Sunday, April 01, 2007

The Surprising Faces of Prejudice

A couple of days ago, I met with a very senior colleague in the department where I work along with several staffers to discuss ongoing research projects. In the midst of a lively discussion, that colleague, wanting to give an example of ways to control unruly women (in the presence of three women!), half-jokingly turned to me and said: "In your country you beat them, isn't that right? yeah, Muslims beat their wives". I was shocked but not totally surprised.

These statements are not the product of a defective and ignorant mind. My colleague is a highly educated man, a world traveller who spends half of his time flying from country to country to give invited lectureships. Yet as brilliant as he is in his profession, he remains essentially a closed-minded bigot and yet he would never admit it. He is of Anglo-Saxon descent, and remains a die hard Anglophile. No other culture or ethnicity quite measures up. The farther East or South you are, the less worthy. On his scale of worthiness, Italians from Milan are passable but those swarthy Sicilians might just as well be Arabs. He is also a born-again Christian and does not miss an opportunity to proselytize. He once told a bright Indian post-doctoral fellow working in our department that she behaved like a Christian. He meant it as a compliment. She, a Hindu by birth, but from a secular family, rightly took it as an insult. She did not fit his stereotype and yet he could not accept that what he admired about her as being intrinsically Indian; it must have been the result of some Western, Christian influence.

I have always assumed that people exposed to other cultures were likely to be more open-minded and less prejudiced. It is obviously a wrong assumption as the case of my colleague demonstrates. He loves to travel and meet different people, but what he takes away from these encounters is very selective. Anything that reinforces his own preconceived notions, he took in wholeheartedly and anything that challenged the stereotype, he ignored. So, in a twisted way, the more exposed to other cultures he was, the more prejudiced he became.


My assumption was also proven wrong in other ways. As a clinician in the U.S. for the past twenty years, I have treated patients of all socioeconomic backgrounds, ethnicities and religions. With most patients, my own background mattered little, although with some, it was a problem. I was always surprised by the people to whom my background mattered the least. It was almost invariably the simplest of rural folks, who could not place Syria on a map if their life depended on it, with whom I developed the most trustful and mutually respectful patient-doctor relationships. With this realization my own preconceived notion, my own stereotype of the "bigot", was shattered.

Of course, in the greater context of East-West misunderstanding, this type of prejudice cuts both ways. We all know many of our brethren who go West and come back without having expanded their cultural horizons one iota.

So what happened with my colleague?

I did not confront him during that meeting but chose instead to send him an email later that day. I measured my words carefully. I started with a long tirade that I thought was too confrontational and so I whittled it down to short paragraph:


"I just wanted to let you know that I was deeply offended by the statement that you made earlier today that spousal abuse is the norm in among Muslims and in "my" country. It is akin to saying that spousal abuse in the United States, not a trivial issue, is a "Christian" problem rather than a societal problem. And for the record, my mother, a European Christian, will tell you that, as a woman, she feels much safer walking at any time of the day or night in Beirut or Damascus than she would in any Christian European or American city. "

And he responded:

"Thank you for telling me. I hope you know that I would not intentionally offend you. The recent NY Times articles on the issue have made the same point that you make. They have also noted that a sense of humor about the differences in cultures is the best hope for mutual understanding. Please accept my apologies. "

Despite his apology, I am not sure he gets it or that he is truly remorseful. It was rather a cold response for someone with whom I have worked closely and successfully for the last fifteen years. Unfortunately, he is set in his ways and I will not be able to change his outlook. At least from now on he may think twice before unleashing the humorous interludes meant to improve mutual understanding among cultures.

22 comments:

Dr.Mad said...

I do agree with your point, being funny about cultural differences does not help in mutual understanding; this is assuming that his generalization was an accurate one in the first place, which it wasn’t.
By the way, I read a NYtimes article a couple of days ago related to this topic; It was about the controversy Laleh Bakhtiar had caused by modifying the word “idrib” meanwhile translating the Koran, maybe this had some influence on your colleague’s prejudice.

I am so pleased to know that you do clinical research; I am starting my clinical training in the US next year and I will combine it with my research project that I am working on it now. Most of the Syrian doctors I met there had “business” mentality, they had their private practices and that is it. I had not found any one who was interested in research, which I think it is a big mistake. In my view, only people in the Academia can make a difference, but all the doctors I had met there were more interested in making money rather than making a difference ;)

Cheers!

Dr.Mad said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dr.Mad said...

Laleh Bakhtiar's story

http://www.reuters.com/article/
domesticNews/
idUSN2129015920070323?feedType=RSS

Dubai Jazz said...

Interesting post Abu Kareem,
Living in Dubai- an Arab gulf city which claims to have a multicultural population; I can relate to your story quite clearly...
Not a single day passes by in this town without me witnessing an act or two of racism, and to my dismay, those acts are mostly committed by expats who lived here for 15-20 years (i.e. had enough time to understand other cultures and to come to terms with differences...)
And to add insult to injury, those act of racism are again committed by people from the Anglo-Saxon race (e.g. Brits, Aussie and to lesser extent Americans and Canadians).
So what I am trying to say is that you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, mingling with others and travelling around doesn't make one a better person (humanity wise) it only reinforces preconcived notions. Specially in a place where nationality and caste are detrimental factors of the pay and social prestige (Dubai)...
Sorry for the long comment, and I must salute you for standing up against the offensive comment of your colleague...

The Syrian Brit said...

How thin indeed is the veneer of openmindedness and civility!.. In a moment when your colleague puts down the barrier of pretence, his true thoughts and beliefs found their way to the surface..
I have often wondered in similar situations, which was worse: my disappointment with the colleague, or my amazement at myself that I was shocked in the first place..
Apologies to Abu Kareem, but I have a bone to pick with Andre.. His comments about Syrian doctors being only interested in money is no less objectionable than the comments of Abu Kareem's colleague.. they both reflect offensive stereotyping and unwarrented generalization.. There are countless examples of first-class clinical researchers on both sides of the Atlantic, hailing from a Syrian origin.. I am sure Abu Kareem can vouch for that..

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Andre,

Thanks for the comments. I did see the article even before this encounter and applaud Bakhtiar's efforts. SB is right, there are those physicians out for status and money but there are plenty of others doing what we do.

DB,
Thanks for the comment. I suspect in Dubai it is even more complicated: European expats vs Arab expats vs natives.

Dr.Mad said...

To Syrian Brit and Abu Kareem

I have to clear the misunderstanding caused from my previous comment. I think not explaining where I am coming from made my comment sounds very differently to what I wanted to say and had obscured its original aim.
Firstly, I have to say that me myself I am a Syrian doctor, so my comment was more criticizing a real situation in order to improve it rather than throwing offensive stereotyping and unwarranted generalization.

What I exactly said was Most of the Syrian doctors I met there had “business” mentality. This is not a general statement about all the Syrian doctors of all times; I am just describing the Syrian doctors I had met. It is a fact derived from my staying in the US for a year and meeting substantial amount of Syrian doctors, who were basically my colleagues in the Medical School back home in Damascus, and who are working as residents and practitioners in the US (the average age of this sample is 30 and degree of freedom=17 ;).
Again, the majority of them were not interested in pursuing research careers. I think this is a grave problem my generation has as a result of our zero exposure to research in the medical school, which is full of excellent clinicians but very few researchers and no clinical research thinking taught to students.

So to sum up, my intention was to point out that even if there are many great Syrian scientists and researchers, which I am obviously ignorant of, there is a real problem facing my generation and the coming ones. Unless our University becomes aware of the necessity to improve its clinical curriculum, we will end up having fewer clinicians who are dedicated to research and academia in general.

I started my comment with “I am pleased” phrase, because I, as a Syrian clinician researcher wannabe, was delighted and full of hope that there are many compatriots out there doing what I am planning to do and that we can connect and maybe collaborate in the near future.

Salam

Andre, a humble junior colleague

Julia said...

I just stumbled on your blog and am happy that I did. Thank you!

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Julia,

You are welcome.

Unknown said...

I have to agree with DJ.

As we live in Dubai, we encounter at least a couple of discriminatory or racist acts. Dubai has made it very clear and sometimes cruel to me that Racists do exist.

I gotta say that being Levantine and speaking the languages made it less dramatic for me. But you can imagine what an Indian, Pakistani, Afghan, Filipino, etc..is having to face.

As for that bigot colleague of yours, he is the type of person who would travel the world, just to prove to himself that they are superior.

Cheers buddy.

RnD

Ibn Bint Jbeil said...

i enjoyed going through your blog. keep up the great writing.

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Ibn Bint Jbeil,
Thank you; come back any time.

Solomon2 said...

I was always surprised by the people to whom my background mattered the least...this realization my own preconceived notion, my own stereotype of the "bigot", was shattered.

Many Americans have had similar experiences. However, the conclusion you draw - that people don't have a right to judge between different cultures - is logically flawed:

...he remains essentially a closed-minded bigot and yet he would never admit it. He is of Anglo-Saxon descent, and remains a die hard Anglophile. No other culture or ethnicity quite measures up.

Have you ever visited an American prison? I have not thank G-d, but have read the accounts of others who have. A prison is a closed culture with the addition of a physical barrier, a culture that most people would certainly consider inferior to the world outside the prison.

Therefore not all cultures can be considered equal, and in fact some cultures are superior to others. I see no reason why differences between a prison and the surrounding community cannot serve as a sufficient analogy to justify judging between different cultures worldwide.

My point is this: you copped out. You were invited to look at your culture critically and discuss it constructively and you let political correctness button your lips from answering. Is such an approach truly beneficial, or is it just a topical salve without lasting benefit?

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Solomon2,

It's been a while.

No, I did not cop out.

First of all, the colleague's comment was not an invitation for a critical discussion, it was a statement of fact as he saw it, it was not open for discussion.

Second, if you have read some of of my posts, you will realize that I do not shy away from thinking critically of my own culture; I suspect not critically enough for your taste.

Third, my point, which you completely missed, is that stereotypes tend to force everyone in that category into a single mold. You cannot approach an indvidual from a given culture by assuming, based on your stereotype, that they behave in a given way. This is not about being politically correct, it is about having a respectful discourse between individuals of different cultures. If he had said to me:"I have read that there is a problem with violence against women in Arab countries" as opposed to "you all beat your wives, don't you?", we could have had a constructive discussion.

And thank you for the Arab/Muslim culture = prison analogy; made me feel real warm and fuzzy inside.

Here again is a stereotyped assumption: that Arabs from Morocco to Iraq and Muslims from Malaysia to Bosnia all have the same culture. It is ironic, Neocon propaganda wants everyone to believe that it is so and Wahhabi jihadists are trying to make it so.

Here is the problem with annoiting a culture superior to another. There is the immediate assumption that every aspect of that culture is superior to every aspect of that of the inferior culture. If you believe that this is case, then there is no need for any discussion. The guardians of that superior culture should just dictate to us what needs to be done and we should just shut up and do as we are told.

Solomon2 said...

the colleague's comment was not an invitation for a critical discussion, it was a statement of fact as he saw it, it was not open for discussion.

I misunderstood. Your pardon, sir. I must read your blog more carefully.

You cannot approach an indvidual from a given culture by assuming, based on your stereotype

Of course we can! If I go to Japan, for example, to communicate effectively it can be assumed I need to use a different verbal and body language than I do here in the U.S. In fact, if I go to different parts of the U.S. I have to do the same thing. A common example: I can offer a white person to share my watermelon with me, but if I offer some to a black colleague I'll get some mighty strange looks.

thank you for the Arab/Muslim culture = prison analogy; made me feel real warm and fuzzy inside.

My analogy?

Here is the problem with annoiting a culture superior to another. There is the immediate assumption that every aspect of that culture is superior to every aspect of that of the inferior culture.

That didn't occur to me. I guess I don't think that way. Thank you for this insight.

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Solomon2,

You comments are often pointed but you are always willing to consider alternative views. I appreciate that; more often than not, people are talking past each other on the blogs, just trying to score points.

Solomon2 said...

Ack, my ears are burning! I appreciate that; compliments have been few and far between.

I was exposed to different and contrasting cultures quite early in life. It isn't necessarily that I'm open-minded, but that I really judge things.

The entire political-correctness concept is flawed because if all cultures are equal, then no one culture or society will see any need or possibility of improving itself, and will educate such values down to the individual. If the individual feels no responsibility for bettering his culture, he won't feel a responsibility for maintaining it either, and the logical result is an unleavened selfishness which ultimately can lead to anti-social or even criminal behavior. So the culture decays - only the PC philosophy forbids its practitioners from recognizing it.

That is the practical outcome of refusing to judge between different cultures.

* * *

Your white Anglo-Saxon Christian colleague tried to give a compliment to a colleague who took the comment as an insult. Yet when the Brits ruled India, they effectively outlawed widow- and bride-burning by making it clear that each episode would be followed by hanging the perpetrator.

You might ask this bright young woman if she endorses sati and wishes it to grow and spread once more. If she says no, isn't that an endorsement of Christian culture that forced the change upon her ancestors? If she says yes, what feelings does that inspire in you about Hindus? If she refuses to answer or equivocates, is she not refusing to make a moral choice in matters of life and death, something that is demanded of every doctor?

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Solomon2,

You just couldn't take a compliment quietly, could you?

I don't disagree with you regarding the concept of political correctness. I also agree with you that cultures that remain static shrivel and die. The most successful are the ones capable of evolving by learning from their mistakes and borrowing from other more successful cultures. But...but no culture has ALL the answers.

As far as the young Indian doctor, I mentioned that she was secular and so as likely to be horrified by sati as anyone. With respect to crediting the British colonial powers, is she supposed to be thankful for their outlawing of sati and ignore every other negative contribution to India? And if she were to thank them, was is their Christian faith that made them do it rather than the secular impetus of a colonial power trying to establish the rule of law?

Anyhow, I want to return to my basic premise which is that interactions between individuals of different cultures is still an interaction between individuals. Don't judge that individual by saddling them, a priori, with what you might find morally objectionable about their culture. This is not political correctness, it is common courtesy.

Solomon2 said...

It's easy for me to prove to my own satisfaction that there is no one culture that has all the answers: Consider that in America freedom with the rule of law is strong enough and the government welfare system generous enough that family ties are weakened; the individual can go his own way, and ignore his parents if he so desires.

However, in many other parts of the world, including the Arab World, individual freedoms are so restricted and the rule of law so arbitrary that family ties are strengthened as a form of protection from a hostile outside world.

I value both family and freedom highly, yet recognize that in one culture family values are superior, and in the other freedom's values are; currently, it seems one can't have both.

***

I'm sure that your bright Indian doctor is quite capable of answering my query herself without you answering for her - indeed I suspect that she'd be rather upset if she found out you did. So I will do you a kindness and ignore your response.

***

Don't judge that individual by saddling them, a priori, with what you might find morally objectionable about their culture. This is not political correctness, it is common courtesy.

Do you not understand the "watermelon" example? Do you treat a child with terminal leukemia the same way you do an adult? Treating everybody the same can be a form of cultural insensitivity that breeds confusion, resentment, fear, and conflict. It will not be accepted by an offended interlocutor as "common courtesy". I may find such sensitivity "morally objectionable", but failure to take it into account could mean disaster.

Rabi Tawil (AKA Abu Kareem) said...

Solomon2,

Now you make me want to take back my compliment.

"Do you not understand the "watermelon" example?"

Yes, even my feeble Arab mind understands that. What you do not seem to understand is that your example has nothing to do with what I am trying to say.

I am not talking about ignoring the social customs peculiar to a certain culture when interacting with a person of that culture; that's a no brainer. I am talking about assuming, that because a person is of a certain culture, that you automatically know what that person's stance is on social, religious or political issues (ie: assuming, as my colleague did, that all Arabs beat their wives). That, to me is "morally objectionable".

At any rate, we have exhausted this discussion and it should come to an end.

At any rate, this discussion is going nowhere and should end here.

Solomon2 said...

Yes, the distinction is important. How many times have I had people tell me what I think or what kind of awful person I must be when I tell them I'm a Jew or a Zionist? A lot.

I appreciate the time you've spent on this conversation, thank you.

Anonymous said...

Are there many marriages between Arab men and Christian, or European Christian women in Amman?
If so are there some who are wealthy couples? I'm doing some research and need information. Would a couple like this object to the marriage of their Arab son to a well educated and beautiful AngloSaxon woman? This is for research purposes, not to find any kind of mate.