Check out the latest digital print edition of Inquire. Physical editions on news stand in the next few days!
http://issuu.com/inquirepublication/docs/feb2013__1_
Monday 25 February 2013
Tuesday 29 January 2013
Men ......... Feminism
Matt Bradley
Queen's University
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1990. Print.
Queen's University
This article begins with a title and, in a fashion all too indicative of my misguided English, this title is grammatically imprecise—Men____ Feminism. However, I do not believe this imprecision can be corrected by any simple appeal to editorial prowess for such correction must adeptly contemplate and define the relationship between men and feminism—in feminism, beside feminism, with feminism, despite feminism. Few scholars have risen to this challenge and, as a collective, literature concerning the viability of the male feminist has done little to ease the surmounting confusion that plagues men at a practical level— what role, if any, do men have in the feminist movement?
It is impossible to avoid the political implications of this question, especially when it is asked by men. Tom Digby argues that the pervasiveness of patriarchy will continue to implicate the male feminist to be seen and as an outsider by some women and a traitor by some men (3). A man exploring his role in feminism is witnessed as an intrusion into femininity and a betrayal of masculinity. Such understandings reaffirm the assertion that manhood is the antithesis of feminism. My concern in this article is not to protect male interest from feminism nor is it to promote conceptual space for the male voice in feminist thought. Rather, I wish to challenge the social configurations of power which systematically repress important questions −─to explore why the notion of the male feminist leaves so many of us, men and women, ambivalent and uncomfortable. Why is it controversial to explore the relationship between men and feminism and what can we learn from this reticence?
“Men” and “Women” are not pre-social beings that can be justly categorized by an appeal to some foundational essence of manhood or womanhood. The label “man” or “woman” does not signify a stable, unitary group that can exist across racial, class-based, religious or even gendered modalities (Butler 7). What constitutes a “man” in a suburban, Christian community in Southwestern Ontario will necessarily be different from what “man” denotes on the Tibetan plateau. Judith Butler argues that even the body does not present a base for which to presume a fixed, collective identity (173). Women can be born “biologically” male but become actualized as feminine; so too can men be born “biologically” female and come to identify themselves as male. These instances expose the illusive and coercive nature of gender categories. There is no essence that pre-determines our current heteronormative binaries: boys to play with hot wheels and girls with dolls, men to be attracted to women and women to men, men to be dominant and females to be subordinate, females to be feminist and males to be patriarchal. In light of this absence, it is significant to consider how we are coerced to maintain “gender appropriate” behaviour.
The denotation of gender appropriate action has not remained constant across time and space. Each epoch redefines what constitutes the proper comportment of the body, the proper social activities for men and women and the proper sexual relationship between people. These norms become internalized and reproduced by subjects not because they reflect any objective truth, but because the punitive consequences for resisting the status quo are high and often dangerous. The legal penalty for sodomy in early modern England reinforced the “naturalness” of heteronormativity by punitively punishing those who engaged in outlawed sexual acts. Modern day discrimination against transsexuals reasserts male and female categories by ostracizing those who challenge gender distinctions. Discourses regulate our behaviour not by predetermining which acts we should undertake but by demonizing those acts which stray from the “appropriate.” We are able to see power by acknowledging the struggle of those that resist prevailing social norms: women that pursue positions of authority and men that embrace feminism are prevalent examples. Our fervency to attack and quell discussions of men and feminism is a window into the inner-workings of power.
Power transcends individual agency and motivates us to repress outlying forms of speech and action. The ambivalence and discomfort we feel when exposed to dialogue between men and feminism is illustrative of how power functions to shape social relations: by repressing those acts that challenge prevailing gender categories. We cannot escape the influence of power. It is present in our every act, every word and every breath. However, the pervasiveness of power in our daily lives does not inevitably reproduce the existing social framework. We each retain the agency to change our relationship to power by challenging the forces that encourage certain actions and repudiate others. This ability requires us to acknowledge our own biases and prevailing assumptions and to resist their limiting grasp.
The a priori disapproval of the concept of a male feminist provides insight into the inner-workings of power. Recognizing this reticence allows us to understand how patriarchy reproduces subjects as dominant or subordinate: by demonizing those acts which contradict one’s socially inscribed gender. We need to acknowledge the sociopolitical implications of discussing the relationship between men and feminism and resist them. This realization does not necessitate space for men in feminist thought, but it does require us to challenge the forces which disapprove of the role feminism plays in male thought.
Feminism is strongest when equality and gender justice are sought through the joint efforts of both men and women operating on an equal playing field. Under a patriarchal system the male social location is more privileged regardless of individual intention. However, the power relations that reproduce patriarchy are not deterministic; they are malleable. Individuals can change their relationship to power by resisting prevailing social norms and embracing those who do the same. This realization does not necessitate space for a male voice in feminism. Rather, such recognition demands that the relationship between men and feminism be taken seriously, not as a regression, but as a chance for communal growth towards gender equity. There may or may not be conceptual space for men in feminism, but there is certainly space for feminism in men.
“Men who want to be feminists do not need to be given a space in feminism. They need to take the space they have in society & make it feminist.”
—Kelley Temple, National Union of Students UK Women’s Officer
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1990. Print.
Digby, Tom. "Introduction." Men Doing Feminism. New York: Routledge, 1998. 1-14. Print.
Where Beauty Is a Crime
Ronald Leung
McMaster University
What’s in a face? A focal point of emotion and communication, the human face connects us together by relaying expressions and social cues. Its arrangement and size determines, for the most part, society’s judgement of our beauty. It greets each one of us in the mirror. It is formative in building our self-worth. A delicate layer of cells and skin can play such a big part in life; it’s certainly not surprising however, that it is often the target for criminal acts of revenge, passion, and punishment.
A common occurrence in the Middle East and parts of Asia, the deep-rooted patriarchal system has prompted countless cases of disfigurement in women. The weapon of choice hydrochloric, sulfuric, or nitric acid. Used as cleaners or precursors to clothing dyes, these deadly substances can be bought for less than a dollar. That’s how much a face – and a life – is worth in those parts of the world: less than a dollar.
In a small village 300 kilometers from Dhaka, the capital city of Bangladesh, 14-year-old Shammema Akter was sleeping in her parent’s house. The window was open to air the muggy heat that was trapped inside the home after a full day of blaring sun. Akter awoke to a sudden splash of liquid. Immediately feeling pain beyond comprehension as her face bubbled, the acid liquefing her skin. Her face dripped off, her right ear disintegrated, and she remembers screaming until she fainted. That was seventeen years ago. After thirteen surgeries, Akter still suffers from blindness in her right eye, and deafness in the right ear. Her nose had to be reconstructed. The entire right side of her face remains scarred. Atker was attacked by her husband of an arranged marriage, whom she ran away from after multiple rapes. In 2006, she smiled at hearing the 43-year sentence. “I don’t look at mirrors,” Atker says— she doesn’t want the nightmares to return.
Its harsh sentences, such as the one received by Atker’s husband, that have slowly reversed the climb of acid attacks in Bangladesh. Previously a hotspot for such crimes, with close to 500 attacks reported in 2002 alone, the number has dramatically dropped to 71 in 2012. The Acid Survivors’ Foundation is a not-for-profit organization that has worked tirelessly in Bangladesh. They have not only provided support for victims, but also worked to invoke change in the country. Tougher legislation has sped up trials and tightened control on dangerous acids, discouraging attackers from committing more attacks. Media awareness has fueled the need for change. Major newspapers in Dhaka fearlessly publishing first-witness accounts of acid attacks, allowing the victims to talk about their disfigurements.
Other countries such as India still struggle to control acid attacks. A deep mentality of “deserved” retribution is still held by many. Disfigurement carries the label of being unfaithful, overly promiscuous, or disrespectful to the male figures in their lives. The blame and ostracization wrongly expressed towards the victim instead of the attacker. This mindset leads to a lack of police prioritization–in other words, if you’re the victim of an acid attack, tough luck.
It isn’t so much a misogynistic viewpoint than a deep-rooted belief in the ancient patriarchal system that allows violence against women to continue. The rape and murder of a 23-year-old last month in New Delhi made headlines across the globe, and shocked the world by revealing just how commonplace this type of violence is in certain parts of Asia. Just as this horrible crime stirred activists to protest for women’s rights, government officials and prominent religious figures also voiced their outdated, insulting, and ignorant thoughts. Member of Parliament Ramesh Bais told reports “the rape of grown-up girls and women might be understandable, but if someone does this to an infant, it is a heinous crime and the offenders should be hanged.” A self-proclaimed “godman”, Asaram Bapu also shared this view: “She [the 23-year old rape victim] should have taken God’s name and held the hand of one of the men and said ‘I consider you as my brother’.”thus purporting that if she had begged and referenced a religious connection to the rapists she would have been sparred. A social administrator, Jitendar Chattar, blames rape on instant noodles: “To my understanding, consumption of fast food contributes to such incidents. Chowmein leads to hormonal imbalance evoking an urge to indulge in such acts.” The oppression of women has been practiced for so long that even prominent politicians and leaders consider every option but the most obvious; these outdated, obtuse, and uneducated views must be dismissed before true equality can be achieved.
Legislation and government action can only go so far—although they can achieve great results, with Bangladesh’s stance on acid attacks as a perfect example. Whether or not India and other countries still mired in misogyny will follow this path is still up in the air, but with enough pressure, perhaps more legal protection for women can be achieved. What is ultimately necessary, however, is a complete equalization of the entire patriarchal system which, unfortunately, may take generations to achieve. Hopefully one day the tipping point will be reached and personal safety will not simply be a privilege, but a birthright.
"Acid Survivors Foundation (ASF)." Acid Survivors Foundation (ASF). N.p., n.d. Web.
21 Jan. 2013. <http://www.acidsurvivors.org/about.html>.
Aulakh, Raveena. "India’s male public figures are still making excuses for rape - thestar.com." News, Toronto, GTA, Sports, Business, Entertainment, Canada, World, Breaking - thestar.com. N.p., 11 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. <http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1313998--india-s-male-public-figur es-are-still-making-excuses-for-rape>.
Aulakh, Raveena. "The scars of hate: How Bangladesh has sharply cut acid attacks - thestar.com." News, Toronto, GTA, Sports, Business, Entertainment, Canada, World, Breaking - thestar.com. N.p., 12 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. <http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1313848--the-scars-of-hate-how-ba ngladesh-has-sharply-cut-acid-attacks>.
"Home | Acid Survivors Trust International." Home | Acid Survivors Trust International. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. <http://www.acidviolence.org/index.php>.
Jamkhandikar, Shilpa. "Short skirts, bad stars and chow mein: why Indiaâ€TMs women get raped | India Insight." Analysis & Opinion | Reuters. N.p., 8 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. <http://blogs.reuters.com/india/2013/01/09/short-skirts-bad-stars-and-chow-mein -why-indias-women-get-raped/>.
How Religion and Society Contribute to Gender Inequality
Schwab Bakombo
University of Toronto
World religions are not immune to issues concerning gender equality. My goal is to explore how religion and society contribute to gender inequality. I will make use of some compelling arguments presented by scholars such as Malory Nye, Judith Butler, Tomoko Masuzawa, and others as they relate to the social construction of gender roles. Gender, as it pertains to identity, is largely based on social contexts. Religion and culture are often intertwined to the point where they can be comprehended interchangeably. Nye’s theory regarding the association of religion and culture offers a guide to understanding gender roles in religion and offers a perspective from which we can understand how religions were probably derived from cultures. In addition, it is widely accepted that gender roles are social constructs that are well-defined in almost all cultures.
The struggle for gender equality in religion is still an issue despite the progress that has been made in bridging the divide. It may be helpful to begin with careful observation of the relationship between religion and culture. The history of religion may corroborate the idea that religion informs culture and vice versa. It may also convince inidivduals that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are social constructs deeply rooted in history. Perhaps every one of them, at the time of their conception, was constructed with specific social interests. Tomoko Masuzawa, a US professor and author of Invention of World Religions, focuses her research on the historical development of the 19th and early 20th century search for the origin of religion. In terms of the relationship between religion and culture, she makes a pertinent suggestion that may help to support the fact that religion and culture often inform each other; “religion is not an abstraction. It has vital significance only as it is deeply rooted in the moving process of folk life.”(Masuzawa, 2005, p.39) Careful observation of cultures may suffice in confirming the fact that humans have, since their existence, been trying to shape social customs in order to establish a common good. Marriage, for instance, is at the threshold of complete redefinition in Canada. For centuries, most Canadians held the belief that marriage is a covenant between one man and one woman. The issue of gay marriage is being accepted by more Canadians to represent a civil rights position. It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that within a few decades, the reshaping of our customs will lead many Canadians to view gay marriage as equally acceptable.
Nye’s theory pertaining to the relationship between religion and culture presents some limitations because it may suggest that religion and culture are the same thing. “Most cultures are largely shaped by their dominant religions and vice versa.” (Nye, 2003, p.14) The 19th century German scholar Max Müller believed that scholars of religion should employ sacred texts as their main focal point. Müller (as cited in Nye, 2003, p.157) suggested that in order to understand the role religion plays in gender inequality, it is imperative to study religion from an exegetical perspective while also seeking to understand its cultural origins. Scholars who ignore this suggestion offered by Müller will conduct their research “outside the sacred texts and run the risk of straying in[to] murky waters.” (Nye, 2003, p. 157) The signifier of God is commonly understood to be male. Nye suggests that “the ideology of a male god is what paved the way for the subordination of women in many societies.” (Nye, 2003, 88) Because androcentricism is pervasive in the study of religion, God is literally explained as a male person. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam teach that Adam was created first and Eve afterwards. This belief was interpreted by some cultures to mean that women are inferior to men in principle.
In the Congo, where I was born, the very culture defines the role of women as that of the caretaker of the home. The aforementioned concept is heavily challenged by the biblical “Wife of Noble Character’s” story as it is told in Proverbs 31. The moment the African man becomes a Christian, he does not lose his culture; he simply associates it with his understanding of scripture. From his comprehension of the teachings of his church, men may internalize the religion they have been taught and see it as correct. For instance, this can be clearly seen in the way we understand marriage today. The woman was made as a helper suitable for the man according to Genesis 2: 18. In verse 28 of the same chapter, both man and woman are mandated to be fruitful and multiply. The Koran, in Chapter 15, also supports hierarchy in creation. Since belief is often open to different interpretations, many societies have tried to interpret scripture in light of social constructions in order to set limitations of what is deemed acceptable in gender roles. Procreation, as the basis for matrimony, is often employed by the church in order to advocate heterosexual marriage. The consensus among many Christians, for instance, is that the existence of marriage in our society is justified only as far as it can enforce certain obligations. From a social perspective, these take the form of obligations and responsibilities serviced in procreation.
Gender identity is another complex issue that drives a lot of academic and non-academic discussions. The ideas advanced by Judith Butler are intended to bring about a lasting transformation of gender equality. Most scholars hold the belief that “biological differences between the sexes do not determine gender, gender attributes, or gender relations.” (Hacking, 7) The definition and attribution of gender roles differ from culture to culture. It appears that gender roles have become established and defined in society by men. Gender has historically been a concept devised by men because religion and culture are closely associated. This is confirmed by the fact that even the study of religion is soaked “in the pervasiveness of androcentricism.” (Nye, 2003, p.82) People may perceive gender as a social category but careful observation of the priesthood in Catholicism maintains that “the category of gender is in use among us only to benefit some members of the group.” (Hacking, 1999, p.8)
Butler argues further by proposing that “this construct called sex is as culturally constructed as gender.” (Hacking, 1999, p.8) The potential issue with Butler’s approach is that distinctions between the sexes cannot be completely ignored; it is helpful to maintain biological distinctions between the sexes. However, from a social and religious point of view, we still require progress to achieve equality between the sexes in this androcentric world. In Islam, for instance, marriage laws favour of men:
"By licensing polygamy, concubinage, and easy divorce for men, originally allowed under different circumstances in a different society, Islam lent itself to being interpreted as endorsing and giving religious sanction to a deeply negative and debased conception of women.” (Ouzgane, 1993)
Even so, polygamy seems to have been permitted in limited circumstances only. The man who estimates that his monogamous marriage has become too inconvenient may choose to justify his “fantasies” by employing scripture as a license for adding one more nuptial bedroom. It can be argued, by the use of biblical characters such as King Solomon, that ancient Judeo faith has essentially corroborated such practices. Nevertheless, the subject of gender inequality remains a fundamental issue. Thinkers like Butler voice their concern for women’s rights by way of gender construction and gender roles. The role of women in religion continues to be a struggle by virtue of equality. As we continue to make progress towards gender equality in society and religion, we must reason together and make conscientious decisions. Men and women are individuals whose autonomy and existence demand that they equally reclaim their unalienable rights. The biological difference of the sexes should be conceptually maintained for procreative purposes but society must work together and seek ways to end this debate by realizing that equality is in fact an unalienable right. Until we find common ground in overcoming the chasm that gender construction has maintained for so long, we shall live in a world where true equality will never be realized.
An unbiased and robust study of religion may be necessary for differentiation between religion and culture while coming to terms with the fact that gender gaps need to be closed. I believe that society, including the church, must change its views regarding the differences that promote gender inequalities. I am aware of the fact that my belief is not universal because in some parts of the world, religious establishments may be part of the problem rather than the solution. Any sacred scripture can be interpreted to lead some individuals to believe that gender differences ought to be maintained, but an unbiased analysis may also lead people to see that “in Christ there is no male or female.”(Galatians 4:28) Nye is correct in establishing a strong relationship between religion and culture even though they can be studied independently. Common hope will bring about reform in religious exegesis and cultural reshaping; after all, “change has always been characteristic of living religions.” (Masuzawa, 2005, p.39)
Lahoucine Ouzgane. "Women and Islam." Postmodern Culture 3.3 (1993). Project MUSE. Web. 15 Nov. 2012. <http://muse.jhu.edu/>.
Masuzawa, Tomoko. The Invention of World Religions: or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Nye, Malory. Religion: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2003
Do research advisors favour students who pursue academic careers?
Amanda Ali
University of Toronto
With Bachelor of Science degree in hand, graduate school is the next logical step for many students. Graduate studies provide a unique opportunity to deepen scientific understanding, broaden research skills, and develop personal strengths. Traditionally, a Master’s degree led to a PhD degree and then a postdoctoral fellowship (post-doc) before applying for a faculty position at a research institution. In our evolving research environment, this trajectory has changed, and several post-docs may now be required before that illusive faculty position is secured. This has resulted in a cohort of highly educated PhD graduates seeking careers outside of academia, but not without repercussions; it appears that research advisors (principal investigators) favour students who pursue academic careers.
A survey of PhD students at tier-one institutions in the United States examined the career trends of scientists-in-training in the field of biology (life sciences), physics, and chemistry (Sauermann and Roach 2012). When given a 5-point scale to indicate the degree to which PhD students are encouraged or discouraged to pursue various careers, more than 70% reported they were “encouraged,” or “strongly encouraged,” to become research faculty. Looking specifically at biology and the life sciences, 53% of PhD students rated “faculty research career” as the most attractive path to pursue, but the influence of their advisors’ “strong encouragement” on their opinion was not addressed. An informal poll of graduate students at the University of Toronto mirrors these sentiments, with many trainees observing first-hand the favour – in the form of time, approval, and support – that is bestowed upon those who intend to pursue academic careers.
Academia-bound graduate students may attract their advisors’ attention with their dedicated interest in research (which frequently manifests as increased productivity). Because the success of a principal investigator is reflected by their contribution to science, it is natural for them to favour hard-working pre-scientists who will magnify their scientific contribution by going forth and prospering. When a PhD graduate chooses to pursue a postdoctoral fellowship, it is an outward sign to the field that the advisor has nurtured and developed that student’s passion for science. For the student to go on to their second and third post-doc, and then vanish into an abyss of jobless academics, is a near impossibility in the mind of the beaming advisor.
We teach what we know, principal investigators included. They share with their academia-bound students a common passion for science, and this is a tie that binds. Having made the choice to pursue academia themselves, advisors can share personal experiences and offer insight into the trajectory of that particular career path. Understandably, it is within the advisor’s domain of expertise to discuss strategies for a successful post-doc interview, but outside of their expertise to discuss potential careers in government, industry, or business. With this in mind, it seems sensible for advisors to favour those who are interested in pursuing the academic route to ensure that young scientists go on to become senior scientists.
So what’s the problem?
Very few advisors are willing to admit that these biases exist; perhaps they are subconscious like many other biases. Much like a parent refusing to choose a favourite child, it is taboo for an advisor to openly admit to preferring students who pursue academia; but the students feel it, and they want their advisor’s support. This desire for approval and the weight of an advisor’s “expert” opinion may be enough to push a confused and jaded graduate student down a career path that isn’t right for them. Choosing to pursue a post-doc may only be delaying the inevitable career-path decision, wasting time that could be spent cultivating other skills. Basic economics offers the most compelling argument: the supply of life science PhDs interested in academic positions exceeds the number of available positions (Sauermann and Roach 2012). When advisors push half-interested and less-than-capable graduates into academic careers, they saturate the field and steal opportunities from the truly gifted.
As many disciplines and professional schools offer their trainees guidance and a bridge into the working world, so too should advisors offer graduate students the same support and “encouragement” to pursue careers outside of academia. Our view of graduate studies should not be limited to the pursuit of academia, but should be reconfigured to accommodate the variety of careers at which PhDs can succeed. Research advisors should strive to mitigate preferences and relieve pressures to pursue academia, and instead should help graduate students identify their true talents and find the path that is right for them.
Sauermann, H. and M. Roach (2012). "Science PhD career preferences: levels, changes, and advisor encouragement." PLoS One7(5): e36307.
Medical Marijuana: the Future
Matthew Got
McMaster University
McMaster University
On December 16, 2012, the Canadian government rolled out yet another policy that was aimed at “improving public safety and maintaining patient access.” Similar catch phrases have been used time and time again, and if anything is to be learned, it is that the government is not telling the whole story. A quick read through Health Canada’s press release reveals that the Medical Marijuana Access Program (MMAP) will be no more— their justification is that the “current medical marijuana regulations have left the system open to abuse.”
Currently, the MMAP operates by either granting patients a license to grow marijuana in their homes, or by allowing them to purchase marijuana grown and distributed by the government for medical use. Patients who chose to purchase from Health Canada are charged $5 per gram, a price heavily subsidized by taxpayers. The size of the MMAP has grown from under 500 authorized patients at its inception in 2002, to over 26,000 patients today. With the proposed changes, the government will no longer grant permission to grow marijuana nor produce marijuana themselves. Instead, the market will be open to companies that meet strict security requirements.
Health Canada intends to treat marijuana like they treat other narcotics used for medical purposes. Under the new system, healthcare practitioners would sign a medical document allowing the patient to purchase an appropriate amount of marijuana from the new vendors. With this new system, Health Canada believes there will be greater quality control of the marijuana and that it will be harder to acquire excessive amounts. The changes have garnered applause from both the Association of Fire Chiefs and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police for addressing the unintended impact of the MMAP on public safety, specifically fire hazards and criminal activity.
The inconvenient truth is that this policy is neither primarily about public safety nor maintaining patient access. Most strikingly, this policy screams of health cuts, as the government will no longer be subsidizing patients when they purchase their marijuana. As private entities will be given the rights to marijuana production and distribution, this industry will become increasingly dominated by big pharmaceuticals, driving up the marijuana prices and jeopardizing access for low-income patients.
Following the changes, MMAP patients who are now no longer permitted to grow their own marijuana or purchase at a discounted price are left with few options. Those who cannot afford to purchase at the prices set by industry will be left without treatment, forced to continue growing but now illegally or forced to purchase illicitly. If they choose to fix this problem, they will be forced to increase social payments to these patients, undermining their original motive for ending the MMAP.
If improving public safety were really a main focus of this latest policy, reforming the MMAP would have been an appropriate move. The current program has a major loophole that has been widely acknowledge but has not been corrected—the production licenses issued do not regulate the amount of electricity used by the patients to grow their marijuana. Since marijuana production is proportional to the total wattage used, simply regulating the wattage per license would limit the amount of marijuana produced by each patient. This would prevent abuse of the production licenses while addressing many safety issues.
The government has been presented with a great opportunity to improve the MMAP for patients. Instead, as the program has gotten bigger and with more patients relying on it, they intend to back out and surrender the program to the private sector. Understandably, there are people currently enrolled in the system that abuse it. However, the appropriate action would be to reform the system so that it is harder to manipulate as in addition to making it safer and more accessible for patients.
References
The Denial of Education: Religious Persecution of the Bahá'í Community in Iran
Campus Association for Bahá'í Studies
Queen's University
In an age when the promotion and protection of human rights and security are regarded as measures of societal progress, violations of the basic rights of individuals are met with considerable opposition. State and non-state actors alike have attempted to counteract global human rights violations— yet cases of religious, ethnic and cultural persecution continue to persist. In 1863, the Bahá'í Faith was founded by the Prophet Bahá'u'lláh in Iran. Since the inception of the Bahá'í faith, the various regimes that have governed Iran have systemically persecuted members of the Bahá'í community and pursued attempts to extinguish the faith at large.
Although it is a signatory of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Islamic Republic of Iran is among the most severe perpetrators of human rights violations internationally. Following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the persecution of the Bahá'ís intensified; mass arrests and the execution of hundreds marked the new regime's stance on the Bahá'í Faith in Iran. The government undertook efforts to institutionalize their campaign of religious persecution including the barring of Bahá'í students and faculty from studying or teaching at universities. In 1987, the Iranian Bahá'í community responded to the expulsion of its students and faculty by establishing the Bahá'í Institute for Higher Education (BIHE). BIHE provides those students who had been deprived of education by state officials a chance to continue their undergraduate and graduate studies. The Institute was, and still is semi-clandestine, operating outside of the public sphere.
A 1991 memorandum known as the "Bahá'í Question", signed by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calls for the Bahá'ís to be treated in such a way that "their progress and development are blocked". The denial of education for any individuals who self identify as Bahá'í is a central tenet of this plan. Although discretion has been essential to the survival of BIHE, the Iranian government has carried out a campaign to shut it down. For years, government forces have been launching raids, confiscating equipment and arresting individuals associated with the institute. In 1998, 500 homes, in which BIHE classes were held, were raided; confiscating equipment, books, computers, and arresting thirty-six faculty members. Further raids were carried in 2001 and 2003.
In recent years, as part of the campaign to deny the Bahá'ís access to education, and ultimately eradicate the faith, there has been a revival in the attacks against BIHE. A 2006 letter from Iran's Ministry of Science, Research and Technology instructed Iranian universities to expel any students discovered to be Bahá'ís. There is significant evidence to demonstrate that this directive from the Ministry was heeded by university officials as more than half of Bahá'í students enrolled in autumn 2006 were expelled throughout the course of the following academic year.
In addition to pressure on universities, the raids on BIHE have continued as well, with May 2011 marking the most recent attack by Iranian government forces. Coordinated raids were conducted simultaneously throughout the country on the homes of individuals involved with the Institute. Thirty-nine households were extensively searched with personal belongings confiscated. Nineteen individuals were arrested—all of whom were professors and administrators of BIHE. Seven of these nineteen individuals were sentenced to extended prison terms simply for providing an education to those who had been deprived of that right.
There has been growing concern internationally for the plight of the Bahá'ís in Iran, with both state and non-state actors pressuring the Iranian government to cease its campaign of persecution. Desmond Tutu, Romeo Dallaire, Ban Ki-moon, as well as former Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Lloyd Axworthy are a few of the many notable defenders of human rights who have stepped forward to decry the treatment of Bahá'í community. Universities across the globe have also stepped forward to support BIHE by recognizing the degrees awarded to graduates of the Institute. Queen's University is one such school, and as a result, a number of BIHE graduates have succeeded in completing their PhD at the university. One of Queens’ current students, Saba, completed her Undergraduate and Master's degree through the Bahá'í Institute for Higher Education. She is currently in the process of completing her PhD in Neuroscience here at Queen's, and has agreed to share her story.
INTERVIEW
How did you learn about BIHE?
The Bahá'í community is a small and very organized one. People receive the news both via official ways, meaning announcements through Feasts [Bahá'í community gathering], and word of mouth. By the time I wanted to apply to BIHE though, it was not a new thing anymore, but a norm for Iranian Bahá'í students.
What was your experience like during your time as an undergraduate student at BIHE?
I think the experience has been unique in many ways, both in the difficulties and the blessings. Because we didn’t have the suitable locations or equipment, our classes would be held in the living room of one of the students. We simply couldn’t afford to have classes more than six times a semester, which meant that the classes were only for question/answer rather than teaching. On the other hand we were blessed with an attitude of love and support that usually bonds the members of an oppressed group.
What course material did you cover?
For most of the courses we used the materials used in North American universities to keep our standards comparable to theirs. Some of these resources were actually found in bookstores and other public shops, but many of them were not, and these latter ones were purchased by BIHE staff and were mailed to Iran. We would oftentimes end up sharing the books among ourselves.
Who were the teachers/professors? What were their qualifications?
Until 2005, the instructors were mainly the Bahá'í former professors who had been expelled from the universities after the Revolution. Some of them were physicians whose job wasn’t really teaching in a university, but they had the knowledge in their fields. A few of the instructors were Muslims who wished to help the Institute. In 2005, the Institute started to take a new approach, namely using the opportunity for distant learning through the online education facilities, which paved the way for a huge number of professors around the world to start helping BIHE.
What were the risks involved with being a professor, student, administrator associated with BIHE?
The main risk has always been imprisonment. For many, this has already happened and there are still many professors and administrators in jail. For hosts of the classes, there has also been a risk of having their property confiscated. This has happened a number of times with regards to our “labs” which had to be held in set locations and obviously couldn’t be moved.
Did you feel that the course material you studied was at the standard of most institutions of higher education?
When I was in my undergrad, I used to compare our coursework to that of the students in regular universities of Iran, whenever I would get the chance. The cases were limited so I cannot make a general judgement, but I had the impression that we were doing a more difficult job.
Here, I have never taken a [undergraduate] course, so I cannot really compare.
How have you found the transition from attending BIHE for both your undergraduate degree as well as your Master's degree to Queen's University?
As stated, BIHE didn't even have a campus! Forget about labs, offices, classrooms, etc. I have, however, experienced being on a real campus before coming to Queen’s University, at Lyon, France, where I visited the lab of my Master’s supervisor for a couple of months. I have also been into regular universities of Iran, secretly, attending the classes by asking the professor’s permissions and telling them that I was not a student (I officially wasn’t!) and was just eager to attend, and it would work sometimes.
But this is the first physically existing university that I belong to, that I can get in without needing a friend coming and signing a “Guest’s Entrance permission” form on my behalf—Iran’s universities are very regulated and you are not allowed into campus, which is surrounded by walls, without being associated with the institution—that I can walk through without worrying about being stopped and sent out.
What were some of the unique experiences or opportunities you were exposed to as a student of BIHE?
I guess there were many. One of the primary experiences was experiencing all the devotion and love that came about from sharing the difficulties and successes with my classmates. University life can become harsh at times, and you can easily find your instructor being unreasonably demanding or even unkind. But even given all this, there were moments that you would be impressed by the amount of love and support that they would invest in their work.
My supervisor during my Master’s hosted me at her home for the duration of my stay there, paid for my travel expenses, and helped me with all the process of getting an entry visa for France. All just to give me a chance to experience working in her lab and have my thesis defence with a jury from her department—BIHE didn’t have any other experts in her field, except herself—as well as presenting my poster at a conference held in her city.
One of my professors who lived in Toronto, which is 8 hours behind Tehran, where I was, had to get up at 5:00 a.m. once every week to have classes with us before she went to work. It was a precious moment for me when I came to Canada and could hug her and see her, after having heard only her voice for years. Studying at BIHE has developed a strong sense of appreciation in me for everything that makes life much more beautiful.
How has BIHE changed in recent years?
BIHE started as a small group of people dedicated to providing education for those who were deprived of it. Now, it has grown to an Institute with over a thousand students whose goals for education are not limited to just uplifting their personal life situations. BIHE has recently set a more specific direction for its future, and it is contributing to the socio-economic development of Iran. This has made some huge changes to the dynamics of the institute in several ways.
First, because this new model requires a lot of interaction with the Iranian society at large, it increases the risks that the Institute faces. Second, because the goals have a more social perspective, the attitude of service and sacrifice inside the Institute has intensified, which can sometimes become exhausting. Third, because of the nature of the immediate demands of society, the focus of the Institute might turn into more practical aspects of knowledge, rather than more theoretical approaches.
Is there any other information that you think that readers of this publication should know?
These alterations to the Institute's structure and programs have increased the risks for individuals associated with BIHE. Now more than ever they need the support of organizations and people in order to continue their work in providing education to those whose rights have been removed, and contributing to the advancement of society.
Keep in touch with your university's Campus Association for Bahá'í Studies (CABS) group for updates on campus events to support the Bahá'ís in Iran.
Queen's CABS: Queensbahais@gmail.coms
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)