Fond University of Toledo Reflections

By Reem Subei

Published: Thursday, December 9, 2010

http://www.independentcollegian.com/mobile/fond-ut-reflections-1.2425906

As I sat in my Feature Writing class last Monday presenting my final assignment on the experiences of veiled women in the world, one girl asked about my hair, which is hidden under my scarf. Yes, believe it or not, I am not bald!

I told the girl that I could show it to her. So after class was concluded, and it was only me and my female classmates in the room, I unwrapped my scarf to reveal my hair. Apparently, they were all wondering about it but never worked up the courage to ask for fear that they would offend me. Little did they know that I had been waiting for them to ask, but never had the courage to discuss the matter without being asked. This incident was one of the most memorable experiences of my undergraduate years.

I am now writing my last column as an undergraduate. It is with great pride and pleasure that I call myself a graduate of the University of Toledo. I am deeply grateful to every person who had even the smallest hand in my being where I am now.

Over the course of three years, I have been lucky enough to sit in those cozy, warm classes of our campus. I enjoyed the lectures of some of the world’s greatest professors, some of which I believe spent a long time before every class period jotting down the most difficult, complex words in the English dictionary with which to baffle us poor students.

There were professors who did not do the job exactly the way I wanted them to, but when I forced my brain to listen to what they were saying, it was not too bad. Every professor, like us students, has her or his story and if you give them the chance to tell it, there is much to learn. In the process, you will have made a new friend who has years of knowledge over you — not to mention getting an A in the course!

I have noticed that many students create a wall between themselves and the professors, and I’m glad I was not one of those students. Take it from me: never keep a distance between you and your professor. They really are there because they care. They want to give you a piece of their brain and they want you to succeed, not only in their class but in life, too. I won’t say “real life” because I’m pretty sure we all know college life isn’t a dream.

Professors are just the tip of this university’s beauty; classmates are a whole other story that you shouldn’t miss out on. The students at UT are people of great intellect and integrity; don’t let them escape you! Talk to the person sitting beside you in class. They really won’t bite — trust me, I’ve tried!

While most people are too afraid to say the first word in a conversation with a stranger, all people welcome the interaction gesture. Classes get boring, and even if you’ve become buddies with your professor, you will still need to know the person sitting beside you in case you get stuck in a pile of snow and really need to know about the assignment you missed. Rest assured that other people need you and want to get to know you as much as you want to get to know them.

I would like to end my years of undergrad with special thanks to a few people. Thank you, my dear energetic professor, for being so enthusiastic and excited about teaching that you made me feel like an 80-year-old in the body of a 20-year-old. Thank you, smart classmate sitting at the front of the class, for always answering every question the professor asks, correcting her notes and making me feel mentally challenged and in need of therapy.

Thank you, creepy person sitting at the back of the class, for never speaking a word while you stared at me in a way that expressed either extreme fascination or utter detest. Even you, girl who sat beside me and silently copied my notes without ever saying a word of thanks, you have taught me to start sitting all alone at the back of class.

My dear fellow classmates: college life is what you make out of it. Don’t let it stop at learning the alpha signs and exploring the reason behind female oppression in our world; take it to a more personal, social level. Speak to the person next to you — even if that means they start copying your notes.

We are Independent, but not Isolated

By Reem Subei

Published: Thursday, November 4, 2010

http://www.independentcollegian.com/mobile/we-are-independent-but-not-isolated-1.2394091

A human being is a social animal.

A hundred years ago, my rationale for the above statement would have been that two human beings must ‘socialize’ before a third can come into existence. But this is not true anymore.

Thanks to modern technology, all you need now is a technologically advanced healthcare system with understanding administrators who appreciate a person’s need to have a child even if they lacked the ability to naturally bring that child into existence by socializing with another adult.

Whether you believe in God, evolution or both, our deteriorating ability to connect to each other is an issue that pertains to you. The fact that, naturally, a human is the product of two individuals socializing with each other reinforces the concept that no human can exist in isolation from others.

People, therefore, merit our care and attention. We are all, whether we choose to be or not, responsible for the welfare of humanity. This is called collective responsibility.

The “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy” states that the notion of collective responsibility, like that of personal responsibility and shared responsibility, refers to both the causal responsibility of moral agents for harm in the world and the blameworthiness that we ascribe to them for having caused such harm. In simpler terms, all people are ultimately responsible for what goes on in the lives of others.


The problem with the above description is that it poses a threat to our inner self-satisfaction. It is, we have learned to believe, easier to live with the mentality of ‘every man for himself.’ We abide by this decree because it seems more appealing to believe that we are responsible only for ourselves and maybe, if we were feeling really generous, for our immediate family.

None of us wants to believe that the old man begging on the street is our responsibility because if we thought of him as our responsibility then we might have to go out of our way to help him, something we find ourselves better off without.

Yes, it is natural human tendency to avoid stress by deflecting responsibility on somebody else, whether that somebody is the government, the healthcare system, the educational system or the rest of the world. Anything works for us as long as we can sleep at night without having to worry about others.

“They are grown ups, they can deal with it” is often the first thought that comes to our minds when we see an adult struggling with a serious problem. Unfortunately, that thought speaks our sad life story. We grew up in a society that constantly told us to be independent, to be strong, and not to wait for someone to help you; you are on your own.

I recently read a book called “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People,” in which the author presented an argument with which I disagree. He dedicated several pages solely to the explanation of the limitations created by centering one’s values and morals on a singular aspect of life such as money, pleasure, work or religion.

The author concludes that chapter by explaining that we should be principle-centered people, basing our attitudes and behaviors on moral values such as integrity and honesty.

While the author is not entirely wrong, his writing diminishes the importance of family values in celebration of the ever-worshipped value of independence, which we wrongly consider to be the source of happiness.

Conversely, social research has proven that our widespread belief in the direct relationship between independence and happiness deserves revisiting. The Gallup Organization released data last July showing that among all the nations of the world, residents of Denmark are the happiest.

You may be wondering if Denmark hosts delightful weather or if it’s a wealthy country, but the truth is that Denmark falls behind the United States on both measures. What, then, makes the Danes’ lives so enjoyable?
The people of Denmark are happy because they share a sense of responsibility for others which is complemented by the satisfaction of knowing that other individuals in society will be there to take care of them shall the need arise. Denmark is not a socialist state, but it does have socialist welfare programs such as a free school system, free medical care, income support and unemployment benefits.

The US, on the other hand, is one of the most capitalistic countries of our world, where money is seen as salvation and every individual is responsible for his own salvation; if he fails, rest assured, nobody will save him.

While material wealth is grand, society, community and family are grander concepts that no amount of money can buy.

Yes, even in the 21st Century it is still crucial for us to feel part of a family, to feel integrated in society, because the human being is a social animal, not a lone one.

Veiled as Liberty

By Reem Subei

Published: Thursday, October 21, 2010

http://www.independentcollegian.com/mobile/veiled-as-liberty-1.2377050

A new form of slavery is settling into our liberal, democratic countries at a slow but definite pace. This contemporary version has been passing by, hidden under the mask of its most serious enemy: liberty.
It is therefore imperative that we distinguish between the two. Liberty is freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction and hampering conditions. While in the process of lifting control, if we rob people of their right of doing, thinking or speaking according to choice then verily, we have achieved slavery.

On Thursday October 7, 2010 France’s Conseil Constitutionnel, the guardian of the country’s constitution, ruled that a law banning the wearing of any face-covering veil in public places does not impinge on civil liberties. The law had passed both houses of the French legislature by overwhelming margins earlier this year and is scheduled to come into effect in the spring.
The ban pertains to the full-body and face covering — with an opening for the eyes and hands — worn by some Muslim women in public places. This covering is often called ‘burqa’ or ‘niqab.’ The law imposes a small fine on anyone wearing such a covering and a substantial fine on anyone who forces a woman to wear one.

While the law is carefully worded so that the words “women,” “Muslim” and “veil” are never mentioned in any of its seven articles, it is worth noting that the nearly 2,000 women who wear such veils in France are all Muslims.

Ironically, supporters of the law see it as a symbolic defense of French values such as women’s rights and secularism and find it liberating and beneficial to Muslim women even though it explicitly fines women who voluntarily choose to wear the veil.

Unfortunately, this law is not the first of its kind in France or in the world. Governments, public officials and politicians are constantly interfering with the personal, peaceful, non-violent, day-to-day behavior of women in their countries. Some want to force women to behave chastely, while others who consider this very chastity ‘oppressive’ to women have decided to ban it.

In Saudi Arabia, for example, women are legally prohibited from driving cars. If a woman is caught driving a moving vehicle, she will be prosecuted and imprisoned for breaking the law. This regulation is still upheld because the government perceives it to be in the best interest of the nation to prevent women from traveling in a moving vehicle without a man.

Another example of a government dictating a code of conduct for women is found in the country of Iran, where women are mandated by law to cover their hair and body. Iran’s rulers believe that this regulation will help the women rise above the limitations of physical beauty.

Notice how every government claims to be doing what is best for its nation. As citizens of a diverse and multicultural world, it is crucial that we do not limit our definition of ‘oppression’ to regulations that force women to wear a veil but extend it to include regulations that prohibit women from wearing a veil. Both are equally oppressive and in fact, the latter is racist.

The Oxford English Dictionary offers an expressive definition for the verb ‘oppress’: to keep (a person or group of people, esp. a minority or other subordinate group) in subjection and hardship by the unjust exercise of authority, power, or strength.

Increasingly, secular countries have been unjustly exercising authority to interfere with the personal freedom of women at a time when these very countries are using women’s rights as their main argument for the secularization of theocratic countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Judging by example, as soon as the harmless personal practices of private citizens become the political debates of a government, oppression and human rights are likely to be compromised. This threat to human rights still exists when the lawmakers have the best interest of their population in mind, since what is liberating to some women may be oppressive to others and vice versa.

I must admit to you that as a Muslim woman, I take issue with the attribution of ‘niqab’ to Islam. The subject is surrounded by controversy and I am one of many devout Muslims who believe ‘niqab’ to be a cultural practice of the old Arab tribes and not an Islamic teaching.

I, just like the French government, wish to wake up one day to a ‘niqab’-free world where all women are convinced that they do not need to cover their faces.

However, the question here is not whether I think Islamic teachings require women to cover their faces or not; the question is whether the state is allowed any say in a woman’s free choice to cover or not. The answer depends on the type of state.

For instance, it would be futile to plead with the governors of a theocratic country that the government should not meddle with people’s religious practices since the rulers openly declare that they rule in accordance with religious principles, more specifically what they believe to be religious principles.
What we can argue about is when a secular state like France, where personal freedom is supposedly a priority of the state, implements a law that interferes with the peaceful, non-violent, private choices of its people, whether those practices are religious or not.

Oppression can take different forms for different people. If the government of France had the well-being of those women as its priority then why are those women complaining? Many people think they could easily answer this question by saying that these women have been brainwashed and do not know better. But that is a racist, sexist and subjective opinion.

The early enslavers thought they were doing their slaves a great favor by forcing them to work as slaves. They thought of slaves as lesser beings who need to be forced into the right path because the slaves ‘did not know better.’

Our present world has not come far from that early example; slavery is still practiced by many who think that Muslim women need to be forced into the rulers’ subjective view of liberation. True liberation is the result of choice and choice cannot be forced — it must be voluntary.