Why are terrorists so stupid?

Terrorism is defined as political violence. Wreckless and shameless, it's all rooted in some all-important political message that supposedly justifies the means.

(Insert apologetic statement about being Muslim here, followed by a sombre pronouncement that this is not a sarcastic post.)

Reading about the twin suicide attacks on the British embassy in Kabul today (early Friday in Kabul) made me scratch my head.

I. Just. Don't. Get. It.

What I don't understand is the message. What exactly are these terrorists trying to communicate?

The attack comes on Afghanistan's independence day - independent from Britain since 1919. Is the rationale that since the Brits are in Afghanistan again, they need to be reminded independence has already been won? To me, it just further defines the power relationship; x terrorist group views "their people" as perpetual victims.

I am just so sick of this narrative of saving the people from the colonizers. This so-called political violence only enables further control. Is there no realization that the actions of a few make calls for collective punishment seem "rational"?

Instead, why not draw strength from the concept of independence to work towards rebuilding once more? Why not draw strength from the spirit of Ramadan? Or why not simply take a minute - think about it?

After studying the subject, pouring over academic papers, listening to political commentators, and generally losing my mind over it, I have come to one conclusion:

Your grievance doesn't count as soon as you become a reason someone else is grieving. It's that simple.

Too bad no terrorists read my blog.

Cost of Living

Having recently moved to Vancouver (ahem, yesterday), while looking for a place I can call home, the ridiculous cost of living of this city hit me while I was being naively optimistic about what I could afford.

Which got me thinking about the exclusivity of postal codes (ok, so it doesn't work as well as zip code, but you know what I am getting at). A glimpse of water, a mountain view will all cost you. Which seems fair - more desirable means more valuable. But is it?

How do we monetarily value views that should be available to everyone? The hardwood, the high ceilings, the fancy gym - that you can slap a value on. But isn't it a bit sad that you can buy a view or accessibility or fresh air? (Ok, so I am being dramatic about the fresh air)

Isn't it a bit absurd? Shouldn't we all have these things?

Creating a new New Delhi

Tomorrow is New Delhi’s SlutWalk. There are many opinions about the idea of a SlutWalk, about the cultural “appropriateness” of the idea in Delhi, the issue of class and those privileged enough to participate and get their drivers to pick them up afterwards. To this I will simply lay out that, for me, the importance piece of this is women reclaiming public space. Especially in a city like New Delhi where if you are out in public as a woman, day or night, you can expect to be catcalled, harassed, or groped. It is this sad state of the status quo that this walk aims to change.

I read an interesting article in The Star a few weeks ago about the New Dehli SlutWalk. Two thoughts ran through me: admiration for the women who will carry this out and fear for them.

Featured in the article was an interview with New Delhi police inspector Pavan Kumar who likely epitomizes the attitude towards women in the city. He led the police unit that investigated rape allegations for fifteen years. His explanation for the high rate of rape as compared to other Indian cities was that really, half the cases were only filed as a result of family pressure to cover up their daughter’s consensual sexual involvement with a man.

“A woman would go back home to her family and they would want to know who she was with and where she was. She’d say she was taken without consent to relieve the pressure on her.”

Seriously?

The fact that this man held a position of power in a unit that investigated rape allegation absolutely disgusts me. Was he appointed because of his attitudes, or was he one of the more progressive chaps in New Dehli’s police force?

For a woman to be brave enough to report a rape and for a family in such a climate to be supportive of her be simply cast off in this light is abhorrent.

Rape is ultimately an act of violence. No amount of flesh shown by a woman can justify it. Men are not simply driven to it because of women. It is insulting to all the respectful men I know to pre-suppose such a thing.

But that's not all Kumar had to say. The police inspector went on to explain why New Delhi’s rape statistics are higher than Mumbai’s: “Maybe it’s the climatic conditions,” he said. “Mumbai is humid but they have the winds blowing off the water so much. Here there is none of that relief. The temperature is so high and you see people angry here. We have so many incidences of road rage.”

Kumar assumes it must be something innate in the environment that drives men to rape. As if such a brutal act is simply a response to the weather. I cannot wrap my head around how he could find this to be a rational explanation that is appropriate to share for print.

For a woman to be in public on a hot day in Delhi is not a good enough reason for her to be harassed, groped or raped. A woman may have the right to be out in public, but that does not mean she will be safe in public. Every society owes it to half their population to ensure this basic right.

---

On a related note, an interesting academic exploration of gendered use of public space in Mumbai I have come across is the book Why Loiter? Women and Risk on Mumbai Streets by Shilpa Phadke, Sameera Khan and Shilpa Ranade. I haven't read the book yet but have read other pieces by Shilpa Phadke on the subject that have been excellent.

New Age Anthropologie

Most women I know let out a sigh of yearning at the mention of Anthropologie. Gorgeous, albeit pricey, clothes, accessories, and décor. I was recently at my friend Michelle’s place when I notice their monthly catalogue on her kitchen table. Excited to lust after items I could not afford, I started to thumb my way through the catalogue. Upon closer examination, my excitement faded, quicly displaced by discomfort.

The location of the shoot appears to be India. A beautiful backdrop no doubt, but not very original and quite frankly, a little colonial in style.

A quick sample of the catalogue to your right - the lovely model is wearing the "contrasting halves dress". How clever, to have a contrasting dress on a glowing model in front of a small army of brown boys. Are we seriously still using "locals" as props to ensure the product is prominently shown? Is this actually seen as appropriate?

See more of the catalogue here.

I was thinking about why this particular company would bother to go on a trek to India to produce an offensive catalogue. Then it struck me: Anthropologie. The connotation of the brand name itself, Anthropologie, combined with this absurd neo-colonial imagery leads me to ask the question: Are people that unaware of history, or do they feel they have the power to simply ignore it?

Anthropologists have generally made me uncomfortable. The need to examine other cultures is not what makes me uncomfortable, it is the classic attitudes that I have encountered in reading, talks and the like that have incited an unsettling feeling to stir deep within my belly. The history of this particular field is not pretty. The study of people in "other" cultures emerged from the study of natural history. Cultures that had been colonized by European powers were studied in a "scientific" manner, studied as one would study the environment. Once anthropology was seen as distinct from natural history, the concept of race and the placement of value on races was a hot topic. Cultural dominance often comes with the assumption of cultural superiority - and wasn't that the essence of colonialism?

Although the field has changed rapidly and anthropologists of today would not share the views of their nineteenth and even twentieth century peers, it's unfortunate that this retailer has chosen to be "clever" with their May catalogue and use beautiful clothes to dredge up reminders of an ugly past.

"Anthropologie offers a one-of-a-kind and compelling shopping experience that makes women feel beautiful, hopeful and connected ... Complex as you are, you remain our inspiration and because of this, we endeavor to bring you an unimagined experience."

I am a bit more complex than you imagined.

Identity and Survival

Upon discovering the colloquial use of Paki in Spain (or in Barcelona at the very least), Andreea and and I decided to dig a little deeper.

First stop? Google. After watching a documentary called Pakcelona, we learned about Huma Jamshed, a businesswoman who owns a travel agency and started a Pakistani women's association in Barcelona - ACESOP. We tracked her down in Raval, one of the city's better known immigrant-populated neighbourhoods. Since it was siesta time, we headed from her office to the women's centre.

After moving to Spain to complete a PhD in Madrid, Huma started a business in Barcelona and established ACESOP. Huma has developed an interesting perspective on the subject of Pakis. Check out the video below for her thoughts.

From this conversation, it became clear that for Huma survival issues were the primary priority and identity issues would only become important after the community becomes more established in Spain.

It is impossible to undermine the importance of her point; economic and social security are not only vital to quality of life but survival itself. When helping someone escape an abusive home and trying to ensure their immigration status will be valid without their sponsor, it becomes obvious that identity politics will not be front of mind.

This, however, does not mean that survival and identity are mutually exclusive issues. In immigrationspeak, settlement and integration are processes vital to considering immigration successful for both the immigrant and host country. (Yes, people have all sorts of issues with these terms and their meanings, but bear with me for now.)

Settlement typically refers to the immediate issues - housing, employment, schooling and the like.

Integration is a longer-term process, the ultimate aim being for immigrants to feel they are able to participate in their adopted society socially, economically, culturally and politically. For me, this vision represents the opposite of ghetto-ization.

When people have a name for a group of "ethnic" people that the community itself does not use, when they are geographically clustered in particular neighbourhoods that are considered dangerous until the yuppies move in and gentrify it, when an employer cannot with "good conscience" hire an individual because of their ethnic background as it is perceived to be a huge risk, when girls are being asked by their parents to not continue school after high school so as not to be corrupted by the "adopted" country's culture - this vision of integration is a distant reverie.

The way an identity is constructed by both the adopted society and the ethnic community will forever shape the relationship between the two.

When a Paki means a corner store to locals, it corners Pakis into a particular socio-economic box. Identity shapes how one will survive - barely living is barely survival.

Slang Power

I'm pissed, yo.

This phrase is a normalized part of the English language for me. Not to say I am pissed all the time - but when I am, I rarely will express it as: Well, I am angry.

Slang is associated with many things - the evolution of language, the re-appropriation of terms and the misappropriation of terms.

Slang can be so whacked out in your own language, so why does it always seem even stranger in other languages? The connection from the slang term to the actual term seems so much more distant in other languages because of our own ignorance of the language and it's many intricacies.

So, while visiting my dear friend Andreea in Spain, she mentioned to me that the word for variety store here is Paki. And for dollar store, Chino.

Huh?

Those who grew up in Spain have assured me these are not racist terms. They simply refer to the short-form term for ethnicities that tend to own these kind of stores. They are perceived as innocuous terms with no latent negative meaning.

I am most interested in the use of Paki, given it's long ugly history. The power to create this slang and make it a mainstream phrase is not with Pakistanis, but most seem to think Pakistanis likely don't mind.

So how do the Pakis feel about this?

Andreea and I have decided to explore the subject further. Stay tuned.

International Women's Day and the F-word

International Women’s Day always brings gender issues into the mainstream media, providing a rare reason for a broad audience to talk about how to eliminate violence against women, ensure greater political representation, or guarantee reproductive rights.

As happy as I am to see those issues be discussed by a wider audience than the usual “progressive” crowd, I can’t help but think: Will I ever live in a world where we don’t need a day to speak about these issues? Where the population at large simply cares to ensure particular privileges exist for women and men alike?

This gets me thinking about the “women’s movement”. I am not sure it is a singular movement anymore since every issue has a gender angle to it - poverty, climate change, economic development. Many people that cringe at the use of the “f-word” often wonder why, in a society where women have equal rights, do women have to be so annoying and talk about gender – it’s a non-issue right?

I always keep a few responses in my back pocket:

1. It is about gender – men and women are NOT the same, therefore have different needs.You cannot have a conversation about gender without talking about men.

2. Fixation on the pay issue is always a favourite for many people in North America. “Women work, they make the same money, have the same opportunities” is something I hear all the time. Women are now attaining higher levels of education, but still make less – across almost every field. It’s still an issue as economic means remain a determinant of other opportunities available to an individual.

3. Women “here” are connected to women “there” – those faraway places that we don’t like to think about because unpleasant things such as genital mutilation and forced marriage happen.

4. Women “here” experience many of the same things – do we truly believe there are no forced sex workers, women experiencing violence, or systemic poverty in our society?

5. This isn’t about making women victims. Every society I can think of in today’s world (I am sure I have knowledge gaps – this is a blog not a thesis, get over it) patriarchy reigns. We need to work towards a world where victimizing a woman isn’t normal and advocating tooth and nail for a fair shot at life is no longer the case. The power for a woman to choose her own destiny is all we ask for.

Work life, family life, sex life – whatever, is all affected by gender relations. For many, the status quo provides benefits- making individuals blind to its effect on others, or the status quo is so completely normalized it becomes difficult to imagine any other type of society.

We pesky women (and men) have imaginations. We can imagine worlds that do not exist but can exist. One where your genitalia does not determine your destiny.

Moreover, us pesky feminists believe it will exist.

To women all over – mothers, sisters, friends and lovers, have a lovely International Women’s Day.