Songs and poems about rain abound (although Hollywood is not exempt from this either). In Botswana, the Setswana word for rain, pula, is used as the name of the national currency.

The weather channel is commonly considered rather boring but it’s hard to deny the ways in which we are affected by the sun’s heat, the lash of rain, the ways of the wind. Not everyone discusses the weather with the same enthusiasm as the Brits, but it finds its way into our language all the same. Reminds me of that old Crowded House song (Everywhere you go you always take the weather with you).

Are there unique ways that the weather has affected your culture? Special words that talk about climate? Social phenomena born from seasonal ones?