World-Wide Need

It is times like these that kind of drive me crazy: an earthquake in Haiti, a tsunami in Thailand, an earthquake in China, etc. The pictures are horrifying, the loss is unimaginable, and the news coverage is non-stop. And then it starts: celebrities suddenly crawl out of the woodwork to tell you how to help. They let you know what they are doing, how much they are donating, and to whom.

Even Ravelry, a site I normally love and adore, has gotten into the act. Designers can tag their designs with special tags, and if one purchases such a tagged pattern a designated portion of the proceeds goes to a Haitian relief effort of the designer's choice. A person searching for a pattern can even filter for the special tag!

Before you keep reading, let me be as clear as I can be. I have nothing but the utmost empathy for what people most be going through in those situations. Obviously, I have not gone through a natural disaster of that magnitude. The closest I have experienced is the Missouri Floods of 1993, which was plenty for me, thankyouverymuch. And before you ask, yes, I participated a great deal in the clean-up efforts. I can only imagine what it must be like for people who have lost their entire families, for people who can't find their families, for people who have lost everything they have ever owned, and for people who now literally have nothing but the clothes on their back. Truly, it's unimaginable.

However, what disturbs me about the outpouring of "Help Haiti/China/Thailand/etc." campaigns is that there is a ridiculous amount of suffering and death on a daily basis that goes largely unnoticed by these same celebrities, media outlets, and dare I say it, Ravelry Powers That Be. For instance:

• Approximately 8,500 people die every day of AIDS-related complications
• Approximately 4,500 people die every day because they don't have clean drinking water
• Approximately 2,700 people die every day of malaria
• Approximately 33% of North Koreans are malnourished

These things happen EVERY DAY. These are problems that doctors, politicians (you know, the good ones - they DO exist; I promise!), public heath practitioners, and human rights advocates fight against EVERY DAY.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't give aid to Haitians right now. I'm not saying that they aren't deserving of prayer and compassion. Of course they are.

What I AM doing is imploring you to give aid to other, equally worthy causes every other day. They aren't as sexy, they won't make the news every day for two weeks straight, they won't have star-power backing them up; I can almost guarantee you that. That's kind of what makes the fight so special and meaningful. It's what will make you have so much passion for the cause later.

So, now that I've implored you to help, here's how you can:

My favourite HIV/AIDS sites/charities:

• CDC Factsheet on HIV
  
• Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS
• amfAR, The Founation for AIDS Research

How to help with clean drinking water:

• Thirst Relief International

How to help eliminate malaria:

• CDC information on malaria
• Nothing But Nets

Information on North Korea's plight:

• World Food Programme

Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein

This post has the potential to be controversial. It covers cultural anthropology, world affairs, and human rights.

In case you don't want to read it, aren't in the mood, etc., here's a pretty picture to serve as a buffer:

For those of you who haven't yet heard about this, you can read about it here. The basic gist is that Ms. al-Hussein went to Sudan, where it is illegal for women to wear "indecent clothing." She was caught in public wearing trousers, which has traditionally been defined as "indecent" for a woman. She now faces a punishment of public flogging (40 lashes). She could have avoided it by claiming diplomatic immunity, but she instead chose to resign her position with the U.N., presumably to shed light on these issues.

I've been turning this issue over and over in my mind for a few days now, and no matter which way I come at it, I remain truly ambivalent about it. It's a complex issue, and I'm going to try to explain my thoughts about it in an articulate manner. So, stick with me here. Or at least try to!

In the U.S., women can wear trousers. It isn't considered indecent. However, in Sudan it is. In the U.S. what we can and can not wear isn't codified. However, in Sudan it (apparently) is. While these differences surprise me, I don't find them appalling. I find them to be cultural differences. And I'm OKAY with that. I don't find anything there to be all up in arms about.

I find it extremely difficult for one country (ANY country) to dictate to another what is RIGHT. "We do things THIS way, so it MUST be the RIGHT way. Therefore, YOU must do it this way, too."

My friend Kristi and I had discussions along this line when she was working on her KAA dissertation some years back. I was bemoaning the fact that there were so many Chinese baby girls being adopted and aborted because of the population cap and how that should be changed. And she said that she was uncomfortable with us (meaning Western culture) dictating to another country how they should run their country. They HAVE over-crowding. Who are WE to tell them how to solve the problem? If their culture dictates that men are valued more, then that's THEIR culture. I learned that afternoon that there exists a delicate balance between human rights and cultural rights.

And that's where I find myself again.

Sudan has laws about what women can wear. She broke the laws. Some people may find the laws "archaic" or "old-fashioned," but that IS their law. When people visit our country, we expect them to abide by our laws; they have a right to expect the same by visitors to their country.

Now, the next issue: some people find the punishment "too much" or "humiliating." Talk to me about that one again when the U.S. gets rid of chain gangs and the death penalty.

An eye for an eye?

In November 2004, Ameneh Bahrami was the victim of an acid attack. She had rejected a guy who was into her, kept harassing her, and proposed marriage to her multiple times. One afternoon, he followed her from her place of work to a train station and threw acid on her face. As a result, her face, hands, and arms are disfigured (the acid got on her hands and arms when she put them up to her face) and she is now blind in both eyes.

Rather than accepting money from attacker Majid Movahedi (a custom known as "accepting blood money"), she requested an eye for an eye. A court ruled that she would be allowed to drop 20 drops of acid into one of Movahedi's eyes (not both - the theory that one man is equivalent to two women apparently applies to their body parts, as well). He will be restrained on a table and his eyes will be forced open as she drops the acid into his eye.

He appealed the court's ruling and recently lost that appeal.

She says she isn't doing this out of revenge. She says she wants this to be a deterrent for future potential acid attackers. She says she won't change her mind.

A lot of human rights activists are up in arms about this. Some say that it violates Movahedi's human rights; the punishment is too barbaric. Some say that since Bahrami now lives in Spain, she should abide by Western humane mores and not participate in such a vengeful, barbaric act. I will admit that the second argument doesn't hold much interest for me. Note that I did not say that I disagree with it, it just doesn't interest me as much as the basic human rights issue does. And I see this as a victim's right issue, as well.

One of the first (and most difficult) lessons I learned in law school is that law and justice seldom go hand in hand. And truth and the justice RARELY coincide (one of my professor went to law school across the street from a church, and his professor often told them that if they wanted Truth, they should go across the street). And I could really do a blog post on the whole law/justice, truth/justice issue later (and I might).

I don't see justice here. I see the law, but no justice. I see the truth (the attack DID happen, Movahedi confessed but is apparently without remorse). I've tried very much since I first heard about this story to see justice. And I just can't find it.

It's tempting to blog about my own journey from a rape/incest victim to a survivor who has forgiven her rapist. But the truth is that that journey took many years, many evolutions, and had its own prices along the way. I can't expect that every victim will feel the same way I do. It's not fair to them (or to me). And I'm not arrogant enough to say that the way I did it was the right way. Survival looks different and takes different forms.

But I wonder if participating in physical barbarism is a necessary step for Bahrami in her journey from victim to survivor. There are things that happened during my transformation that I wish I could do again, do differently, or just altogether take back and erase. While my greatest hope is that she ultimately decides to not do this, my next hope for her is that if she does do this, it does not become a regret in her life.

Inauguration Day

One of my coworkers brought in her portable television so we could watch the pomp and circumstance in the office.

I held it together for the most part. I cheered for Justice Stevens (although I made fun of Biden for calling him "Mr. Justice) and I jeered Chief Justice Roberts, especially when he went and fucked up the oath of office. Dumbass.

I was proud of myself for not bawling like a baby while Obama was sworn in. Although I will admit that I cried when Dubya got into the chopper and flew away. It was such an immense feeling of RELIEF. All I could think of was, "It's over. He's gone. We can get to work on repairing this clusterfuck of a country now."

The only unpleasant part of the whole deal was when Rick Warren was introduced. I made a comment that I still couldn't believe that he was doing the invocation. Coworker 1 asked me who he is. I said, "He's a conservative pastor who is anti-gay rights, pro-life, etc." Coworker 2 said, "He isn't anti-gay rights. He's anti-gay MARRIAGE." I said, "Marriage IS a gay right." Coworker 2 said, "But he isn't against ALL gay rights." I just left it like that; I'm not out at work, and I didn't want to start a big THING.

While I was disgruntled at this statement, my sister (who I called last night since it was her birthday) and I managed to make it pretty funny. As in, "how many gay rights do you have to support for you to call yourself pro-gay rights? Is one enough? Two?" I wondered if it was like a meal plan where you get one entree and two sides - you can support one BIG gay right and two little ones and you're good to go. Then we really got nuts and started in on feminism. You know, like you can be a feminist but against females being educated... so you aren't against all women's right, just SOME of them. *rolls eyes* Anyway, by the time we were done, we were both giggling like crazy.

I also had my first day of Pre-calc last night. I think I'm really going to like this professor. But we'll see how it goes after Day 1. :)