raindrops on roses...

ok fine. i get the hint. no more politics.

some more hard issues...

so, in light of some rather contentious debates in my last class, i just want to put this out there:

what do you think about the idea of moral relativism? do you think that it is wrong for we in the proverbial west to say: "hey, female genital mutilation is wrong!", or "stop killing women for the honor of your family" or "get that woman to a god-damned hospital before she gets fistula, yo!"

i mean, y'all probably know where i stand, but i'd like to know what everyone thinks. to me the idea that as a woman, as a person i can't say that doing something potentially devastating, brutal, violent against the will of another is wrong is infuriating.

a guy in my class today actually compared female genital circumcision to that of male circumcision - i can see his point in the fact that this is done without consent, but to compare a procedure that is done in adulthood and takes away any and all sexual pleasure for the rest of one's life to a procedure that, as far as i can see, is essentially aesthetic seems a bit stretched. but then, i've never been circumcised. anybody out there that has been: any thoughts? i think the part that riled me up was that his intention was not to point out agency but to say that we shouldn't judge or try to change another culture, because this is their choice.

to me this seems irrelevant - to my sensibilities it is NOT a cultural issue, it is an issue of agency, of power, of human rights. if there is a single woman out there who does not want this procedure, who does not want to give birth alone, who does not want to be killed for the honor of her family then it is an issue of equality and of choice.

the way i see it, if i were a young woman living at any period in the past when the only options open to me were marriage and motherhood i would want support in fighting this. i would want this support whether or not i chose to take advantage of new avenues open to me, whether i decided ultimately to commit my life to motherhood and marriage or to a career as a friggin' brain surgeon or astronaut. because equality is the main issue here.

i am feeling today a lot of what i often felt in india: this gap between fury and confusion; this gap between my tie to indian women through gender, and my inability to understand their circumstances because of differences in background, culture, class. but even just as a human there is a tie in the desire for choice; for the power to choose how one lives their life, who controls that life, who decides what does and doesn't happen, and the power to live a life free of subordination and violence.

does this make sense?

i know i've gotten in a lot of heated debates about this before: whether as so-called westerners we should stand up for issues that go against someone else's "culture". my stance has often been that perhaps our role is not so much to go out there and say "you're wrong, i'm right", but instead to be there for support of whoever may desire equal choice, equal treatment. do we have a role at all to play?

to me saying that we can't stand up for an issue because we are not involved is the same as saying that men shouldn't fight for women's rights because it is a woman's issue, that humans shouldn't defend animal rights because we can't possibly know what they want. but isn't it an equality issue instead, and an issue of violence? shouldn't we have the obligation to stop suffering? can we ever know whether someone is suffering if they don't tell us?

and what of inequalities here in canada? how much representation do we truly have in politics? how much do we make in comparison to men? and if there are indeed still institutional inequalities then who are we to go off to sub-saharan africa to change someone else's culture?

well, i'll leave you with that. there are a lot of different ideas battling it out in my brain, so let me know how you feel.

what i'm learning at university...

today in class we discussed the grisly details of a maternal disease called fistula, a scarring and killing off of tissue around the pelvis because of obstructed and therefore grossly prolonged labor (ie a baby being forced against your pelvis) - usually more than 48 hours, sometimes up to 12 days. if this prospect isn't enough to turn you off motherhood, the actual effects of this condition are to create a permanent and constant condition of incontinence, urinary and anal; in other words a relentless stream of urine and feces coming out of you for the rest of your life. it can also cause something called "foot drop" where the deformity of your pelvis causes you to drag one foot. both of these symptoms usually result in a woman being disowned by her husband, sent back to her family and alienated by her entire community, often ending up as a beggar. Fistula is most common in girls under 16, since it is most likely to occur when the pelvis is not yet fully developed and therefore not big enough to fit a baby, and it will last indefinitely if not surgically remedied. it is not uncommon in girls as young as ten. this disorder is actually extremely rare in wealthy nations since a c-section can easily treat obstetric obstructions and thus prevent fistula from ever happening.

have i mentioned that my program is occasionally depressing? other bright topics this week were killings of women in pakistan by family members when they left abusive husbands, the long term and unforeseeable effects of carbon in the atmosphere, the huge ratio of men to women in many countries due to selective abortion and infanticide, the widespread chaos and destruction of ecosystems that exotic species are causing around the globe, germany under hitler, and the spread of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis as well as its prevalence among marginalized and impoverished groups.

is it any wonder i'm so cynical?

london, ontario

spent the weekend in london. ontario. it was one of those towns that feels oppressive in its shittiness, in its lack of life or community or culture, full of ghost-stores long abandoned and consistently bad restaurants. it was a pretty unpleasant place, but i got to spend the weekend with my family, including my 95 year old grandma. she is still looking good, though she is a little deaf which makes conversations tricky. ("HI GRANDMA, YOU LOOK NICE!!!" "Oh, no ice thank you dear") made me think a lot about getting old, and what it would (will?) be like. imagine being 95! she has no living siblings, her parents and husband are long gone, and of course most of her friends died a long time ago (but she still has all her teeth, as she will tell you). it seems so lonely to me, but i guess everyone has a desire to live, no matter what the circumstances. i wonder why? what is it about being alive that's so great? or perhaps conversely what is so frightening about death? will i accept my mortality by the time i'm that age? does anyone ever accept it?

ah well, i can't help but believe that it is unlikely i'll make it that far, what with the million different ways we've fucked up the planet.

ok, anyways, i'm done with the doom and gloom. onwards and upwards.

it was really nice to see my family over the weekend and it made me realize that i really miss the company of people i feel comfortable around. i've been so busy that i wasn't feeling it too much, but that warm fuzzy feeling of family was enough to make me very homesick (despite the usual madness that is the gray family together in one room). and not just homesick for close friendship but homesick for that feeling of being surrounded by people who know your history and understand your humor, your asides. i dunno, i think a lot of the time too my sadness is more for things in the past than for things at a geographical distance. being at university surrounded by undergrads makes me miss that excitement of my first time around, before i realized that i would indeed have to leave school at some point and that it wouldn't be pretty. i miss my rose-tinted glasses! where did they go??!!!