You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘America’ tag.
Annette, Carol and Elisheba's hands with
"India 2012" bracelets
Every time I visit India, I meet someone who thinks it’s important to tell me that I should avoid the sun and not allow my skin to tan. “You should be careful, you’re losing your color,” they’ll warn me. The desire for lighter skin is a disease that has infected not only India but the entire globe. In India the question, “Is she fair?” is one of the first asked by a prospective groom’s family. Unfortunately, this is not in reference to the potential bride’s ability to be impartial or objective, but to ascertain the color of her skin. The first time I heard this I was struck by the ridiculousness of this comment and responded angrily, but now I am better able to remain calm and try to reason with the inquirer. I am always struck by the many commercials on Indian television for creams and bleaches to lighten skin—they even have a special cream to lighten the skin under the arm!
The discussion of skin color has once again reared its ugly head in the USA, because of the recent death of Trayvon Martin. For my international readers who may not be familiar with this case, I’ll briefly recapitulate the incident: On February 26th, unarmed, 17 year-old, African American, Trayvon Martin was shot and killed at close range by 28 year-old, George Zimmerman whose voter registration lists him as Hispanic. Zimmerman states that the shooting occurred because of self defense and the Martin family states that there was no altercation and that Trayvon was not a threat. Initially, no arrest was made. Then there were many public protests demanding that Zimmerman be charged and on April 11, he was charged with second degree murder. The facts of the case are still not clear, but the Martin family and their supporters believe that the killing was prompted because of Trayvon’s race and that, “George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood.”(1) Zimmerman and his supporters believe that he shot Trayvon in self defense and is protected by Florida’s “Stand your Ground” law (2), which states that a person may use self defense, even deadly force, when there is a reasonable belief of a threat. The rage, bitterness and ignorance that has followed this situation has created divisions within the American public which mimic those felt during the OJ Simpson trial and the James Bryd murder.
The same ignorance related to skin color was also present in India. I met a young girl in India and she introduced me to some of her friends while I was in New Delhi. We began to chat about India and America and the differences between them. They were insistent that America was a much more open minded country and that in America, women could behave anyway they pleased without developing a bad reputation. When I educated them on the rather old fashioned values of most Americans, they seemed surprised. They began to discuss boys they would pursue if they were allowed and surprised me when they both exclaimed, “I would never marry a South Indian! They’re so dark.” They continued in this way for awhile until I asked them how many South Indians they knew personally. They both stated they only knew South Indians teachers and didn’t know any as friends, but they didn’t like them because they had dark skin and were culturally different. I waited a moment before I told them that I was married to a South Indian. At which they both stammered and became silent. Then one of them asked me how it happened that a North Indian Punjabi came to marry a South Indian man from Tamilnadu. I tried my best to enlighten them and they remained steadfast that dark skin was somehow undesirable. (By the way—they are wrong. It is not true that South Indians are all dark. Some are and some aren’t and some North Indians are much darker than South Indians). Before I left them, I made sure they understood that their attitude would be unacceptable by most intelligent and as they called them “open-minded” Americans.
While traveling through India with my long time friends Annette and Carol, I also encountered some issues associated with color. It was interesting to hear how the door was held open for Carol who is Caucasian American and not for Annette who is African American. While we were in a tailor shop in Madras, the woman who owned the shop carefully measured Carol and me. She refused to measure Annette. When we asked for a group picture from those passing by, pictures were snapped on all the cameras but Annette’s consistently seemed to have a problem with its shutter release and her camera would miss the shot. I finally asked an Indian friend of mine about the biased treatment and I was told that many Indians do not like blacks because of the color of their skin and because they have a legacy of slavery. I felt ashamed and embarrassed.
The attitude of some Indians toward blacks prompted me to compare what was happening here in America with the Trayvon Martin case. It is believed by many that Zimmerman did not like blacks and his comment on the 9-1-1 call to the police in which he said, “these a**holes always get away,” (3) has been interpreted by some to indicate young, black males. It has been said that Zimmerman and many Hispanics have a dislike for African Americans. How do immigrant Hispanics, Indians and other minorities, who have very little interaction with blacks, learn this aversion? Some of it can be blamed on the media and on the entertainment world. But I think the root of the problem is much deeper.
Unfortunately many minorities have adopted the global majority view of what is considered acceptable and superior in art, music, cuisine and even attitudes towards race and skin color. I have heard Indians chastise other Indians for eating Indian food with their hands, rather than use a fork. Communicating in English is considered to be more sophisticated and educated, than using a native tongue. Lighter skin is not only preferable in the South Asian community, but also in the Hispanic, Asian and black. Music and art are more acceptable when they are westernized. I outlined this phenomenon in much greater detail in an older post of mine called, My Story is Mine. http://becauseihavesomethingtosay.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/my-story-is-mine/
It seems that many prejudices and stereotypes that are falsely applied to blacks are accepted by minorities to be accurate and true. For some minorities, uniting with the majority to hate or dislike their enemy, is the best way to prove that they are trustworthy and valuable. A color is just a color—deeming one color to be better than another, is as ignorant as blindly adopting a corrupt principle in order to become better established in the dominant system.
________________________________________________________
1 http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/12/11159111-update-trayvon-martins-mom-retracts-accident-characterization-says-zimmerman-killed-him-in-cold-blood?lite
2 http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html
3 http://www.policymic.com/articles/5755/did-george-zimmerman-commit-a-hate-crime-in-the-killing-of-trayvon-martin
I’m traveling from Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay) to a town called Pune and I saw this sign advertising an upcoming movie on the road. In case you can’t see the photo clearly, it says, “Married 2 America! A single minded fight against the forces of corruption” It’s meant to be a caution to Indians to resist western influence–America in particular.
I too, agree with the sentiment of this sign. When I landed in Mumbai, one of the first things I noticed was how much more western India had become since my visit last year. It was disappointing, to get out of the plane and into the streets and see that many things that make India unique, had disappeared. While I could see some people dressed in traditional clothing, for the most part western clothing had replaced the beautiful, graceful clothing I so admire and enjoy wearing. The streets that once teemed with bikes, old fashioned Ambassadors, hand pushed carts, goats, dogs and even cows, have become much like a western metropolis. Freeways and roads are filled with Mercedes, Toyota, Fords, BMW—I may as well be at home in New Jersey. For quite a few years I have seen signs for McDonald’s (although McDonald’s in India sells Aloo Tikka Sandwich and a Lamburger, instead of using beef), Subway, Pizza Hut and many other familiar fast food joints. Thankfully, there is no Walmart or Target–yet. The Indian parliament vehemently opposes any Walmart store in India and BJP leader, Uma Bharti has publicly promised to set fire to any Walmart that opens.[1]
At the same time parts of India have not changed. Despite the use of texts, Facebook and phones, there is still a high value placed on face to face/human relationships. People still respond to each other with respect, even if they are angry. The food still tastes fantastic and the people are warm and helpful–even in big cities like Mumbai which according to Indian standards is supposed to be one of the rudest city in the country.
But I noticed that while India does embrace some of the better attributes of both western and eastern culture, it also adopted some of the worse aspects of the west. The one that bothers me the most, is a decrease of concern shown to family and community needs. Instead there is an increased emphasis placed on the self and personal satisfaction. The lack of civic responsiblity is very quickly evidenced by the presence of litter in just about every city and town.
More importantly and sadly, many Indians have embraced materialism and greed. Even though the middle class is growing at breakneck speed and India’s superrich class is rapidly increasing, the amount of money that is given away by Indians is pitiful. “India is now home to 57 billionaires, according to Forbes, and a multiplying number of millionaires. Despite difficult economic times around the globe, over the past two years, India’s 20 wealthiest individuals have doubled their combined wealth, according to Bain & Co. However, India’s superrich have been relatively slow to give. Bain & Co.’s 2011 India Philanthropy Report found that India’s wealthy are giving away between 1.5% and 3% of their yearly income. The number marks an increase, but still pales in comparison with the 9% donated each year in the U.S.”[2]
The prize for the most disgusting example of a superrich dunce, with absolutely no sense of civic responsibility, has to go to Mukesh Ambani of Mumbai. He is building the world’s first billion dollar home. It will have a number of idiotic and selfish features including a health club,(which is actually good, because a few of his family members could benefit) a ballroom, parking garage and a cinema. The worst part is that I have seen this structure and it is without a doubt, the ugliest building I have ever seen. Which just goes to show—you can’t buy good taste.
The movement in India to resist the influence of the west is admirable, but instead of focusing on changing the names of cities or resisting the commercial influences, more emphasis should be placed on educating the average Indian to resist adopting the more western notion of putting personal needs above the needs of the community and encouraging Indians to return to their original value system which not only sets them apart, but is one of their greatest strengths.
makingmoney101.net
On a cold afternoon, I put water to heat for some tea. I opened the refrigerator to get milk and saw the gallon jug had been put back—empty. I let out a loud sigh and sent one of my sons for milk. I gave him a twenty dollar bill, measured the tea leaves and waited.
When he returned with the milk, I finished making the tea and resumed reading my book. The next day, while rooting through my purse to pay for a pack of gum, I realized I had never received change from the twenty given to my son the day before. I asked him for the $16+ change he had not returned. “Oh yeah!” he said and then wandered about the house looking for the change. The next day, after much prodding, he found the jeans he had been wearing on the day of the milk errand under his bed. After turning the pockets inside out, he handed me some badly crumpled bills.
I reminded him of the many times he had been careless with money, spending without remembering where or how he had used it—I was feeling a bit cranky since it was his actions that had deprived me of a stick of gum.
Obama is acting like my teenage son. We sent him out to buy milk and he doesn’t want to give us back our change.
The 700 Billion dollars that was loaned to the banks is being repaid faster than expected and guess what? There’s 200 BILLION in the TARP fund—our change. There was a sale and good news, bailing out the banks is only going to cost 500 Billion. So can we have our change back please? Congress is divided on what to do with the “extra” money. Since we never had it anyway, I wonder how they can call it extra. Obama wants to spend it and the Republicans want to use it to reduce the deficit.
I look at like this. On the day I sent my son out to buy the milk, imagine that I owed the electric company $50 and $80 to the phone company. While he was out buying milk, if he had spent the $16 change on what he perceived were more important needs, perhaps socks, deodorant and chips—such a decision would have been outrageous. I would have used the money to reduce my debt or perhaps I would have saved it for more groceries.
Obama wants to use our change for more spending projects—after he pays off Hilary’s friends. How about letting the American people decide? Or better yet, just like I tell my kids—Don’t spend money you DON’T HAVE.
I don’t know about you, but $50 is a good chunk of money and $100 is still a lot of money to me. Obama wants to spend 200 Billion Dollars, that’s nine zeros!—200,000,000,000 on more spending projects. Our national debt is already over 10 Trillion! Stop the madness; reduce what we owe, so our children do not have to pay for our folly.
Michael J. Totten, October 2007
Now that the war effort has shifted in focus to Afghanistan, it gives us a chance to stand back and look at Iraq through a different lens. When American troops first landed in Iraq, I remember the accounts about the poor conditions of the Iraqi soldiers and the suffering of the people. At first glance it seemed that the Iraqi people were quite joyful that they had been liberated from Saddam Hussein’s rule. I watched the American soldiers on Iraqi soil receive a warm welcome. By the time the first elections were over and the now iconic photos of women waving their purple dyed fingers began circulating, I noticed a subtle shift in the attitude of Iraqi sentiment—decidedly negative.Today, there is no mistake; Iraqis seem resentful, bitter and downright angry at the presence of Americans in their homeland. Rather than offer an over simplified or easy answer that throws around ideas like “stealing oil” or “imperialism” I suggest the real answer regarding the Iraqi sentiment is something much deeper.When Iraq gained freedom, there was an essential ingredient missing—It was the chance to win independence for themselves. When the noose around the necks of the pre-revolutionary Americans, grew so tight they could take no more, they fought tyranny with their own strength. General George Washington crossed the Delaware River on Christmas in 1776, and his men were demoralized, hungry and barely alive. Words by Thomas Paine boosted morale, “These are times that try men’s souls…Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph,” and inspired the historical victory.When India won their independence from the British, it was because the people of India decided to end the British exploitation for once and for all. Gandhi’s call for the British to “Quit India” rallied pride and a sense of dignity in every Indian. Each citizen had a chance to contribute to their own freedom–spinning cotton, making salt, or joining the march to boycott British goods.In the same way, Frenchmen while carrying a tremendous national debt and broken under the burden of over taxation, (sounds familiar!) achieved their own revolution which led to the establishment of their New Constitution.But the people of Iraq were denied this. They did not win their own freedom. Instead it was given to them, like a gift with a bow. There is no doubt that the people of Iraq were oppressed by Saddam Hussein. But it had not yet reached ignition point. This moment may have been a year or even ten years away, but when Saddam was overthrown by the Americans, the noose around the collective Iraqi neck had not yet reached the moment of suffocation. They were denied a chance to gather in the streets, circulate revolutionary papers, choose a leader and fight to overthrow an oppressive regime. When Saddam was brought to justice, the power behind the accomplishment was not organically generated, but came from an outside source. As many others who had felt tyranny before them, the people of Iraq at the time of their own choosing, would have overthrown Saddam Hussein in their own way and most importantly, with their own might.
The memory of the Iraqi people in relation to their independence is not one of ownership. Since their independence was given to them and they did not earn it for themselves, their momentary happiness, viewed retrospectively, has turned into shame. In many ways the global community asks Iraq to be grateful for a present they did not ask for and were not ready to receive. The Iraqis are resentful toward America because America is the source of their shame.
Politically, the independence of Iraq seems a success, but the collective consciousness of the people of Iraq has been deeply bruised. Shame is not easily erased and it will take time before Iraq can raise their eyes and look eye to eye at the rest of the world once more.
World Wrap Federation, January 2010
When I travel, I like to collect art work. I have paintings from local artists, small sculptures, carpets and other household items I have collected.
Obviously, I’m behind the times. Brad and Angelina like to collect children when they travel. So far they have collected Maddox Chivan, Zahara Marley, Pax Thien and Shiloh Nouvel. And just to round it out they added two more from the good ol’ United States of America —Knox Leon and Vivienne Marcheline, birthed in France this time by Angelina herself!
When I wandered through the market in Tanzania, and said “oh how gorgeous!” I picked up a watercolor painting. But when Angelina wanders in Ethiopia and says, “oh how beautiful!” she apparently picks up a child.
Mr. and Mrs. Pitt went to India to pick up a brown one and India told them to forget it. They went home with a sari or jewelery like the rest of us. I applaud India for the decision that just said no to Child Collectors. It’s about time someone told this couple that children are to be cherished and brought into a family to be loved and cared for—not as another publicity stunt.
I’m not against adoption, by any means. I love my adopted nephews and niece very much. But they were adopted after much careful consideration and deep soul searching on the part of their parents.
No matter what their publicist says about how “hands on” Brad and Angelina are, you and I both know these kids are dumped with the nanny(s) most of the time, except when they are taken out for an occasional photo op. And who advocated for the children when they were forced to leave their country and were brought to America (not everyone wants to live here!) to be the collection of this hunted and don’t-take-pictures-of-us!-wait-i-live-for-fame harassed couple?
I wonder why this couple had to leave their country to collect these children. Did they think about adopting one of the thousands of children who are in the many fost-adopt programs in America? Most of these children are no longer babies, or have complications (health or emotional) but are desperately waiting for adoptive parents. Of course these are not “perfect” children and might not present the proper “we love the world” perspective Brad and Angelina want to portray. We have so many children in the country who could benefit from an adoptive family. Doesn’t charity begin at home?
I’m posting about child collection because I have something to say about people who are up in arms about the lady who has seven cats but give Child Collectors a pass.
what people are saying