The articles I read for this last blog highlighted anthropology's role in analyzing and providing new, constructive perspectives on how to deal with the issues stemming from the world's increasingly capitalist and globalized economic structure. Environmental destruction is the main problem which scientists have warned will worsen if something is not done to change the maintenance of the global system. Using multiple broad perspectives to gain an understanding of the present, anthropologists vitally serve to find solutions to the main environmental and economic issues which face the world today.
In his article "Anthropological Perspectives on Contemporary Human Problems", John H. Bodley describes the history of human development and how the recently-developed, globalized, capitalist system has visibly created environmental issues, and increased poverty and political turmoil as a result of strained resources. Bodley notes that in 1992, scientists globally distributed the World Scientist's Warning To Humanity, outlining the predicted problems the world would face as a result of humanity's destructive "collision course" with the environment. (7) Among these issues were the availability of biologically functional air, water, and soil. The depletion of these resources on a global scale would undoubtedly cause worldwide human suffering and a possibility of human extinction. Bodley declares that the complexity of anthropology is essential for the complicated issues facing the alleviation of the world crisis:
[ "What is needed is perspective--a combination of detachment, a predilection for viewing the total picture in the widest spatial-temporal frame, and a clear recognition of the interrelatedness of social, cultural, biological, and psychological factors. As an academic discipline, anthropology is uniquely qualified to offer such an overview." ] (9)
Bodley outlines the approaches for how an anthropologist can analyze the world crisis. The holistic approach "naturally leads to the broad questions that we must ask" using a scope that often crosses disciplinary barriers. The cross-cultural approach assumes that a problem cannot be solved without understanding how different cultures would view the situation, therefore avoiding ethnocentrism. The evolutionary approach views the history of humanity, showing what mistakes we have made or what ingenious strategies we have used in the past. Bodley finishes by analyzing how the wealth and power of transnational corporations and capitalism still has a hold on how humans will solve the world crisis.
I have seen the environmental destruction caused by capitalist economic pressures by the increase of suburban areas within the town of Woodbury, a community next to my hometown of Maplewood, MN. Apparently, in the late 1980's, Woodbury was complete farmland, consisting of vast acres of pasture and crop fields. However, if someone were to drive on the highway and pass the suburban strip malls, townhouses, housing developments, shopping centers, gas stations, restaurants, and water tower, the most farm-like thing they would be able to find would be the Land 'O Lakes facility which holds parking space for large cemi-trucks. The high increase of suburban development within the past 20 years tells me that there was a larger economic demand in the area for store-bought goods than there was for farmers' crops. While the farm land would have been less damaging to the environment than the community's smog-producing transportation and electricity-hogging businesses, the push for capitalistic values has turned the once farm-town of Woodbury into a materialistic society.
Culturally, Woodbury has put more value into cars, money, and personal appearance. Even my parents comment on how much our neighborhood cares about how good their houses or their cars look. Housing developments have gone up so fast in our neighborhood that while my dad build our house from scratch mostly by himself, within five years, nine houses were built inside the culdesac and connecting side street behind our house, and six more houses went up just down the opposite side street.
To look at Woodbury from a cross-cultural perspective Decorah, IA, Decorah has not changed that much in the past twenty years. Houses have remained relatively the same, and I have not seen many town developments in Decorah that look relatively new or modern.
Psychologically, I can say that Maplewood and Woodbury have become more mentally dependent on technology and less inclined to find happiness in nature than a farmer living in Woodbury would be able to twenty years ago.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Cultural Anthropology BLOG #7: Culture Change, The Gebusi, and American Inhibitions
This week we read about the massive effects of modernization in third world countries and also about Bruce Knauft's experience living with the Gebusi, a group of clanspeople living in Papa New Guinea.
In the article "The Price of Progress", John H. Bodley analyzes the effects of modernization within more third world cultures, and shows whether these changes have improved or degraded the traditional societies. Often times, new developments such as imported foods, governmental policies for better health, resulting increased populations, and perceived impoverishment disrupt the established cultural systems which have provided the traditional societies with stability and economic survival. Usually, American factors such as GDP, per capita income, or formal education which urbanized countries rely on to determine progress do not translate or relate to cultures which have survived on more traditional means, such as foraging or pastoralism. Bodley makes clear the true definition of progress. To determine whether more modern institutions bring prosperity, Bodley asks, "Does progress or economic development increase or decrease a given culture's ability to satisfy the physical and psychological needs of its population?" Through much detail and analysis, Bodley has shown that the societal developments implemented through other cultures often wreck havoc on non-industrial societies. The changes made to urbanize these cultures have resulted in decreased health, disease, poverty, resource depletion, loss of tradition or culture, negative self-perceptions for the members of the culture, and overall dissatisfaction with life. One example Bodley shares is the distinct changes for the Micronesian people of Rarotonga as compared to the people of the neighboring island, Pukapuka. While Pukapuka had remained traditional in culture, Rarotonga, with increase of urbanized economic success, had been introduced to newly imported foods which had tripled salt and sugar intake, increasing the rates of high blood pressure, heart disease, and obesity among men and women. The Rarotonga had become more "modernized", but according to Bodley's definition, had actually become less progressive as they became less healthy throughout the general population.
After reading Bodley's definition of progress, I realized that American society is quite behind in its progress. American society has become reliant upon machines, schedules, and means of survival that actually take more time out of the day for relaxation, eating healthy meals, exercising and developing intimate relationships. The modernization of America can be seen in any institution that values productivity rather than quality. American food industries will refine raw food into food products, detrimentally decreasing its nutritional value, but increasing the number of food products produced. Many Americans spend more time on the internet than they spend in the physical presence of their friends; while online socializing may "save time" and brings more connections, it decreases the amount of intimacy created in each relationship. Most of all, the typical American schedule leaves little room for leisure and time to exercise. While Americans spend time at their jobs or studies in order to earn money and survive, Americans typically lessen their ability to have a long life because of diseases related to pressure and stress.
An excellent example of a community which thrives within its traditional culture is the Gebusi. Bruce Knauft and his wife spent years living with the Gebusi people, and found them to be full of energy, excitement, and life-satisfaction despite their short life spans due to infection and disease within the humid climate. One interesting thing about the Gebusi is that many Americans, like Knauft, have inhibitions about things which the Gebusi embrace. Male sexuality is expressed openly in many different forms. One way that young, married men release sexual tension is by having sexual encounters with teenage boys from the village. Even though the culture is monogamous in marriage, the village is fully aware that the men of the village "break the rules" and engage in sexual acts with younger men. Knauft was once asked by a younger male if he wanted to go out with him and receive a sexual act. Knauft told him that in his culture, some men will have sex with other men, and others do not, and that Knauft himself was one who did not engage in sexual acts with other men. The openness of male sexuality among the Gebusi reflects a celebration of patriarchal affluence and contributes to a communal pastime.
In contrast, American celebration of patriarchal affluence is developed through distinct images of 'man' and 'woman'. While Gebusi men will dance in clothing that is influenced through masculinity and femininity, American society often shames bisexual, transsexual, or homosexual behavior. A man that dresses as a female in America is usually not taken very seriously by other heterosexual men and can turn off women, rather than attract them. I recently dated a young man for two and a half years who considers himself to be bisexual. Throughout dating him, I had received a lot of negative criticism about why I was dating him and what kind of person he is. I feel bad that I was sometimes influenced by the negative questioning others expressed to me, and to know that somewhere in the world men can express their femininity and masculinity openly among others, and even have it seen as desirable, makes me feel hopeful that someday, as different cultures frequently cross paths, America will accept more that both genders can express either feminine or masculine expressions of sexuality.
In the article "The Price of Progress", John H. Bodley analyzes the effects of modernization within more third world cultures, and shows whether these changes have improved or degraded the traditional societies. Often times, new developments such as imported foods, governmental policies for better health, resulting increased populations, and perceived impoverishment disrupt the established cultural systems which have provided the traditional societies with stability and economic survival. Usually, American factors such as GDP, per capita income, or formal education which urbanized countries rely on to determine progress do not translate or relate to cultures which have survived on more traditional means, such as foraging or pastoralism. Bodley makes clear the true definition of progress. To determine whether more modern institutions bring prosperity, Bodley asks, "Does progress or economic development increase or decrease a given culture's ability to satisfy the physical and psychological needs of its population?" Through much detail and analysis, Bodley has shown that the societal developments implemented through other cultures often wreck havoc on non-industrial societies. The changes made to urbanize these cultures have resulted in decreased health, disease, poverty, resource depletion, loss of tradition or culture, negative self-perceptions for the members of the culture, and overall dissatisfaction with life. One example Bodley shares is the distinct changes for the Micronesian people of Rarotonga as compared to the people of the neighboring island, Pukapuka. While Pukapuka had remained traditional in culture, Rarotonga, with increase of urbanized economic success, had been introduced to newly imported foods which had tripled salt and sugar intake, increasing the rates of high blood pressure, heart disease, and obesity among men and women. The Rarotonga had become more "modernized", but according to Bodley's definition, had actually become less progressive as they became less healthy throughout the general population.
After reading Bodley's definition of progress, I realized that American society is quite behind in its progress. American society has become reliant upon machines, schedules, and means of survival that actually take more time out of the day for relaxation, eating healthy meals, exercising and developing intimate relationships. The modernization of America can be seen in any institution that values productivity rather than quality. American food industries will refine raw food into food products, detrimentally decreasing its nutritional value, but increasing the number of food products produced. Many Americans spend more time on the internet than they spend in the physical presence of their friends; while online socializing may "save time" and brings more connections, it decreases the amount of intimacy created in each relationship. Most of all, the typical American schedule leaves little room for leisure and time to exercise. While Americans spend time at their jobs or studies in order to earn money and survive, Americans typically lessen their ability to have a long life because of diseases related to pressure and stress.
An excellent example of a community which thrives within its traditional culture is the Gebusi. Bruce Knauft and his wife spent years living with the Gebusi people, and found them to be full of energy, excitement, and life-satisfaction despite their short life spans due to infection and disease within the humid climate. One interesting thing about the Gebusi is that many Americans, like Knauft, have inhibitions about things which the Gebusi embrace. Male sexuality is expressed openly in many different forms. One way that young, married men release sexual tension is by having sexual encounters with teenage boys from the village. Even though the culture is monogamous in marriage, the village is fully aware that the men of the village "break the rules" and engage in sexual acts with younger men. Knauft was once asked by a younger male if he wanted to go out with him and receive a sexual act. Knauft told him that in his culture, some men will have sex with other men, and others do not, and that Knauft himself was one who did not engage in sexual acts with other men. The openness of male sexuality among the Gebusi reflects a celebration of patriarchal affluence and contributes to a communal pastime.
In contrast, American celebration of patriarchal affluence is developed through distinct images of 'man' and 'woman'. While Gebusi men will dance in clothing that is influenced through masculinity and femininity, American society often shames bisexual, transsexual, or homosexual behavior. A man that dresses as a female in America is usually not taken very seriously by other heterosexual men and can turn off women, rather than attract them. I recently dated a young man for two and a half years who considers himself to be bisexual. Throughout dating him, I had received a lot of negative criticism about why I was dating him and what kind of person he is. I feel bad that I was sometimes influenced by the negative questioning others expressed to me, and to know that somewhere in the world men can express their femininity and masculinity openly among others, and even have it seen as desirable, makes me feel hopeful that someday, as different cultures frequently cross paths, America will accept more that both genders can express either feminine or masculine expressions of sexuality.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Cult. Anth. BLOG #6: Adaptions Lost Through World System Integration
For thousands of years, humans have learned how to physically adapt into their environment to survive. Humans had learned how to forage by gathering plants, become pastoral by domesticating animals, develop horticulture by manual labor of planting, and creating agriculture with the invention of new farm machinery. These types of survival form into different cultures, the systems by which humans learn to survive. Whereas animals survive by whether they have the preferable traits to an environment, humans create their own suitable behavior to survive in the environment and pass the information along for future generations. Each way of living, or culture, is best because it is suited to its own unique environment, after years of trial and error.
As more people have filled the planet, different cultures have increasingly come into contact with one another, creating conflict. When culture is taught within a group of people, the people of that group will usually believe that this way of living is the only proper way to live. This way of thinking is called ethnocentrism. Sometimes ethnocentrism can be so strong that people will try to enforce their own ideas on how to live onto other groups of people. These enforcements of new rules are usually ill-fitting and detrimental to the new society because the perceived "right" way to live usually does not best utilize the resources of the new environment. The society which lives in the environment usually knows the best way of how to use it.
As these different types of cultures merge, there can be confusion and conflict about what things should be valued. Pastoralists sense that their animals symbolize the group's own well-being and sense of identity. Cultivators in horticulture will bless the crops that they receive from the earth, and will connect crop production with their own sexual fertility and human worth. More modern farmers who use technology in agriculture still have pride in their crops, but also in how big of land or how much technology they use, as that is what will provide them with the biggest yield. Americans believe that if you have more money, you will have a happier life, not because paper money is intrinsically valuable, but because it represents all of the other things which one can buy with money. These cultures all value things that give them the ability to survive. By growing up and believing that these things are what gives one life in their particular situation, humans will connect their own well-being and identity to things which ensure their survival. This is why indigenous peoples and capitalist countries alike will strive to keep their cultures alive, so the meaning of their own lives can remain alive as well.
Anthropologists believe that there is a world system that is creating relationships between different cultures that are defined by power. According to Lassiter, the world system is "the culture that mediates our relationship with the environment, writ on an international scale" (120). Whoever has more control over the environment and resources will have more control of what kind of relationship will come between the two cultures. Most often, if a more powerful, “core” country values capitalism, other countries will be forced to compete for power, or else they will end up as dependents of the more powerful country and in effect, the nation will have its culture ripped away and it will lose the ability to survive on its own.
As capitalism becomes more affluent in the world, there becomes a greater struggle for indigenous or rural groups of people to maintain their own cultural identities. The capitalist "core" countries of Britain and America have found their way into gaining profit from the cocaine industry in Bolivia. In effect, the Bolivian peoples have struggled to maintain their culture, their personal identity, and their ability to survive. As more men are enlisted to work for the cocaine industry, there are less laborers to work the fields of the small villages. One village, Pocona, is run by almost all women now, as the men have all left to process cocaine. This loss of workers leaves Pocona with a lack of diversity in their horticulture, less food, and broken-up families. Even the men who are supposedly earning money by processing cocaine end up not earning a good wage, addicted to crack, and possibly receiving a venereal disease from a local prostitute. Both the men and the village left behind suffer in health because the capitalistic, profiting cocaine industry pushes out the people's natural ability to care for themselves.
I see this pattern of the world system pushing out individual cultures in the way that more and more international students are attending private, liberal-arts colleges. I find it ironic that while I was college-searching, colleges would advertise that their campuses were more diverse, meaning that they had a larger percentage of international students on campus. However, as more and more international students become accustomed the fast-paced, competitive, and American way of life, their native diversity naturally fades. I see that the capitalist economy "pushes" these students away from their culture and into American life. When I've asked some international friends of mine why they came to Luther, they have told me that their parents wanted them to have a good education, and Luther provided them with good financial aid packages. There is no intrinsic reason that someone would want to come live in Decorah, Iowa. The parents of international students feel the "push" of the world system, as more capitalistic competition in the world means that their children need a higher education to succeed. Although they may still have parents back at home who live a more rural lifestyle than college life in America, the students will eventually start to talk, act, and be more like Americans, therefore leaving their own cultural ways behind, and making room for more American, and capitalistic ways of living.
As more people have filled the planet, different cultures have increasingly come into contact with one another, creating conflict. When culture is taught within a group of people, the people of that group will usually believe that this way of living is the only proper way to live. This way of thinking is called ethnocentrism. Sometimes ethnocentrism can be so strong that people will try to enforce their own ideas on how to live onto other groups of people. These enforcements of new rules are usually ill-fitting and detrimental to the new society because the perceived "right" way to live usually does not best utilize the resources of the new environment. The society which lives in the environment usually knows the best way of how to use it.
As these different types of cultures merge, there can be confusion and conflict about what things should be valued. Pastoralists sense that their animals symbolize the group's own well-being and sense of identity. Cultivators in horticulture will bless the crops that they receive from the earth, and will connect crop production with their own sexual fertility and human worth. More modern farmers who use technology in agriculture still have pride in their crops, but also in how big of land or how much technology they use, as that is what will provide them with the biggest yield. Americans believe that if you have more money, you will have a happier life, not because paper money is intrinsically valuable, but because it represents all of the other things which one can buy with money. These cultures all value things that give them the ability to survive. By growing up and believing that these things are what gives one life in their particular situation, humans will connect their own well-being and identity to things which ensure their survival. This is why indigenous peoples and capitalist countries alike will strive to keep their cultures alive, so the meaning of their own lives can remain alive as well.
Anthropologists believe that there is a world system that is creating relationships between different cultures that are defined by power. According to Lassiter, the world system is "the culture that mediates our relationship with the environment, writ on an international scale" (120). Whoever has more control over the environment and resources will have more control of what kind of relationship will come between the two cultures. Most often, if a more powerful, “core” country values capitalism, other countries will be forced to compete for power, or else they will end up as dependents of the more powerful country and in effect, the nation will have its culture ripped away and it will lose the ability to survive on its own.
As capitalism becomes more affluent in the world, there becomes a greater struggle for indigenous or rural groups of people to maintain their own cultural identities. The capitalist "core" countries of Britain and America have found their way into gaining profit from the cocaine industry in Bolivia. In effect, the Bolivian peoples have struggled to maintain their culture, their personal identity, and their ability to survive. As more men are enlisted to work for the cocaine industry, there are less laborers to work the fields of the small villages. One village, Pocona, is run by almost all women now, as the men have all left to process cocaine. This loss of workers leaves Pocona with a lack of diversity in their horticulture, less food, and broken-up families. Even the men who are supposedly earning money by processing cocaine end up not earning a good wage, addicted to crack, and possibly receiving a venereal disease from a local prostitute. Both the men and the village left behind suffer in health because the capitalistic, profiting cocaine industry pushes out the people's natural ability to care for themselves.
I see this pattern of the world system pushing out individual cultures in the way that more and more international students are attending private, liberal-arts colleges. I find it ironic that while I was college-searching, colleges would advertise that their campuses were more diverse, meaning that they had a larger percentage of international students on campus. However, as more and more international students become accustomed the fast-paced, competitive, and American way of life, their native diversity naturally fades. I see that the capitalist economy "pushes" these students away from their culture and into American life. When I've asked some international friends of mine why they came to Luther, they have told me that their parents wanted them to have a good education, and Luther provided them with good financial aid packages. There is no intrinsic reason that someone would want to come live in Decorah, Iowa. The parents of international students feel the "push" of the world system, as more capitalistic competition in the world means that their children need a higher education to succeed. Although they may still have parents back at home who live a more rural lifestyle than college life in America, the students will eventually start to talk, act, and be more like Americans, therefore leaving their own cultural ways behind, and making room for more American, and capitalistic ways of living.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Cult. Anth. BLOG #5: Misunderstood Perspectives of Iraq, The Veil and Islam
Because Americans know so little of Middle Eastern culture, Americans' ideas and values misread how Middle Eastern women are treated. The womens' veils do not signify sexist oppression. The Qu'ran does not force women to wear it. The women's veils are not part of Islam, but a desired part of their community values. The women of Iraq believe that not covering oneself is shameful, and the use of the abayah or veil allows them to feel in high esteem about themselves. Americans believe that Middle Eastern women are not allowed to express themselves, when in fact, by wearing the veil, they are expressing the fulfilling values of their culture. A recent event exemplifies this difference in cultural values. In a recent beauty pageant, Miss Iraq showed off her bikini body onstage to the international camera. Americans belived that this act showed liberation and a healthy woman's confidence. On the other hand, important figures from Iraq found this display shameful for the woman. Americans disrespect the Middle Eastern ideal of liberation by assuming that both types of liberation are the same. Americans' ethnocentrism assumes that showing one's body freely is liberating.
Middle Eastern women often pity American women for being so naive as not to cover themselves. During her year and a half stay in El Nahra, Iraq, Elizabeth Warlock Fernea experienced this dispute concerning the veil. Like all travelers, Fernea arrived in Iraq more or less with an ethnocentrism which held some stereotypes about the women she would encounter. When Elizabeth Fernea first appeared in Baghdad, she was set to not wear an abayah and give into the perceived oppression of the veil. She was quick to learn by hostile or strange stares that by not wearing the abayah, she was shaming herself. Soon a female acquaintance had one made for Fernea and she felt much better.
It is not simply that Americans focus on looks and the Middle Eastern women do not care about their appearances, or do not express themselves. It is only that the two cultures give different standards as to what looks good and what does not. Abayahs and veils, contrary to American belief, look good to Middle Eastern women because it upholds their moral integrity. This makes them happy and gives one as much confidence as an American women could feel while wearing a new, red, summer dress.
There are biblical examples which have influenced these cultural ideas. In the Qu'ranic Bible, the story of the Garden of Eden is different than in the Christian Bible. It is believed and taught that once Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, they were forced to strip their clothes. This story reflects the Middle Eastern value that to be without clothes in public is shameful, rather than liberating. The Christian Bible, Adam and Eve, once realizing their own nakedness, put clothes on themselves, which signifies that they had become ashamed of their nudity. Interestingly, Christians do not settle on the idea as to cover themselves so much as they focus on the innocence of being naked before God. Even Christian Americans show off some skin publicly when diving into the swimming pool.
There are other groups in the world who consider not covering oneself to be shameful. In a adulthood ceremony of the Nitendi in the Santa Cruz Islands, the young boys of the tribe are made to remove their clothes for five days until the Nitendi festival. After feeling shameful for five days, they are clothed at the ceremony and hence become adults. This can relate to the Adam and Eve story in the Christian Bible, because during the time they were naked, they were without knowledge, like a child. The Nitendi realize that this nakedness represents childhood, and by reclothing the young boys, they gain back their adulthood.
While putting so much pressure to release the women from the abayah, Americans miss the point that many Iraqi's who immigrate here to America are fleeing from religious persecution. In the land of the free, it is absurd that America does not throw open its arms to console those who are searching for religious freedom. The first pilgrims to the U.S. were Dutch Protestants who desired to flee from the Catholic persecutions. However, stereotypes of terrorism infiltrate the nation's mind. Constant television images of terrorist men in kaffiyehs or turbans bring the idea that all Iraqi men could be terrorists. This idea is hardly challenged in American society. Although precautions have cooled down since the few years after the 9//11 attack in New York, Iraqis are often prejudiced against, being overly searched in comparison to other plane passengers and not given company jobs in fear that they could abuse the system.
One way to be opened minded rather than prejudging one's safety is to reach out and get to know the Middle Eastern immigrants who live in America. Linda Walbridge became friends with Seyed Moustafa, a Shiite Muslim who left Iraq with his family to flee religious persecution from Saddam Hussein. His education is substantially intricate, as he speaks several languages and he has been trained as a Shiite Muslim cleric. His family is famous for helping to conduct Shiite religious rituals for local American Muslim communities. I find that Moustafa's life work is not much different than a Baptist preacher in America. These two types of religious leaders are both dedicated to their religion and host a passion to spread the words of their holy texts to others. They also satisfy the spiritual lives of the members in their respective communities.
Islam is similar to Christianity in the way that Islam is a fulfilling, spiritual religion and not a constant jihad. When the idea of Islam is brought up to Americans, the stereotype of men in turbans shouting and shooting with rifles into the air can sometimes come to mind. However, most time these images of jihad, or holy war, are rebellions against the oppressive, persecuting Middle Eastern governments, and do not connect with the Islamic faith at all. The Islamic faith is very much based on community and honoring the Qu'ran. Just like American Christians may meet for a Bible study, groups of women and men will meet, having one person read the Qu'ran and others will listen and reflect on its powerful words. In Guests of the Shiek, the women of El Nahra would sit and listen to the Qu'ran being read aloud and found this practice very spiritually uplifting. Also, the leading figures of Christianity and Islam, Jesus Christ and the Prophet Mohammed are similar in their martyrdom. Children's stories from each religion pay tribute to each of them, showing that they died, each for the greater good of their communities.
The best way to bridge gaps of understanding inbetween two cultures is two have cross cultural experiences which expose the contradicting ideas and misunderstandings. Since the abayah or veil is such a contrast or opposite value of American culture, it sticks out and therefore brings more opportunity for Americans to learn and discuss about the true meaning behind the abayah.
Americans have not yet truly accepted the religion of Islam because it is misunderstood and confused with ideas of political uprising.
Middle Eastern women often pity American women for being so naive as not to cover themselves. During her year and a half stay in El Nahra, Iraq, Elizabeth Warlock Fernea experienced this dispute concerning the veil. Like all travelers, Fernea arrived in Iraq more or less with an ethnocentrism which held some stereotypes about the women she would encounter. When Elizabeth Fernea first appeared in Baghdad, she was set to not wear an abayah and give into the perceived oppression of the veil. She was quick to learn by hostile or strange stares that by not wearing the abayah, she was shaming herself. Soon a female acquaintance had one made for Fernea and she felt much better.
It is not simply that Americans focus on looks and the Middle Eastern women do not care about their appearances, or do not express themselves. It is only that the two cultures give different standards as to what looks good and what does not. Abayahs and veils, contrary to American belief, look good to Middle Eastern women because it upholds their moral integrity. This makes them happy and gives one as much confidence as an American women could feel while wearing a new, red, summer dress.
There are biblical examples which have influenced these cultural ideas. In the Qu'ranic Bible, the story of the Garden of Eden is different than in the Christian Bible. It is believed and taught that once Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, they were forced to strip their clothes. This story reflects the Middle Eastern value that to be without clothes in public is shameful, rather than liberating. The Christian Bible, Adam and Eve, once realizing their own nakedness, put clothes on themselves, which signifies that they had become ashamed of their nudity. Interestingly, Christians do not settle on the idea as to cover themselves so much as they focus on the innocence of being naked before God. Even Christian Americans show off some skin publicly when diving into the swimming pool.
There are other groups in the world who consider not covering oneself to be shameful. In a adulthood ceremony of the Nitendi in the Santa Cruz Islands, the young boys of the tribe are made to remove their clothes for five days until the Nitendi festival. After feeling shameful for five days, they are clothed at the ceremony and hence become adults. This can relate to the Adam and Eve story in the Christian Bible, because during the time they were naked, they were without knowledge, like a child. The Nitendi realize that this nakedness represents childhood, and by reclothing the young boys, they gain back their adulthood.
While putting so much pressure to release the women from the abayah, Americans miss the point that many Iraqi's who immigrate here to America are fleeing from religious persecution. In the land of the free, it is absurd that America does not throw open its arms to console those who are searching for religious freedom. The first pilgrims to the U.S. were Dutch Protestants who desired to flee from the Catholic persecutions. However, stereotypes of terrorism infiltrate the nation's mind. Constant television images of terrorist men in kaffiyehs or turbans bring the idea that all Iraqi men could be terrorists. This idea is hardly challenged in American society. Although precautions have cooled down since the few years after the 9//11 attack in New York, Iraqis are often prejudiced against, being overly searched in comparison to other plane passengers and not given company jobs in fear that they could abuse the system.
One way to be opened minded rather than prejudging one's safety is to reach out and get to know the Middle Eastern immigrants who live in America. Linda Walbridge became friends with Seyed Moustafa, a Shiite Muslim who left Iraq with his family to flee religious persecution from Saddam Hussein. His education is substantially intricate, as he speaks several languages and he has been trained as a Shiite Muslim cleric. His family is famous for helping to conduct Shiite religious rituals for local American Muslim communities. I find that Moustafa's life work is not much different than a Baptist preacher in America. These two types of religious leaders are both dedicated to their religion and host a passion to spread the words of their holy texts to others. They also satisfy the spiritual lives of the members in their respective communities.
Islam is similar to Christianity in the way that Islam is a fulfilling, spiritual religion and not a constant jihad. When the idea of Islam is brought up to Americans, the stereotype of men in turbans shouting and shooting with rifles into the air can sometimes come to mind. However, most time these images of jihad, or holy war, are rebellions against the oppressive, persecuting Middle Eastern governments, and do not connect with the Islamic faith at all. The Islamic faith is very much based on community and honoring the Qu'ran. Just like American Christians may meet for a Bible study, groups of women and men will meet, having one person read the Qu'ran and others will listen and reflect on its powerful words. In Guests of the Shiek, the women of El Nahra would sit and listen to the Qu'ran being read aloud and found this practice very spiritually uplifting. Also, the leading figures of Christianity and Islam, Jesus Christ and the Prophet Mohammed are similar in their martyrdom. Children's stories from each religion pay tribute to each of them, showing that they died, each for the greater good of their communities.
The best way to bridge gaps of understanding inbetween two cultures is two have cross cultural experiences which expose the contradicting ideas and misunderstandings. Since the abayah or veil is such a contrast or opposite value of American culture, it sticks out and therefore brings more opportunity for Americans to learn and discuss about the true meaning behind the abayah.
Americans have not yet truly accepted the religion of Islam because it is misunderstood and confused with ideas of political uprising.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Cultural Anthropology BLOG #4: The Cultural Benefits of Marriage
Marriage is a culturally-designed practice which functions within each community depending on its economic, social and political constructs. Different cultures use different forms of marriage to aid the human need of survival while still maintaining the social environment of culture. What I find interesting that many cultures have decisions about marriage, that although appear vastly different from America's relationship norms, in many ways are similar. From comparing these types of marriages with American relationships, we can see that there is no right, wrong, natural, or unnatural sort of union, but only different types of marriage that serve different purposes.
For most cultures, the preferred marriage is the one that gives social or economic benefits. As culture is preserved through positive reinforcement, people who marry through the preferred custom of the culture are more easily rewarded with what society provides. In America, since heterosexual monogamy is ordained as the most ethical form of marriage by traditional Christianity, it is given the most rights and economic benefits. To have any control over crisis-like situations with a partner in America, you must be married. Unfortunately, many homosexual men and women who are not allowed to marry do not have rights such as visiting their loved ones in the hospital or deciding what to do if their lover dies. In most loans and retirement plans, heterosexual couples are usually given the most rights and financial aid.
Marriage is sometimes dictated by the social and political boundaries reinforced through culture. Arranged marriages in India are influenced through the social attitude towards women and the culturally-preserved caste system of social class. In India, women do not have as many rights or occupational opportunities in their future as men do and therefore rely upon an economically secure marriage for their survival. Because a young woman does not have choice in her new husband, her parents will decide the type of man she is to marry. Although India's caste system was long ago abandoned, the implied social stratification still resides within its culture. The chosen husbands of Indian marriage are not free of the bound financial implications within India's social hierarchy; Indian parents are very careful when going about to choose their daughter's husband, as the wealth or education of her husband will determine her survival.
I also interested in how the decision of whether to marry or not is influenced in American culture. As members of an individualistic society, Americans are more easily allowed to make lifestyle decisions which deviate from the cultural ideal. Although many people in America are not religious, the typical, American wedding vows are formed off of Christian beliefs, therefore partly influence Americans to get married for the sake of their morality. In my own life, I do not see myself getting married, as I do not like the social connotations aligned with marriage: patriarchal gender roles, acceptance from a religious institution and government involvement in my personal relationship with my spouse. I would much prefer to be committed to someone and stay with that person because I truly love them, without having to stay simply because I have legal documents binding myself to another person. In terms of the Christian definition of morality, I think it is less immoral not to marry than to marry and end up not loving that spouse , yet still staying with that person. Many Americans think that the idea of commitment is "natural", however the "walking marriage" of the Mosuo in China show that different types of marriage can also be seen as "natural". In this marriage, there is no formal engagement or commitment, but simply a relationship of two lovers who may or may not produce children. There is no obligation from the father to his possible children, even though most fathers do form close relationships with their children. From an American perspective, this type of relationship could be seen as irresponsible on the father's part, however, this marriage promotes that the father remain loyal and helpful to his own nuclear family. In light of commitment, the "walking marriage" promotes a different, yet valid kind of commitment to one's immediate family.
For most cultures, the preferred marriage is the one that gives social or economic benefits. As culture is preserved through positive reinforcement, people who marry through the preferred custom of the culture are more easily rewarded with what society provides. In America, since heterosexual monogamy is ordained as the most ethical form of marriage by traditional Christianity, it is given the most rights and economic benefits. To have any control over crisis-like situations with a partner in America, you must be married. Unfortunately, many homosexual men and women who are not allowed to marry do not have rights such as visiting their loved ones in the hospital or deciding what to do if their lover dies. In most loans and retirement plans, heterosexual couples are usually given the most rights and financial aid.
Marriage is sometimes dictated by the social and political boundaries reinforced through culture. Arranged marriages in India are influenced through the social attitude towards women and the culturally-preserved caste system of social class. In India, women do not have as many rights or occupational opportunities in their future as men do and therefore rely upon an economically secure marriage for their survival. Because a young woman does not have choice in her new husband, her parents will decide the type of man she is to marry. Although India's caste system was long ago abandoned, the implied social stratification still resides within its culture. The chosen husbands of Indian marriage are not free of the bound financial implications within India's social hierarchy; Indian parents are very careful when going about to choose their daughter's husband, as the wealth or education of her husband will determine her survival.
I also interested in how the decision of whether to marry or not is influenced in American culture. As members of an individualistic society, Americans are more easily allowed to make lifestyle decisions which deviate from the cultural ideal. Although many people in America are not religious, the typical, American wedding vows are formed off of Christian beliefs, therefore partly influence Americans to get married for the sake of their morality. In my own life, I do not see myself getting married, as I do not like the social connotations aligned with marriage: patriarchal gender roles, acceptance from a religious institution and government involvement in my personal relationship with my spouse. I would much prefer to be committed to someone and stay with that person because I truly love them, without having to stay simply because I have legal documents binding myself to another person. In terms of the Christian definition of morality, I think it is less immoral not to marry than to marry and end up not loving that spouse , yet still staying with that person. Many Americans think that the idea of commitment is "natural", however the "walking marriage" of the Mosuo in China show that different types of marriage can also be seen as "natural". In this marriage, there is no formal engagement or commitment, but simply a relationship of two lovers who may or may not produce children. There is no obligation from the father to his possible children, even though most fathers do form close relationships with their children. From an American perspective, this type of relationship could be seen as irresponsible on the father's part, however, this marriage promotes that the father remain loyal and helpful to his own nuclear family. In light of commitment, the "walking marriage" promotes a different, yet valid kind of commitment to one's immediate family.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Cultural Anthropology BLOG 3: Sex Is Determined, Gender Is Presumed
This week's readings centered around gender and how people learn the assigned gender roles to them as their culture decides. In America, there is generally two types of gender: man and woman. One could also go beyond these two roles and explain that trans-gender individuals are a third gender of American culture. However, in many countries, one could identify four, five, or six genders. How can this be, one might ask? Are there other human genitalia that has not been discovered yet by the general public? How many body parts do some people decide to 'change'- does this affect what type of sex someone is to be? Currently, and since the beginning of human existence, there have always been two sexes: male and female. Gender, although based in biological differences, does not rely of the bodily differences between males and females; gender is determined through the attitudes and roles in each society given to different groups of people. Just as people have different occupations or religious practices that are encouraged in different cultures, there are different presumed actions, or gender roles, which are encouraged and trained into the individuals of each culture.
It is easy to see the training of gender most often if one spends time with children. In American society, the gender roles of man and woman are taught at an early age and encouraged through positive or negative reinforcement by members of society. I remember in kindergarten class making a book called 'About Me' to give to my parents. For one of the pages, we were asked what we wanted to be when we grew up. To my surprise, we were given two choices of cut-out pictures to paste onto this page category: a fireman or a ballerina. Curiously, I raised my hand and told my kindergarten teacher that I didn't want to be either of these things when I grew up. She told me to simply pick one. Although in this instance, I was given the choice for which adult role I desired, it is clear that this elementary school activity, at least for this page, was saturated with the idea of "man" and "woman" gender roles. The lack of alternative choices suggests that even at 5 years old, I was being pressured to fit in to one of our society's designated gender types.
However, although gender may seem innate or unchangeable, it can be seen more easily in American society that gender roles are actually negotiated and decided between members of a culture, rather than being "natural". A most prominent example of this negotiation is the current battles between gay rights and state legislature. Washington D.C. recently changed over in legalizing same-sex marriage. Gender roles, along with legal documents, are being changed. More often than ever before has it been accepted in America that a man's role is not simply to love a woman, and a woman does not have to marry a man. These gender roles are changing as the acceptance of same-sex lovers is becoming more frequent. Although there are still certain taboos and stereotypes around gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders, these "lifestyles" or decisions in partners is becoming more accepted and therefore the roles of both man and woman are being changed.
Again illustrating that gender is not innate, but a cultural decision, many cultures around the world have valid gender structures that are much different than Western or European structures. A society called the Bijago (bih-ZHA-goh) practice a gender structure which is in many ways the opposite of American culture. Men's main role in Bijago society is to attract women and be chosen for marriage. These cabaros, or Bijago men, are encouraged to be "beautiful, intelligent, and strong", as one cabaro described for an anthropological study. A cabaro must gather palm wine by climbing trees, adorn himself with beautiful fabrics and jewelry, and learn intricate dances in the hope that someday an older woman of the tribe will choose him for marriage. This system of gender roles provides very little power to the man and very little control for a cabaro to find satisfaction in his own life. Much like the cabaros, American women are encouraged to look young and beautiful for men in the hope of attracting a life partner, through the influence of television, advertisements, the music industry, health and beauty magazines, and even mothers who are insistent of having their daughters succeed with the opposite sex. As a Bijago woman informed the anthropologist/interviewer, "A woman's life is much better than a man's life."
In my own life, I see that the idea of gender saturates my own idea of who I am. During my J-Term class at Luther which was called "Being A Good Alien", I was asked to write about who I was. As I was brainstorming, I found that I was writing down words such as, 'daughter', 'sister', and 'young woman'. Although these ideas can be linked to how I connect with my family, it is obvious that my first ideas of identity are mainly based on my gender. My actions are defined by how I relate to others or my sociability, which is presumably a female trait in American society. These roles connect the fact that I have female genitalia with other roles, presuming that my genitalia will decide what kinds of actions I take and what kind of lifestyle I will have. It is assumed that I may spend a considerate amount of money on beauty products, marry a man, and bear children, all things which would assign definite priorities in my life for the sake of other people. Because I have a vagina and breasts, I will always be a 'woman' in American society, rather than Mara Dobervich.
It is easy to see the training of gender most often if one spends time with children. In American society, the gender roles of man and woman are taught at an early age and encouraged through positive or negative reinforcement by members of society. I remember in kindergarten class making a book called 'About Me' to give to my parents. For one of the pages, we were asked what we wanted to be when we grew up. To my surprise, we were given two choices of cut-out pictures to paste onto this page category: a fireman or a ballerina. Curiously, I raised my hand and told my kindergarten teacher that I didn't want to be either of these things when I grew up. She told me to simply pick one. Although in this instance, I was given the choice for which adult role I desired, it is clear that this elementary school activity, at least for this page, was saturated with the idea of "man" and "woman" gender roles. The lack of alternative choices suggests that even at 5 years old, I was being pressured to fit in to one of our society's designated gender types.
However, although gender may seem innate or unchangeable, it can be seen more easily in American society that gender roles are actually negotiated and decided between members of a culture, rather than being "natural". A most prominent example of this negotiation is the current battles between gay rights and state legislature. Washington D.C. recently changed over in legalizing same-sex marriage. Gender roles, along with legal documents, are being changed. More often than ever before has it been accepted in America that a man's role is not simply to love a woman, and a woman does not have to marry a man. These gender roles are changing as the acceptance of same-sex lovers is becoming more frequent. Although there are still certain taboos and stereotypes around gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders, these "lifestyles" or decisions in partners is becoming more accepted and therefore the roles of both man and woman are being changed.
Again illustrating that gender is not innate, but a cultural decision, many cultures around the world have valid gender structures that are much different than Western or European structures. A society called the Bijago (bih-ZHA-goh) practice a gender structure which is in many ways the opposite of American culture. Men's main role in Bijago society is to attract women and be chosen for marriage. These cabaros, or Bijago men, are encouraged to be "beautiful, intelligent, and strong", as one cabaro described for an anthropological study. A cabaro must gather palm wine by climbing trees, adorn himself with beautiful fabrics and jewelry, and learn intricate dances in the hope that someday an older woman of the tribe will choose him for marriage. This system of gender roles provides very little power to the man and very little control for a cabaro to find satisfaction in his own life. Much like the cabaros, American women are encouraged to look young and beautiful for men in the hope of attracting a life partner, through the influence of television, advertisements, the music industry, health and beauty magazines, and even mothers who are insistent of having their daughters succeed with the opposite sex. As a Bijago woman informed the anthropologist/interviewer, "A woman's life is much better than a man's life."
In my own life, I see that the idea of gender saturates my own idea of who I am. During my J-Term class at Luther which was called "Being A Good Alien", I was asked to write about who I was. As I was brainstorming, I found that I was writing down words such as, 'daughter', 'sister', and 'young woman'. Although these ideas can be linked to how I connect with my family, it is obvious that my first ideas of identity are mainly based on my gender. My actions are defined by how I relate to others or my sociability, which is presumably a female trait in American society. These roles connect the fact that I have female genitalia with other roles, presuming that my genitalia will decide what kinds of actions I take and what kind of lifestyle I will have. It is assumed that I may spend a considerate amount of money on beauty products, marry a man, and bear children, all things which would assign definite priorities in my life for the sake of other people. Because I have a vagina and breasts, I will always be a 'woman' in American society, rather than Mara Dobervich.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Cultural Anthropology, BLOG 2- Childbirth: !Kung vs. American Perspectives and Practices
Pain is a universal feeling for a woman giving birth, however, the expression of pain is culturally learned. In chapter titled "First Birth", Nisa shared her pain experienced during her first childbirth. Nisa describes the labor pains as a "fire". Later on, Nisa shares the feeling which follows after the baby's head starts to come out: "...a pain like fire is at the lips of your vagina and the head and the hair on the head start pushing through." !Kung women are taught to not show or express this pain during childbirth. During labor, experienced women will sit against a tree and remain silent until the baby is birthed. This is partly to avoid attraction of the animals in the bush, but mostly the !Kung believe that expressing one's pain is a rejection of the baby. They believe that God will then try to take the baby back, through killing the baby and sometimes the mother. Because of this belief, pregnant !Kung women will try hard to maintain a "stoic" attitude towards birth throughout the pregnancy. The belief that expressing pain will kill the child aids many women to remain silent during childbirth. While Nisa shared that her natural inclination was to cry out in her pain, since Nisa's culture had taught her that this would kill her newborn, she was able to will herself into remaining quiet during childbirth. This behavior during labor seems almost impossible to American women because Americans have been taught that rhythmic breathing and releasing tension during childbirth will help ease the pregnancy. Our bodies truly develop the ability to endure physical labor through the cultural ideas around physical labor, specifically in childbirth.
I can attest as a young, American woman, that I would have a hard time keeping quiet if a baby was bursting through my loins. In America, we are taught to openly express our anger, pain, sadness, and even embarrassment. American movies and TV show laboring women huffing, puffing, whining, moaning, and sometimes even screaming from the pain. I would argue that while feeling pain is universal, the need to let air escape one's lungs to release pain is simply a cultural practice. Although more hyper or heavy breathing can take place when a human being is anxious or upset, !Kung women learn to not feel upset or anxious over having a baby. Having a baby is simply "women's work."
First, humans are conditioned into culture, and later it begins to serve them. The practices in childbirth for both American and !Kung society can provide aid in the process of a successful delivery. This is because beliefs do not only control the practices of American and !Kung childbirth, but each fulfillment of the beliefs will actualize each woman's body into performing the birth. Because American women believe that rhythmic breathing will help ease labor, they usually do. Similarly, since !Kung women believe it is important for the mother to remain quiet in order for the child and mother to live through childbirth, women are able to remain more silent than American women during labor. Alternatively, !Kung women who are not able to remain silent during childbirth often have difficulty in birthing the child. American women who remain tense and do not breathe in a rhythmic manner usually feel more pain during labor. Each childbirth practice aids women through childbirth because humans can be conditioned into their own culture.
I can attest as a young, American woman, that I would have a hard time keeping quiet if a baby was bursting through my loins. In America, we are taught to openly express our anger, pain, sadness, and even embarrassment. American movies and TV show laboring women huffing, puffing, whining, moaning, and sometimes even screaming from the pain. I would argue that while feeling pain is universal, the need to let air escape one's lungs to release pain is simply a cultural practice. Although more hyper or heavy breathing can take place when a human being is anxious or upset, !Kung women learn to not feel upset or anxious over having a baby. Having a baby is simply "women's work."
First, humans are conditioned into culture, and later it begins to serve them. The practices in childbirth for both American and !Kung society can provide aid in the process of a successful delivery. This is because beliefs do not only control the practices of American and !Kung childbirth, but each fulfillment of the beliefs will actualize each woman's body into performing the birth. Because American women believe that rhythmic breathing will help ease labor, they usually do. Similarly, since !Kung women believe it is important for the mother to remain quiet in order for the child and mother to live through childbirth, women are able to remain more silent than American women during labor. Alternatively, !Kung women who are not able to remain silent during childbirth often have difficulty in birthing the child. American women who remain tense and do not breathe in a rhythmic manner usually feel more pain during labor. Each childbirth practice aids women through childbirth because humans can be conditioned into their own culture.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Cultural Anthropology: BLOG 1
What stood out most to me about this week's readings was the focus on getting to know the people one is studying. The basis for modern anthropology is to research within the place one is studying to gain a sense of the real lives of the people. By learning the culture's colloquial language, taking on non-verbal gestures, and distinguishing norms, anthropologists begin to appreciate the community's own understanding of their world. Trust is built through communication, so in order to gain the trust of the community, one must practice the forms of communication that the people use. If anthropologists fail to align themselves with the expectations of their host culture, they lose important building blocks of communication, and therefore willingly admit themselves to social embarrassment and possible rejection from their community. Thus, good anthropologists will communicate with the people in the way which is natural to their culture. In order to integrate successfully into another culture and gain acceptance from their host community, one must learn to live by the rules, or norms, of the host culture.
An anthropologist's assent into the host's style of communication is pertinent for developing vital relationships within the community. During the beginning of his fieldwork with the Yanomamo tribe, Napoleon A. Chagnon adjusted his form of communication in order to gain respect from the community. For much of the beginning of his fieldwork, the surrounding tribesmen would bother Chagnon for his food and his other possessions for their own use. He was not able to ward them off and would eventually give into their impeding demands. Chagnon was not pushy in his communication, and therefore the other Yanomamo men considered him to subhuman. At one poin intime, several tribesmen had chopped up a canoe, that Chagnon had spent all morning constructing, so that they would have wooden paddles for their own canoes. He tried communicating his anger in the way that he was used to, by acknowledging that he was angry at them and he considered their actions disrespectful. However, although Chagnon's actions would have been considered assertive in American culture, his communication style had not been successful with the Yanomamo. Frustrated, Chagnon suddenly cut the men's canoes loose from the dock and let them float downstream. Immediately, Chagnon had earned respect from the men of the tribe. Chagnon found this more aggressive form of communicating had gained him a higher status than he had previously held in the community. Because Chagnon learned how to communicate correctly among the other Yanomamo, he slowly became more of a member in the community. Although Chagnon tried to communicate his anger, he did not communicate in the style of the culture, and hence, he was not taken seriously. Only after Chagnon complied with his host culture was he able to be seen as another human being, a large step made within his study of the Yanomamo.
I became an outsider to a specific "tribe" of America: the punk-rock music scene. In order to integrate into this culture, I had to build trust through the cultural norms of this scene. When I was in ninth grade, I joined a band with my boyfriend, Kyle, and his best friend, Tony. I had never been part of a musical group before that had played it's own shows in front of people who yelled, screamed, and danced while jumping and yelling for the show. During my first performance with the band, I had trouble knowing how to address the audience. Oftentimes at these punk shows, the local teenagers would create circle pits, where the purpose was to run and push into as many other people who were also participating on the dance floor. The teenagers seemed to gain so much energy and excitement from ramming into other people that the circle pits often became the focus of the crowd, rather than the musical performance. I felt that when people listened to a musical group, they should be quiet and patiently wait for the musician to perform the next song. I was used to presenting myself with almost complete silence from the audience. This was not the custom in punk-rock shows, however. The more that the audience was having a good time, the more noise they would make. When I spoke to introduce the next song, I was not to be heard over the yelling and laughing high school teenagers. The volume of the punk rockers reverberated inside the tiny garage we all squeezed into. Feeling adequately unnoticed by the crowd. I decided that I had had enough of being ignored. I decided to take a more aggressive stance at addressing the crowd. Much like Chagnon, I had to assert myself with a degree of aggressiveness that would succeeded the people surrounding me in order to be respected, or even understood. I suddenly yelled into my microphone, "Shut the f*** up!" The circle pit stopped moving and everyone looked towards Kyle, Tony, and I. I started to introduce the song and we started playing our music. The audience grew loud again, signaling that the punk rockers were enjoying our performance. I had learned how to communicate in a way which the given culture understood best, and respectively gained a positive response from my punk-rock community.
If an anthropologist desires to understand a group of people, he or she must empathize with and indulge in the culture in which those people live. Although there is discomfort about personal boundaries which an anthropologist must cross when coming from hjis or her own culture, the reason of delving into the norms of the host culture is to reach some level of understanding. By adhering to the communication of our host cultures, both Chagnon and I were able to communicate efficiently and hence, gain trust and bond with our respective communities.
An anthropologist's assent into the host's style of communication is pertinent for developing vital relationships within the community. During the beginning of his fieldwork with the Yanomamo tribe, Napoleon A. Chagnon adjusted his form of communication in order to gain respect from the community. For much of the beginning of his fieldwork, the surrounding tribesmen would bother Chagnon for his food and his other possessions for their own use. He was not able to ward them off and would eventually give into their impeding demands. Chagnon was not pushy in his communication, and therefore the other Yanomamo men considered him to subhuman. At one poin intime, several tribesmen had chopped up a canoe, that Chagnon had spent all morning constructing, so that they would have wooden paddles for their own canoes. He tried communicating his anger in the way that he was used to, by acknowledging that he was angry at them and he considered their actions disrespectful. However, although Chagnon's actions would have been considered assertive in American culture, his communication style had not been successful with the Yanomamo. Frustrated, Chagnon suddenly cut the men's canoes loose from the dock and let them float downstream. Immediately, Chagnon had earned respect from the men of the tribe. Chagnon found this more aggressive form of communicating had gained him a higher status than he had previously held in the community. Because Chagnon learned how to communicate correctly among the other Yanomamo, he slowly became more of a member in the community. Although Chagnon tried to communicate his anger, he did not communicate in the style of the culture, and hence, he was not taken seriously. Only after Chagnon complied with his host culture was he able to be seen as another human being, a large step made within his study of the Yanomamo.
I became an outsider to a specific "tribe" of America: the punk-rock music scene. In order to integrate into this culture, I had to build trust through the cultural norms of this scene. When I was in ninth grade, I joined a band with my boyfriend, Kyle, and his best friend, Tony. I had never been part of a musical group before that had played it's own shows in front of people who yelled, screamed, and danced while jumping and yelling for the show. During my first performance with the band, I had trouble knowing how to address the audience. Oftentimes at these punk shows, the local teenagers would create circle pits, where the purpose was to run and push into as many other people who were also participating on the dance floor. The teenagers seemed to gain so much energy and excitement from ramming into other people that the circle pits often became the focus of the crowd, rather than the musical performance. I felt that when people listened to a musical group, they should be quiet and patiently wait for the musician to perform the next song. I was used to presenting myself with almost complete silence from the audience. This was not the custom in punk-rock shows, however. The more that the audience was having a good time, the more noise they would make. When I spoke to introduce the next song, I was not to be heard over the yelling and laughing high school teenagers. The volume of the punk rockers reverberated inside the tiny garage we all squeezed into. Feeling adequately unnoticed by the crowd. I decided that I had had enough of being ignored. I decided to take a more aggressive stance at addressing the crowd. Much like Chagnon, I had to assert myself with a degree of aggressiveness that would succeeded the people surrounding me in order to be respected, or even understood. I suddenly yelled into my microphone, "Shut the f*** up!" The circle pit stopped moving and everyone looked towards Kyle, Tony, and I. I started to introduce the song and we started playing our music. The audience grew loud again, signaling that the punk rockers were enjoying our performance. I had learned how to communicate in a way which the given culture understood best, and respectively gained a positive response from my punk-rock community.
If an anthropologist desires to understand a group of people, he or she must empathize with and indulge in the culture in which those people live. Although there is discomfort about personal boundaries which an anthropologist must cross when coming from hjis or her own culture, the reason of delving into the norms of the host culture is to reach some level of understanding. By adhering to the communication of our host cultures, both Chagnon and I were able to communicate efficiently and hence, gain trust and bond with our respective communities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
