For Thursday, November 29th, please read the following:
- How Multiculturalism is Betraying Women by Johann Hari.
- The Failures of Multiculturalism by Aidan Maconachy
Consider some of the following sets of questions, and answer one set of questions fully:
- At the beginning of Hari’s article, she asks: “Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism?” Why does Hari ask the question the way she does? What does the question alone suggest? What is Hari’s main argument, and what, if any, relevance to you think this has to “American” culture? What problems do you see with Hari’s argument?
- What do both Hari and Maconachy suggest is the primary flaw with multiculturalism? Discuss each author’s criticism of multiculturalism, as well as which points you agree and/or disagree with, and why.
- What does Maconachy suggest might be the solution to what he perceives is the problem with multiculturalism? Would his solution work in the United States? Why or why not? What elements of Maconachy’s article do you agree with, and which do you disagree with, and why?
Introduction to Cultural Studies 
November 18, 2007 at 3:58 am
I have to start out saying that the readings were depressing. I always used to think that multiculturalism was something to only be looked at in a positive perspective. Both readings opened my eyes.
Multiculturalism was created to celebrate diversity. It seems that in the majority of instances it is mis used. Like we discussed in class, it is not the word itself, but the application of the concept that raises concerns.
Hari’s article blew me away. She was blunt and right to the point. Her question right away got me thinking. At first I was judgemental about her piece, I was thinking that there is no way that it could be so one sided. Reading the article showed that it can be. The story about the judge horrified me. It makes sense though, it’s the application of multiculturalism. By using the word multiculturalism they are able to cover up what used to be just plain racism.
It’s a shame that something that was supposed to celebrate is oppressing a group of people yet again. I believe that Hari’s argument relates to the U.S because America is a racist nation. We ourselves hide behind the word multiculturalism. It may not appear in our court system, but it is everywhere else. There is discrimination towards culture when it comes to law enforcement, schools, relationships, the media etc. Call me paranoid but this wrongful application of multiculturalism has to do with Hegemony if you ask me (totally didn’t mean to rhyme). Multiculturalism could have started as a tactic to get us all together, to boost the economy and what not. But someone took it as a threat and was able to twist it’s meaning. Things have stayed the same in America only to be joined by the yearly multicultural festivals.
Hari stated her problem in the article. She stated that most of the studies that she wrote about were Muslim’s an outside factor that can’t be measured by the usual control could be the fear and discrimination just for the Muslim population. Other then that I loved Hari’s article, it was insightful.
Just to touch on the other article, I felt like it was proactive. In the conclusion there was an idea to improve things unlike Hari’s article in which she just stated a problem. Maconochy’s article was impressive because of all the facts that were included.
Overall both readings were outstanding and eye opening. I’ll probably blog later as well after everyone else has.
November 22, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Even before these readings I have always been intrigued by how in “our melting pot nation” the US we have always been very un-excepting of almost everything out side of the Norm without ever really establishing what the norm is, kinda like kristen scott and postmodern…like in the cartoon on the home page. anyways;“These reactions are entirely predictable. However the problem with this backlash and the rules and regs being introduced is that it doesn’t address the root of the problem. These are cosmetic measures at best. At worse they may even deepen cross-cultural hostility,” from the article failures of multiculturalism holds very true in the cases presented in both articles. In the case of Nishal the judge looked to their beliefs as Muslims instead of at the core problem, now I don’t know much about German law but if in the court of law it is ok to justify violence with religious scripture than well the judge did take the route supported by the law. Maybe not the route that would have been taken in the US but it is what happened. It is very easy to look on the surface and see the “problem” when in reality the problem lies with a much deeper ideology in the case of Islam’s discrimination towards women, it is not so much the husband’s fault for mistreating his wife because he has been brainwashed by the highly patriarchal society, supported by the Koran. Likewise I think that the women are tolerant of this because they have grown up and only seen a culture like this their whole lives. I’m sure if you had grown up “hearing this is the way it has always been” or “this is the only way for society to work” or as I would imagine “this is the way Allah want’s it.” therefor it is not only excepted but believed, when Muslim women come to a place such as the US or Europe where freedom of religion is encouraged they probably feel like they are right and we are just heathens living outside the will of their god. I think that every religion no matter how liberal or oppressive when practiced on personal level and not enforced on others is ok, if women feel like they have found truth in Islam than who am I to say no, we all have spiritual needs don’t we? I honestly think that Hari believes that you can either be for women’s rights against it, she also has a fairly unprofessional writing style that makes her seem just bitter and emotional about what she has to say. I however do not think the two, multicultualism and women’s rights are not mutually exclusive. I think we in the case of the US because that’s what I know best we can respect beliefs of people but we do have laws established against domestic violence like in the case of Nishal. I do agree with Hope multiculteralism has become an ugly excuse to build up walls and to create excuses to hate than to create community I do believe we can go back to the way it was, I feel that for myself I thrive on experiencing new cultures and languages and so fourth but I can only talk about me and my views but I think that heir are still many people who long to celebrate diversity and the open exchange of ideas and practices that a multicultural society was meant for. On a completely different note as someone who is really interested in European culture and history I would love to see some more information about the immigration situation in Europe because the one article was un cited. If anyone has any links.
November 28, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Hari’s article was very interesting and I was very shocked at what I was reading. I believe in women’s rights and this article provoked me. “Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism?” –I think this question was asked that way because despite many movements in women rights there are still many countries (especially third-world I believe) in which religion, traditions and social norms interfere with this (like in all the cases presented in the article.) I have asked this question to myself many times because (as blunt as it may sound) sometimes I feel women are being violated but it is what they expected in their culture-so they saw that coming. I believe this is why the US is one of the most hated countries by foreigners because we tend to bend the rules in a lot of cases especially religion. Women should be given the liberty to defend themselves in any country, not to be subject to any discrimination because of her sex. I believe there is a way to follow your religion without problems but in cases like these I don’t support the fact that it is right in your culture to abuse a woman.
The class before Thursday of Thanksgiving was very mind changing. I was able to see the horrors of multiculturalism-I never realized it but I was sucked into all the stereotypes, gosh I should have saw that coming. Going back to the article “In Germany today, Muslim women have been reduced to third-class citizens stripped of core legal protections – because of the doctrine of multiculturalism, which says a society should be divided into separate cultures with different norms according to ethnic origin.” This annoyed me. If multiculturalism didn’t exist would there really have been such a problem with the banning of religious shawls and head scarves in France?
The problem is that many of the third world countries have had no women’s right movements…so if they do try to speak up it is out of fear. How would they know that beating them is wrong?
November 29, 2007 at 7:52 am
At the beginning of Hari’s article, she asks: “Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism?” I believe she asks this to get peoples attention and to get them thinking because i can’t think of too many sensible people who would not believe in one or the other. most people i know believe in both. I know, as a feminist and a womens rights activist that it is my duty to fight for equal rights for all… not JUST women… not JUST women of a certain race and definately not just women and specific culture… i think that this judge was an idiot. i believe violence is violence and if this women or even any person, not just women, felt her life was at risk, i believe the judge should have done the logical thing. I remember in my history of women class, we had been learning about the womens right movement and the white men were going to give male slaves the right to vote before women and sojourner truth said that now not only were the black women slaves to the white men but also to their husbands and their fathers. why couldnt everyone just be seen as equals? i truly feel like in some ways it is the same still. A lot of businesses will hire any man no matter what his culture but when a woman applies? well… you know she’s going to want to have lots and lots of babies and have to go on leave all the time. how could people not see this as discrimination?
November 29, 2007 at 2:03 pm
I thought the articles we read this week were both very intersting but sad. I think that the question Hari asks at the beginning of her article is a good one. I think its sad that the German government has as Hari said “classified Muslim women as third class citizens.” For a women who was being beaten by her psychotic husband to be denied a divorce because the Koran said that men could beat there wives is completely insane. That womans life was in danger and she was told that her religion said it was okay for her husband to do that to her. That whole part of the article was so sad. If she was in America she would have been granted that divorce. It may say in the Koran that her husband could do that but her life was in danger. It really is amazing how different the laws are across the western world.
November 29, 2007 at 2:21 pm
2) I think that a lot of the problems that begin with multiculturalism is the whole idea of being politically correct. This results with stereotyping, elitism and what the Maconochy article calls “covert racism”. People want to encourage immigrants to blend in with thier new environments, insteadof having them be an individual in their own ethnic community. The ”blood and soil” routine is also a huge problem. It gives people a sense of supremacy over those who they “conquer”. Saying that they are right in their actions and that WE have the answers and right path to life. All of this, while Europe and other countries have promoted to llive in harmony, they are creating a distance and alienation between those who they consider to be different. I definetely agree that some people have used the word ”multiculturalim” in disguise as ”racism”. What could have been a love of diversity instead becomes misused.
November 29, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Hari questions “Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism?” The question suggests that one of the two ideas is misrepresented. One of the two ideas has negative consequences. Many people would see multiculturalism as a positive highlighting of unique differences that goes against a stifling of culture that promotes conformity. Yet, as we discussed in class, highlighting differences too often divides in extremely negative ways. And as Andrew argued, the idea of political correctness in multiculturalism has the same negative effect. The promotion of multiculturalism perpetuates stereotypes and holds a culture back. As Hari explains, multiculturalism “assumes that immigrants have one homogenous culture which they should all follow – and it allows the most reactionary and revolting men in their midst to define what that culture is.” The woman wishing to get a divorce did not hold the belief that it was acceptable for her to be beaten by her husband because scripture from the Koran, taken out of context, said that women could be mistreated. She went to court because she knew his behavior was unacceptable. She expected the judge to make a reasonable decision rather than uphold racism and misogyny. In America we mask racism and gender resentment as celebration. We attend festivals that present the most extreme stereotypes of a culture. We watch videos that portray women as mindless objects to be admired only on a physical level. Hari explains and supports her argument well. Her only improvement might be to include more than one cultural incidence where multiculturalism impacts women, or even to go beyond just women. But she covered her subject well.
November 29, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Well I too found both the articles very depressing and somewhat disturbing. I believe that multiculturalism can be great thing but in these cases it has spoken against women’s rights. I think the way Hari worded the question ‘do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism?’ does make sense to the article and the specific cases she is addressing. Also because she worded it this way it does make us question multiculturalism and how it works and if it even works to our benefits, and isn’t that what she is trying to achieve? So therefore, it was a great opening sentence that caught many peoples attention. I found it very disturbing that the judge did not grant the women a divorce because she did not want to interfere with their religion. I can’t somewhat understand where the judge is coming from but still this was a line between life and death.
I agree with Hope when she says ‘I believe that Hari’s argument relates to the U.S because America is a racist nation. We ourselves hide behind the word multiculturalism. It may not appear in our court system, but it is everywhere else. There is discrimination towards culture when it comes to law enforcement, schools, relationships, the media etc.’ it is very sad to say but it is somewhat true. We should stop hiding behind the word multiculturalism and face the problems. America does tend to sweep problems under the rug and carry on living life as if nothing were wrong but slowly and surly the problems will rise back up and be even worse.
The only problem that I can think of in this article is that she is mingling with religion and religion still to this day has such great power. I too get upset when people say ‘well it is their culture’ but because Muslim is such a different mentality we can’t really understand.
November 29, 2007 at 5:22 pm
When it comes to diversity and multiculturalism I have many issues with the way things are handeled in todays society. We live in a world where its becoming more and more open about everything from gay marrage to accepting other cultures and religions and accepting them as people. Although this to me is a great thing to have at the same time we are undermining what we are saying about accepting other people that are different by the way we act and the way we feel about others just because they look, act, or are percieved to us as “different” In the piece written by Maconachy he gave an example of France and how they are tigtening their immigration laws to crack down on immigrant crime as well as outlawing some forms of dress from schools like the niqab. In a society thats basis is accepting other cultures and being exemplified as diverse that is not the sort of action that is seen as acceptable from the mind set of a culture. We are just so contradicting as a culture to say that we accept one thing but to say and to act are two totally opposite things, it seems like society today its almost manditory to say that we accept everyone no matter the way they look or act or in what they believe but to go completley against that and to not live up to what we say we accept is almost a given as well. Its become too easy to say one thing but when it comes to actions we do something completley opposite and i think that is the first problem that must be solved in order to have a society that is trueley accepting to all types of people.
November 29, 2007 at 6:07 pm
I think she ask the question almost to make the statement that in most cases multiculturalism opens the eyes of spectators to a world of traditions that are different from there own. So it’s safe to say that this is a good thing, but it also brings about the conflict of morals. Many believe that there morals are THE MORALS to follow. And when something like multiculturalism is introduced and examined, it comes off as almost an insult to many beliefs of how certain issues should, just simply, be. So the question in my eyes is really asking are you gonna be open to a world of many cultures and traditions, or are you going to do what is the code of the majority. (US Citizens) Which in most cases is (quote, unquote) right.
November 29, 2007 at 6:27 pm
i think, along with others, that i had a very different idea of what multiculturalism was before i read these two articles. i always assumed that multiculturalism promotes the views of people coming from different geographical areas, people with different backgrounds, people with different religions and philosophies and traditions. i, personally, have always viewed this as a positive thing. imagine a society in which multicultural aspects were integrated into everyday life?
however, after reading these articles, i see that there is a major flaw in this whole idea of multiculturalism: how can you convert entire countries into a multicultural society without losing the identity of the country itself? adian maconachy gives a really good example when he spoke about the flag of St George in the UK. why should the UK have to change someone that is a part of their culture in order to support multiculturalism in their nation? shouldn’t the idea be that those with different cultural backgrounds live harmoniously outside of their culture and alongside those of other cultures? i don’t think that people should be offended in instances like this, because the flag is a part of the history of the country.
in relation to johann hari’s article, there most definitely seems to be a problem with multiculturalism in terms of politics. i don’t think that any court ruling should be based on culture or religious beliefs or documents. court systems should rule based on basic human rights. i read up a little further on the moroccan-imagrant-in-germany case and found out that the husband and the wife he had beat, although they came from a moroccan background, had been living in germany for EIGHT YEARS prior to the marriage. just because it was in her heritage that she was a muslim inherantly made it right for the husband to beat her?! that is simply rediculous. situations like this need to be dealt with free of any religious ties.
November 29, 2007 at 6:29 pm
I’m all over the place on this one, sorry.
Hari’s question implies that multiculturalism and the rights of women cannot co-exist, and in her argument they can’t. While this may be true in the German courts pertaining to Muslims, I don’t necessarily think it applies across the board, but that is a bigger issue for another time. My main problem with Hari’s article was her statement, “that might be Mustafa’s culture – but it isn’t Nishal’s. It isn’t the culture of the women who scream and weep as they are beaten.” The fact of the matter is, it is her culture. It doesn’t make it “right,” it doesn’t make it any less terrible, but it is Nishal’s culture. And perhaps the government shouldn’t interfere, obeying the laws of multiculturalism. But when a woman deriving from one of these cultures comes to the courts looking for safety in the form of a divorce from her abusive husband, they should listen. Germany’s deaf ear on the matter does indeed turn women into third class citizens. If a woman is satisfied in her marriage and with her husband who “obeys” his religion’s “laws,” and she doesn’t want out; fine. That’s her choice and her freedom. But when she calls out for help and goes to the law seeking sanctuary, it is a crime to turn her away. A crime.
I’m not sure what Hari wants. She calls for the empowerment of Muslim women so that they may interpret the Koran in “less literalist and vicious ways, or to leave their religion altogether[.]” To me, this sounds an awful lot like what Bush is doing in Iraq: reaching in the great American hand to give the little people across the ocean a chance at REAL culture! While Hari and I see eye to eye about how terrible these women’s situations are, it is not up to Americans to step in and change everyone’s world. While I agree that Muslim women DO need to be empowered, we cannot do it for them.
The relevance I see in American culture is a little different, but it’s similar. Recently in New York a judge refused to uphold charges of sexual assault filed by a prostitute who was raped by a man and his friends. Rather than calling it rape, the judge called it “theft of services;” “she consented and didn’t get paid,” so it’s robbery. The judge later said that prostitutes should expect such things, similar to what the German judges were saying about the women in Muslim marriages who were being beaten: “expect it.”
But aside from American culture in terms of women’s rights is American culture in terms of multiculturalism. Hari describes the assumption “that immigrants have one homogenous culture which they should all follow” and the problem with this is “it allows the most reactionary and revolting men in their midst to define what that culture is.” This is a very real problem in Britain, in Germany, in America, and anywhere else that is sacrificing human rights for the sake of a nice mask of tolerance. But who is this leaving out? A lot of people, says Hari, women and homosexuals included. She very accurately describes those who are “left out” as 55% of the population. So, wait…multiculturalism is actually hurting the majority….can someone please remind me why multiculturalism is a good idea?
November 29, 2007 at 6:30 pm
i think this country is very diverse and very accepting of other people’s backgrounds, but when it comes to granting citizenship to those people the government isn’t so nice. we all pro-choice and free speech and stuff but do we really have that? their are so many people in this country that use and abuse what this country offers and then their are those that aren’t treated with the respect that this country is suppose to offer. when reading hari’s article i was completely in shock at what was going on in these countries, how is that someone could get away with killing their wife or abusing them in anyway and pay such a small fine for it or just be given probation. it was very mind bogling i knew that these countries didn’t have the same law as we do but for these men to pay so little for it and the women to have to suffer like that was like wow. i believe in the rights of women bacause know women should have to suffer like that and have it not go unnoticed as it usally does, all women should be granted the same thing all be equal not put down for their status in society. the question alone suggest whether you’re for sweeping everything under the rug and not addressing the problem straight forward or getting out and fighting for what is right. we as a socitey don’t handle the problems such as racism, and all that we use muticulturalism to get around the problem and we don’t actually face it.
November 29, 2007 at 6:31 pm
The question that Johann Hari asks at the beginning of the article is mind grabing. My focus defenetly was attracted to the article. The reason i believe that she asks the question is because it seems that the argument she is writting about revolves around the rights of women effected by multiculturism. If the question was to stand alone without context one might be able to understand it differently. A person might come to the conclusion that multiculturism effects the rights of females, but wouldn’t have information to back it up. It would be more of a pondering question leaving us to assume without sources of expierences. The relevence that the arguement has to american culture is that people in america are always attacking each other racially. For example today at work a coworker thought he would offend me by calling me pakistanian when truely i don’t even care that i’m some what mexican. I believe there is one race which is superior to all. That is the human race. Their was a time when i actually wrote that done in one of the boxes us humans have to fill out prior to testing.
November 29, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Though Hari comes on a bit too strong at times, I think both hers and the other article’s key points are accurate ones. As societies become more and more integrated there is a tendency to want to point out the differences as much as possible.“It assumes that immigrants have one homogenous culture which they should all follow – and it allows the most reactionary and revolting men in their midst to define what that culture is” (How Multiculturalism is Betraying Women). The point is people from any ethnic backround do not always follow the exact same rituals as their dominant culture, especially not among Americans. And nowadays there is an archaetypal representation for every race and culture so it’s almost impossible not to make objective judgements without being criticized for discriminating in some way.“As the Iranian author Azar Nafisi puts it: ‘I very much resent it when people – maybe with good intentions or from a progressive point of view – keep telling me, ‘It’s their culture’ … It’s like saying the culture of Massachusetts is burning witches”’ (How Multiculturalism is Betraying Women). We have to find come ground for laws that apply to everyone regardless of the circumstances. The wife-beating one seems like it should be easier to agree on but there are plenty of better hidden injustices seeded from the backlashes of multiculturalism.
December 1, 2007 at 3:10 am
My immediate reaction is, I believe this is ridiculous. I definitely believe in womens rights and multiculturalism, but the fact that I have to….the fact that both of these ideas have to exsist is very sad. If women were excepted and respected to begin with, they would have never had to fight for any rights. If racism didn’t exsist, we wouldn’t have to LEARN how to except other people and their lifestyle with multiculturalism. I understand no one living now was around during the “beginning of time” so we really have no idea what is true. So with that in mind, religion and culture gives us guidance and hope instead of living for nothing. We have to respect the Karan as well as other religions need to respect the Bible, because no one’s ideas or beliefs are king to the others, in my opinion. We’re just taught to believe so. But when it gets to the point where some one’s life is in danger or they are banned from their home or town because they want to challenge some of the norms expected in their holy book, then the holy book should be reinterpreted. Even if the Karan says the man can “discipline” his wife, if he accidently takes her life, thats murder and should not be taken lightly. The fact that the act of giving freedom to a women is a problem that can result in death, truely saddens me.
December 4, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Maconachy suggests that Europe needs an “inclusive European identity.” I do not believe this is a possible solution for the problems caused by multiculturalism in America. National unity is difficult for any country to achieve and even moreso for a country like the united states in which nobody really “belongs.” Embracing everyone’s differences is easier said than done. What we really need to work on is tolerance, respect and even appreciation for our neighbors. I never liked the whole melting pot idea if it means that everyone loses their identity. Multiculturalism is the flip side which has caused equally bad results, like segregation in Europe (and Chicago). It is a problem too big for anyone to address, and yet it lies in the hands of politicians. No wonder we’re so screwed.
December 5, 2007 at 1:04 pm
i belieive in womens rights, ofcourse there is a difference when we are talking about the different culture`s. american cultures if a woman had an affair she wuold not be doused with gasoline and burned in public( at least i hope not),there are cultures in the middle east that does this tragic act and other aubusive atrocities to women. THESE ACTS HAVE BEEN APART OF THE LEAGAL SYSTEM IN THESE COUNTRIES AND TAUGHT THROUGH THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS FOR YEARS.THE JUDGE`S descision should have
been reversrd without confrontation.it`s shameful that we`re finally paying attention to these brutal acts of murder and abuse to women in other countries( after911).the problem of multiculturalism going bad in europe or u.s. is having a male dominant society who are fearful of others,and refuse to teach the diversity of men ,women,andgays.