Fethullah Gülen, the Muslim scholar who inspired the global educational movement called Hizmet, has not only challenged popular perceptions of Islam in the West and certain practices among Muslims, but has also established a space for humanistically inclined individuals, not only followers of Islam but of other religions as well, to put humanitarian values into practice.

Since the 1960s, Gülen’s teachings have mobilized tens of thousands of individuals to put their efforts to make possible “service” to everyone in need regardless of their religion, ethnicity, or nationality, and consequently, a transformation of society into one that is more inclusive.

Not only do the Gülen-inspired non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other organizations work in the field of education for all members of society, they also work for their upliftment by implementing holistic workspaces and living environments to bring out the best in the individuals who are associated with it. This effort has yielded notable exceptions to the practice of confining women folk to homes and household duties, a practice still prevailing in many traditional societies. Since its inception, the teachings of the movement have evolved to veer towards inclusive approaches towards others even though Gülen does not identify any community or social group as a social or political ‘other’. The case of Hizmet is a good example of social movements of religious nature which do not confine themselves to the country of its origin but to reach out to both wealthy and impoverished societies across the globe with humanitarian approach.

Many western scholars have associated the movement with what is called “moderate Islam,” as contrasted with some of the “orthodox” currents that exist in West Asia and South-East Asia. Notably, Gülen’s teachings have focused and placed a heavy emphasis upon education, including in its origins opportunities for girls that belonged to Muslim households in Turkey who were uncomfortable with sending their daughters to different cities to pursue higher education. With the establishment of Hizmet dorms across the country which promised and delivered safety and trust, this became possible. Hizmet also provided scholarships for girls, including those who wished to continue to wear headscarves at university, an act that was until recently illegal in Turkey. Gülen’s advocacy of equal opportunities has resulted in a rise in literacy rates of females in Hizmet’s society of origin, Turkey.

Patriarchy in Muslim societies

Patriarchy has been the dominant feature in many traditional social systems throughout history and across all nations. Along with many other reforms, Islam has established a set of foundational principles to establish a more just society in which women could enjoy equal rights and dignity with men. At the time of the Prophet there were good examples of women who were involved in full participation as businesspersons, scholars, as well as warriors. Such exemplary roles and contributions of these women have since suffered setbacks owing to multiple factors. A reason for its endemic presence is the sudden spread of Islam and a lack of organic evolution and embrace of truly Islamic practices on the one hand, and a carryover of pre-Islamic cultural mores on the other. Islam’s egalitarian treatment of both sexes could not have full control over many pre-existing restrictive and patriarchal customs and practices which continued to dominate societies. As a result, women have been confined to their homes, denied education and access to the public sphere. The modesty expected from women have been used to restrict their interaction with the outside world. Women have not only been seen more as caregivers and childbearers than anything else, but have also been associated – and victimized – with honor of men.

All of these factors collectively contributed to a patriarchal and misogynistic approach in many Islamic societies to the day. In present times, women have had to bear the brunt of the fiercely competitive capitalistic setups at the workplace which do not want to invest in a labour force with limited hours of production time. Their training is seen as a waste, and their psychological and emotional upheavals as a loss to the economic enterprises engaging them.

It is imperative that we make note of the fact that the prevalent and widespread misogyny in some Muslim societies has no basis in Islamic traditions.

There are several verses of the Qur’an where men and women are accorded an equal space and status in society. However, the Qur’an and Islamic practices do make a distinction on the basis of physiological and biological differences between men and women. In some Islamic traditions attributed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) they become apparent, for example, “Paradise lies under the feet of your mother,” and the reference which finds mention too often, that when the Prophet was asked, “Who is most deserving of my good company?” The Prophet said, “Your mother.” The man asked, “Then who?” The Prophet said, “Your mother.” The man asked again, “Then who?” The Prophet said, “Your mother.” The man asked again, “Then who?” The Prophet said, “Your father.”

It is also true that a reactionary response of some Islamic scholars to western influence resulted in restricting women’s spaces in Muslim societies.

As a Muslim woman growing up in North India, I find it imperative to note that female members and volunteers in many mainstream Sunni charitable social movements play limited roles and are bound to homes and halaqas. Although women in these communities are actively involved in activities as part of their social and political roles, and space is reserved for their use in public gatherings, including local mosques, significant changes are still needed in women involvement.

Hizmet as a social movement

Religion has been the source of many social movements that have transformed societies. Not only do religions provide endurance to withstand adverse situations, they also have the capability to produce charismatic leaders around whom the movement grows. Such leaders provide ideas that can provide people with incentive to serve God and restore order to His world.

While different theories look at why social movements form and become successful, early social science theories stressed that they are formed to address the grievances of marginalized and underprivileged groups. They may also involve resistance to discrimination of participants. Such was the origin of the now popular Hizmet movement, a name that is used interchangeably with the Gülen movement. It emerged as an alternative path in late 1960s with the spiritual guidance of Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen at a time when Turkey had become a battleground for fascists and socialist extremists. By that time, conservative masses, the so-called “Black Turks,” were already facing discrimination and persecution by the ‘secular’ and elite “White Turks.” Gülen drew intellectual heritage from the works of the influential and greatly loved Islamic scholar and writer of Kurdish origin Said Nursi. Nursi preached at a time of what he called “Kemalist excesses” and retreated from public life as a result of “arbitrariness of the administrators”.

While Nursi spent periods of his life in exile and under arrest and was forced to look inward for a better understanding and view of human life, Gülen, in a changed political scenario, hoped to see Muslims find ways to contribute to society by necessitating social, cultural, and intellectual interactions with others.

Regarding the more sensitive issue of the Islamic headscarf and its ban in Turkey and other countries, Mr. Gülen has been a vocal advocate of focusing on what is better for societies and their individuals in the long run. He has encouraged his followers to afford education its due importance and has reiterated that while the hijab/headscarf is an important part of faith, young Muslim women should seek alternative ways to continue their education in favour of a higher purpose of empowering women. Gülen remains a committed advocate of women’s education. The importance of access to higher education and the social rewards which accompany it, as well as a sense of commitment and resolve in self-actualisation, are the formidable tools the preacher identifies that women have at their disposal to decide how to serve humanity and take part in Hizmet on their own terms.

Women empowerment in the Hizmet movement

The Hizmet movement has moved beyond mere lip service in regard to women’s roles in Muslim societies. Rather than confining itself to discursive conceptions of an egalitarian Muslim society, it has put in practice its teachings.

It has empowered women by entrusting them with power and authority across their networks of organization. While doing research on the movement for this paper, the author came across profiles of several successful female achievers excelling in their roles as part of Hizmet-affiliated organizations. Hizmet has elevated women to positions of prominence as spokespersons and editors-in-chief; they serve as administrators and teachers in affiliated schools, an occupation of great spiritual and religious importance.

Gülen sees the inclusion of women as vital to the realization of a cohesive society and frequently gives an example of the Prophet’s wife Aisha, who continues to be highly regarded in the Islamic world, for she was a scholar of Islam. She tutored others on, and answered many queries about, the Prophet’s conduct, a topic of great interest and importance to Muslims.

Gülen’s teachings have led people inspired by him to found platforms and opportunities for women to assume various leadership roles either as a spokesperson of an NGO, chief editor of a newspaper, executive director of a mosque, or as a community religious teacher in a town. In his sermons, Gülen reiterates that during the time of the Prophet, women were as active in social life as men. He also adds that it is best for a society to make appropriate and fitting space for its womenfolk.

In Gülen’s sermons, one finds references to the principled inclusion of women in the workforce. He emphasizes that women are not to be burdened or restricted with their household roles or professional responsibilities and that if they excel at both then they should be provided with an environment that is conducive to bringing out their full potential.

Gülen calls for a solidarity of society’s members, which can only be possible if there is adequate and proportionate participation of the young and old as well as men and women. Going back to the time of the Prophet of Islam, he mentions that serving Islam was open to all, men and women.

In one of his sermons, Gülen said “Women might have specific circumstances and it will be unfair to impose overwhelming standards on them but they should be given duties to the best of their ability,” yet, he adds that a “realistic approach is required where women are included as part of every facet of social life, just as it was in the Age of the Prophet” [1].

Gülen charges both men and women to shoulder human responsibility, and the way to do it, he says in his signature, poetic style, is to “not tread on any toes.” He cautions against alienating people or losing friends with careless language, disposition, or words. He builds on this sentiment by saying that discussion, consultation, and ideas, can only prosper when backed by reason and coherence. His emphasis and keen attention to the sensitivity of local culture and civilization appears to be key in his talks. He does not restrict his concerns to ameliorate the situation of mankind or Muslims, but holds a more universal approach, noting that the God of Islam, Allah, did not instruct nor obligate His followers to assist and aid only Muslims, but His creations, i.e., all of mankind.

He warns against being unmindful of delicate matters such as the case at hand and worsening the situation when dealing with cultures not forthcoming of women participating in community-building and social activities. Through these teachings, Mr. Gülen’s followers have led by example by having not only providing spiritual and professional assistance, but also moral and social support through the organizations and networks they have formed.

The network Hizmet has made available brings forth associations and bonds which are formed as a result of the secure spaces provided through sohbet (discussion groups) and ders (Islamic study groups) help these women of religious bent find like-minded individuals.

Since hicret, Turkish for the Arabic word hijra, the Islamic concept of migration, is a salient feature of Gülen’s teachings, Hizmet volunteers often serve away from their native country or region of origin. This reinforces the need for inter-family interaction and support while building a life in lands far away from their own family in a land where volunteers might not always understand the language, local, ethic associations, or find themselves in new cultures. In some cases, where entire families, including women and children move to unfamiliar environments, women of such families find company and emotional support outside their homes too. In circumstances where women are part-time volunteers or are on a break from work or are full-time housewives, this opportunity to network over ders, food, and culture becomes central to their social lives.

Conclusion

Gülen’s approach embodies how the Islamic way of life is in fact very inclusive and egalitarian in a modern sense and that Islam and modernity are not incompatible as perceived even by Muslims in many parts of the world. Gülen refers to the contribution of both men and women in Hizmet as the two faces of a coin – one without the other renders the coin valueless.

Hizmet has provided an alternative to religiously inclined individuals who seek to lead balanced and modern, secular lives yet have made social service a pivotal part of their everyday lives. This, in turn, has metamorphosed into a powerful socially transformative and inclusive movement.

The Movement is an example for how transformation of society can be made possible by serving others through the efforts of a community of committed, generous agents of change. Not only does the movement provide opportunity to women in professional spheres but also provides feminine spheres of bonding to those of filial bents over culture, art and food.

^[1] “The Role of Women in the Hizmet Movement and the Principles of Coexistence (Heartstrings) Aug 26, 2019”, Heartstrings by Fethullah Gülen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPEKmunorL0

As I wheeled Chris off the elevator, he was quieter than the day before, definitely not in the mood for pranks. He didn’t complain—my husband never complained—yet he clearly wasn’t feeling as well.

Two steps forward, one step back: that still qualified as progress.

Rolling through the hospital hallways, following signs for Radiology, we passed several women wearing nasal cannulas and pulling oxygen-cylinder carts. The sight wasn’t remarkable in that the National Institutes of Health runs clinical trials on virtually every ailment—from the common to the rare, the treatable to the terminal. What was surprising was seeing a cohort of patients similarly afflicted, all female and relatively young.

At least they were ambulatory. When Chris’s doctor ordered a scan this morning, his nurse ordered a wheelchair.

During his first few days after readmission, Chris’s condition fell somewhere between depleted and God-awful depending on the degree of his sawtoothing fever. As his treatments—withdrawal of anti-rejection meds included—began to take effect, however, I’d sometimes arrive to find him sitting up in bed, looking comfortable and alert, like a patient soon to be released.

Towards the end of the week, his humor kicked in. After opening a colleague’s get-well card to find a droll reference to their firm’s new management—a buyout of the Rouse Company was but two weeks away—Chris reached for the bedside phone. When a recording advised him to leave a message, he deepened his voice and pretended to be the CEO. “This is John B—,” he said gruffly. “It’s come to my attention that you have a poor attitude about the merger.”

To me, the spoof was proof of recovery. To his friend, who didn’t recognize Chris in disguise, it was cause to call the head of security: Someone was impersonating the chief executive.

Come Friday, Chris remained frail despite signs of improvement. His nurse took me up on my offer to drive him to his appointment.

In the Radiology waiting room, we found two more women on oxygen therapy. After positioning Chris at the end of a row of seats, I took the one beside him. If silence had been a preference en route, now it was a prescription. No one spoke or made eye contact. No one leafed through magazines, for there were none. No one asked the time or glanced at their watch. It was as if chronic illness had instilled a monkish composure. Or torpor.

I was the only non-patient in the room, the Lucky One. As the others sat alone with their thoughts, I wondered what those might be. That three back-to-back tests followed? That with sick leave exhausted, the boss had to be told? That scrambled eggs might stay down? That last time the shadow had shrunk, so this time, well, don’t get too hopeful?

Or were they trying to avoid thinking, instead imagining doing something—anything—more agreeable? Strolling through the hill town of Assisi. Watching a Coen brothers film. Defending an IRS audit.

One of the women on oxygen finally had enough. Silence wasn’t a chance to grab a shot of mindfulness; silence was a looming endgame. By talking, she could ward off quietus. But she needed a partner.

“What brings you here?” she asked me, in a tone so warm and genuine that she might have been a greeter in a small-town visitors bureau.

She looked about forty, or a little older, but it was hard to tell; illness can age a person faster than a Broadway makeup artist. Although her appearance was middling in every respect—from her height and build to her facial features and shade of brown hair—her spirit was striking. Whether the vivacity was innate or cultivated for survival, she offered me what she desperately needed: a deep breath of fresh air.

“My husband needs an X-ray.” I glanced at Chris. He showed no sign of wanting to engage. Under the circumstances, it felt unfriendly, even hurtful, to not offer more. “He had a kidney transplant a few months ago,” I added. “Now he has mono.”

Immediately, another patient stood and left. Perhaps she went to the restroom, or realized she’d left her purse in the car. More likely, mononucleosis spooked her—even though it’s not an airborne infection.

I paused, realizing that my interlocutor might want to leave, too. She didn’t budge. “How about you?” I asked. In deference to patient privacy, I avoided the politeness of trading names.

“I need a double-lung transplant. There’s a group of us here who have the same disease. We get together every year.” She chuckled. “It’s like a reunion!”

Lymphangioleiomyomatosis, or LAM, is a rare condition that primarily affects women ages twenty to forty. Abnormal cells invade the lungs, as well as lymph nodes and kidneys, leading to reduced pulmonary function and respiratory failure. Treatments, including transplantation, can enhance the quality and duration of life but the disease is incurable. After diagnosis, life expectancy is usually ten to twenty years.[1]

Her disclosure was stunning. Not long ago, I wouldn’t have grasped the challenges she faced, merely to delay the inevitable. No longer.

One day she would lie in an OR, as we recently had. But unlike Chris, whose kidneys were allowed to fail in place, with one of mine nested beneath them, she would have both lungs removed to accommodate her grafts. No matter how damaged and inadequate, those lungs were infusing her blood with oxygen, ridding it of carbon dioxide, maintaining life. Temporarily, she might require a heart-lung machine and a ventilator; ultimately, she’d either breathe though the new air sacs or wouldn’t . . . breathe. If her grafts failed, there was no recourse like dialysis to sustain her.

In short, she would perform a death-defying, net-free launch from a trapeze with no turning back once she let go of the fly bar. Her odds of surviving even five years after transplantation were not much better than one in two.[2]

And that was if she got lucky. With the chronic shortage of deceased-donor organs, lungs might not become available in time. Although living donation was possible, she’d need two Good Samaritans, each providing the lower lobe of a lung.^⁠ They’d face a riskier surgery and longer recovery than kidney donors, which meant friends and relatives were less likely to volunteer.

A radiology assistant called Chris’s name. Together, they disappeared through a door leading to the imaging machines. Moments later, the woman was called, as well.

She’d shared no details about her personal life. She’d only spoken of her illness, which, understandably, had come to define her—from what lung-healthy products she could buy to how she should dress, walk, or perform daily chores, such as unpacking groceries, to minimize exertion. If she seemed compelled to tell me she had LAM, it was not because she sought sympathy; she struck me as someone devoid of self-pity. What she wanted was to be heard. To be heard is to be remembered.

In no time, Chris was back and we were retracing our route through the cold fluorescence of the corridors. As we entered an empty elevator, he said, “You shouldn’t have mentioned I have mono.”

“Why?”

“You saw the woman leave.”

“But she had a right to know. I’d want to know.”

I hadn’t meant to embarrass him. For that I was sorry. But I was as disappointed in him as he was in me. Chris was still “chesting” his health cards, as if this were a hand of bridge, with nothing but his pride at stake.

No doubt a gender difference was at work, a primal XY-chromosome trait, which he’d exhibited many times before: Never show weakness lest a contender seize the advantage—be that your mate, your kill, or your year-end bonus. According to such logic, illness fell between failing and fatal flaw.

A strategy suitable for the savanna or a boardroom, however, is counterproductive in a medical setting where any debility you don’t reveal is one that isn’t treated. The woman I’d just met understood the importance of communication, on every front, regarding her health. I was sorry that my husband didn’t.

And hadn’t.

At the same time, I was grateful. As we made our way back to his room, my mind unspooled a skein of “at leasts.” At least he isn’t suffocating to death. At least he can fall back on dialysis. At least he isn’t alone while undergoing treatment. At least his graft shows no sign of rejection. At least I haven’t had to kiss him goodbye outside an OR and wonder if he would return. At least both of us were able to presume we would return.

Counting blessings was my luxury, not Chris’s. Sick as hell, he was entitled to feel however he felt, unthankful included, with no obligation to parse his advantages relative to others.

Later that night, Chris’s doctor called me at home. He’d had Chris moved to intensive care. He spoke so calmly and matter-of-factly that I didn’t panic. In fact, the thought never occurred to me that every “at least” would soon count for nothing.

[1] National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, “Health Topics: LAM,” http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/lam (accessed February 1, 2019).

[2] Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, “National Data: Lung Kaplan-Meier Patient Survival Rates For Transplants Performed, 2008 – 2015; Survival by Single vs. Double Lung (Lung Only),” https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data/view-data-reports/national-data/# (accessed February 2, 2019).

She stood at the edge of the abyss, the blinding darkness engulfing her, enticing her. It would be easy to let go, to wither away and join him. Her arms felt numb, and her powerful legs were weak. Violent tremors traveled up and down her body. A small compelling hand, wet with tears, tugged on her arm. “What will we do now?” a quavering voice whispered. She opened her eyes. The sky was a cerulean blue, and the blazing sun was beating on her torn straw hat, casting a slender shadow on the spring green rice fields. Her rapid heart was calmed by a wind that caressed her cheek. To her dead husband, to her children, to Vietnam, she dropped the condolence letter, and with her feet firmly planted on the ground, said, “We will live.”

To say it was easy is an understatement. Raising five kids as a single mother, in a country where women are expected to be docile, seemed infeasible. “I was taught at a young age that men were the head of the household, they were the heroes of the family,” Diep Ngo, aged 80, recalls sadly, her eyes distant. “I felt helpless. My brothers were charting new paths, while I was still, unable to move.” With a suppressed sob, Ngo recounts that at the twilight hour, she would drown with dark thoughts, but every morning when the sun rose, they would be vanquished. The roosters were the reveille that awakened her slumber, her empty stomach was the battle cry, and the last words of hope from her departed beloved, the mantra that carried her on. 

The war took its toll on the civilians of Vietnam; it was a disease that plagued families with deaths and injuries. Young girls were jailbirds, kept busy looking after their younger siblings, torn rags their striped attire and restrictions the bars of their prison. Dreams were locked away, replaced by the basic needs crucial to survival. Even so, when asked if she would take part in the war that claimed her husband, Ngo, her mouth in a straight line and her eyes ablaze, adamantly nodded. Raising both arms until her fists were level with her head, she mustered a grimace. Her nose crinkled and teeth bared, but her eyes sparkled with humor. “Do you think anyone would’ve thought twice about taking me on?”

Scraping bits and pieces of broken memories from her childhood, Ngo recalls that the only freedom she truly had was that from the pressures of education. “I never did well in school. Women were not expected to accomplish anything, so it was highly unusual for a women to achieve higher education.” Now, it seems clear that this supposed freedom transformed itself into another burden upon her shoulders, for she had to take on menial tasks when drafted into the position of “man.” For the first time in her life, she left the cage built by the patriarchal society and refused wealthy suitors. “They were bloated with pride… I would never submit to any man like that.” Ngo was ridiculed by her neighbors as a result, but she felt a strange sensation, absent from her life ever since the fateful, disappointed sigh that accompanied the doctor declaring her gender 80 years ago: the jewel of independence.

“As their father was gone, I had to step into the role of the provider. Oh, what a burden it was, but the power and purpose it gave me fueled the sleepless nights.”

Before the age of 30, her long, black hair turned a platinum gray, and impending wrinkles scarred her face as the war robbed her of youth. A moment to weep or reconcile with memories of loved ones was lost in the present.

“Losing my husband was truly hard, but myself, and other women of Vietnam, had to choke back grief and look to the future,” she remarked. Leaving the house militarily before the sun rose and coming back well after the crescent moon silently loomed in the sky, the only thing Ngo regrets is not spending as much time with her children. But, what she had to do was necessary, as every day was a battle. Even so, how could she explain to them the rough calluses on her hands, which toiled tirelessly, tending the infested wounds left after the hungry bullets pierced the heart of Vietnam? How could she explain yet another outline of a large palm on her red cheek, this time from an angry customer, unsatisfied by the knee-length trousers she had spent all night mending?

Through it all, she remained an eternal warrior, whose struggles rivaled those of men fighting raging wars. Diep Ngo battled gender inequality and injustice, all while leading her family through desperate times. An old poem by Xuân Diệu filled her thoughts as America, the land of rebirth and opportunities, slowly emerged on the horizon: “Your feet have hardly tread round this way… Open your arms to clasp the spring, then from your hand let there be light” (translated by Thomas D. Le). And for the first time since her husband’s death, she welcomed the moist tears, for the valiant soldier’s burden had been lifted. Her dauntless mission was complete. 

I’m forever grateful for her valiant decision to bypass social stereotypes and become a sort-of soldier, leading her family to survival, to new opportunities, to an education, to happiness, to America. It’s a natural, humane feeling that is respectful of the wisdom, the strength, and the sacrifices of the old. Every evening, after the tiring cycle of school, I retreat back into my place of comfort: my grandmother’s arms, and for the past 17 years, her past life was but a false, beautiful painting, rid of pain and hardships and suffering. That one night, under a blanket of softly twinkling stars, I retraced her hands, touching them, caressing them, tracing her old, calloused, scarred fingers and her bulging veins, to finally realize the truth: that there was so much I didn’t know about my hero.

Scientific psychology corroborates these truths and lays bare the inescapable responsibility to know and manage the self (C.G. Jung, 1957). Knowing and accepting realities about ourselves positively offers a platform for personal growth and development, and further permits cathartic motivations for transcending flaws. While religions approach the path to transcendence differently (e.g. based on organic time and place), each testifies to human dignity that is capable of finding safe passage through the contradictions of life without compromising the safety of others.

Religious and secular histories reveal tragic outcomes for humanity when these responsibilities are ignored. The current neoliberal, capitalist ideology, which was systemized by economic theorist Milton Friedman, externalizes, or factors out, human and environmental damage, for these interfere with the profit principle. His open defiance of social responsibility not only shows a separation between the rational mind and rational heart, but clears the way for nullification of the universal human rights principle and bows to nefarious economic warfare waged between groups.

Within earlier historical memory, power’s unwillingness to analyze the subjective and blame the objective played-out on the global stage with catastrophic consequences. Between 1914 and 1945, the world was at war with itself. Yet, national leaders and their people denied their own failed-policies, and chose to violently project responsibility onto others (Fromm’s, 1973). Analyses of Europe’s part in the atrocities of WWII illuminate a reoccurring historical fact: non-defensive wars are often complicated and motivated by un-dealt with personal projections of a nation’s leaders and its peoples. At the heart of humanity’s violent history lie legions of self-denials and self-failures, too colossal to list. Perhaps more ironic than the irresponsible projections themselves is the denial of responsibility, as expressed in the question: where was God?

With the beginning of the West’s wars in the Middle East, in 2003, human rights experts recognized that the topic of human rights was off the table, a frightening but conscious decision that reconfirms the warnings of sages and prophets: human history is a history of choice.

A catharsis for the events of 1914 – 1945 was the establishment of the Bretton Accords, which established international institutions aiming to prevent future crimes against humanity. The sets of principles laid out in the accords sought to mandate individual rights of vital protections, by humanizing finances, employment, and governance. Rights of human security were embedded within a constellation of personal, social, economic, and political rights. The United Nations, which signed the 1948 Convention on The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, agreed to this universal principle, and applied it clearly to the subjugated children and women of the global patriarchy by creating the special conventions: Rights of the Child and The Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

While many nation-states embrace moral responsibility to ratify conventions for universal human rights, many UN representatives continue to face non-ratification resistance at home. While the new, global power-brokers of trade and finance systemically and tactically block universal human rights, the global under-privileged are taking their arguments to the streets. Taking responsibility to occupy their own policies is a response validated by scholar Noam Chomsky (Occupy, 2012, p.89) and reflects the Jeffersonian idea of democratic action. Taking possession of rights far exceeds passive verbalization.

A watershed of responsible self-action is being witnessed around the globe: workers are organizing to buy-back their closed factories; students organize to undermine dictatorships and corrupt governments; sexually exploited children are naming criminal-priests; women are fighting the slave-trade; independent journalists air photos of government backed genocides and externally organized coups; neighbors take video of real-time police brutality; independent filmmakers document corporate damages; veterans bow to their own shame and expose military atrocities; whistle-blowers expose mass government fraud; and high-ranking bank officials make tragic, but telling testimonies against system-exploitation by committing suicide. While these examples reflect an existing depth of global darkness, self-responsible action affirms our awareness of our right to live change and change living.

Considering our ever changing universe and the human capacity to re-imagine new life, it is possible to more clearly understand the discreteness of the great religions which direct responsibility to each individual. By means of self-awareness, self-responsibility and self-regulation, we each hold the best possibilities for peaceful co-existence and the preservation of human rights.

June Dayle Jelm, PhD in International Relations, is a Professional Mediator specializing in Domestic Violence in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Civil society has yet to define and accept broader human rights … The struggle goes on, building on those who went before us, for the benefit of those who come after us.

The 50th anniversary of President John Kennedy’s assassination this year is poignant for those of us who were well along in high school or had begun college when we heard the news that awful Friday afternoon. We still remember exactly where we were and what we were doing when the word came. I was in the locker room in the seminary dormitory with some classmates when a friend ran in to tell us. First came shock; then, hopeful denial. The television, however, confirmed the unbelievable reality. The next three days we rarely budged from in front of the television – not until the state funeral had ended.

Kennedy was, for many of us, the promise of our generation. His eloquence, humor, and charm captured our idealism, as certainly as his call-to-action inaugural address – “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” – inspired us to build our communities and bring our country further along the path of democracy. He urged us to reach out to the world. The Peace Corps, which Kennedy proposed at the University of Michigan during his campaign, captured our imagination.

Tragic history has a way of deadening dreams, and casting youthful idealism upon its ash heap. We strove to resist that trajectory and continued to push our energy forward in the civil rights movement, and those movements that followed … for women, the environment, and peace.

Many of my generation answered the call, and, with the help of Lyndon Johnson’s masterful implementation, and expansion, of Kennedy’s ideals, joined the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, or the War on Poverty. Others of us dedicated ourselves to other visions of civil society. Some of us were brutally tortured to death. Many were beaten bloody at lunch counters and on buses, or had snarling dogs set upon them. Terroristic violence even killed four little girls at Sunday school in Birmingham, Alabama.

We endured the pain of the unimaginable assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., and strove with grit to keep the dream alive and steady the course, despite the odds set against us.

Of course, we were not alone. We were building on the shoulders of the other generations in our time, and marching with them. All of us were honoring the legacy, lives, and struggles of those who had gone before us and now rested in peace. But it was Kennedy’s clarion voice that called us younger folks forth.

I myself ended up in the farm workers movement, following the leadership of César Chávez, and eventually moved into broader human rights efforts.

As I look back fifty years, I have learned that the struggle is so much more difficult than what we had seen through our idealistic-tinted glasses. I still cannot bear to watch the anniversary replays of President Kennedy’s assassination, and this year is even worse.

But there is never a moment that I don’t feel a stirring deep within my heart when I watch his inaugural address or listen to his speeches calling upon our “better angels,” as another assassinated president, Abraham Lincoln, did a hundred years earlier.

It is with the same stirring of heart that I watch the next generations so passionately pick up the struggle to make the dream real.

When I look back, I also see other formative people and events that helped move me in this direction. I have learned from this that everything we do well in life has a good impact on others and that we can always learn from the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

Probably the person who influenced my life the most was my grandmother. She was an intensely devout Christian, who practiced every day what she believed. She gave her money to the poor, visited people in the hospital, doted on her grandchildren, helped my parents support our family of six kids and send us to Catholic school, and prayed and went to Mass every day. My grandmother lived a life of compassion, tolerance, and justice. In her late eighties, she was on a picket line, supporting the United Farm Workers’ grape boycott.

Another important epoch in my life was the eight years in seminary, high school and college, studying to be a priest, even though I eventually chose a different vocation to which I felt called because it offered a more activist role in human rights work; after a stint in graduate school studying philosophy, I went on to become a lawyer.

But my time in the seminary gave me a good liberal arts education and taught me discipline, spirituality, philosophy, and grounded me in Catholic social justice teachings. It was the era of Pope John XXIII and Vatican II. Pope John was much like John Kennedy: he “opened the windows” of the Church and challenged us to bear witness to the Gospel in community life in new ways; to help build civil society, in effect.

And, in my later years, coming to know and work with people in the Hizmet movement inspired by Fethullah Gülen gave me yet a broader, more ecumenical vision of the world, and offered the opportunity of collaborating with people of the Islamic faith to help build civil society. This experience further deepened my own spirituality.

Few of us involved in human rights, I venture to say, are without a spiritual basis for our work. Like all generalizations, mine is surely excessive; but it does capture the point that very many human rights advocates remain in their work because of their spirituality, which comes in all shapes and sizes. As the Christian monk and mystic Thomas Merton warned, without spirituality, we find ourselves caught up in the frenzy of activism and overwork, which overwhelms us.

While in law school, I worked summers with migrant farm workers in Michigan, the vast majority of whom came from the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas, along the border with Mexico. It was the era of César Chávez, who galvanized the country around issues of justice, decent pay and working conditions for field laborers.

So it was that I ended up in the Valley and worked there for ten years, helping to support farm worker organizing efforts and undertaking other human rights endeavors. It was an amazing way to witness that people living in poverty had great personal wisdom and an amazing sense of family and community.

Eventually, my work brought me to Austin, Texas, and the Texas Civil Liberties Union.

In 1990, two of us located free office space in a benefactor’s community building and began the Texas Civil Rights Project. Over the years, through the help of many generous people and organizations, TCRP has grown to a staff of 38 people in five offices: El Paso, South Texas, West Texas, Houston, and Austin.

TCRP handles the full panoply of civil rights issues, including: voting, free speech and assembly, economic justice, jail and prison matters, police misconduct, discrimination, and disability. For 23 years, the Texas Civil Rights Project has been a tireless advocate for racial, social and economic equality for low-income people, through its education and litigation programs.

Some of the achievements of the TCRP staff include:

• Handling more than 3000 legal cases for poor and low-income people
• Developing a vigorous VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) legal program for abused immigrant women in rural Texas that includes our unique “Circuit Rider” component and counseling and support services provided by a MSW supervisor and social work interns
• Publishing twelve Human Rights reports on issues such as hate crimes, Title IX rights of girls in high school, and the death penalty, and seven “self-help” legal manuals, on matters like veterans rights, disability laws, and prisoner rights
• Conducting community and lawyer trainings for more than 50,000 persons
• Publishing more than 400 opinion editorials in Texas newspapers
• Giving more than 500 speeches and talks on civil rights to diverse groups (such as school conferences, law enforcement trainings, and senior citizen organizations)

Due to the tireless advocacy of many TCRP employees, jails in Texas counties now do much more in preventing inmate suicide, providing interpreters for deaf prisoners, protecting vulnerable inmates from sexual assault, and administering HIV medications.

TCRP set the national model in ballot accessibility for blind voters and has led more than 30 regional compliance campaigns in Texas under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Thanks to our intrepid staff, businesses, churches, and courthouses in Texas are much more accessible to elderly and people with disabilities, as are government programs.

TCRP’s Title IX programs on sexual harassment and equal sports opportunities have helped make rural middle and high schools more hospitable for young women, and respectful of them, and opened up the prospect of athletic scholarships to college for them. Our Safe Schools project works with community groups on anti-bullying programs for students and our “Equality under the Law” campaign addressed “benign” discrimination against African Americans and Hispanic Americans in banks, restaurants, motels, and other public accommodation.

Efforts to help South Asian, Muslim, and Arab citizens, permanent residents, and students who fell victim to post September 11th discrimination included filing a suit against a major airline and enlisting Texas attorneys to represent, on a pro bono basis, individuals who were questioned by the FBI.

TCRP worked with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) to help create single-member school board districts and assisted in redistricting the Texas Legislature and congressional districts so as to protect the voting and representational rights of minority citizens.

We assisted the NAACP is persuading the U.S. Department of Justice to audit the Austin Police Department and make more than 200 changes, including its use of force practices in the city’s minority communities.

TCRP joined with the American Jewish Congress in one of the first court cases in the country to challenge the constitutionality of government funding of a religiously-orientated job training program that used the Bible as an employment text and proselytized its trainees.

And we are a leading voice in raising questions about the fairness of Texas’ death penalty scheme, and the possibility of executing innocent people. So, too, are we an intrepid advocate of traditional civil liberties, such as free speech and assembly, due process, and equal protection under the United States and Texas Constitutions.

Our work that I’m proudest of dealt with:

• Ending secret collection of and research on blood of all babies born after 2002 
• Directing 480 suits under the Americans with Disabilities Act and related enforcement campaigns
• Challenging grand jury discrimination against Mexican Americans, women, and poor people
• Eliminating the statutory exclusion of farm and ranch laborers from the Texas workers’ compensation and unemployment compensation laws
• Extending the Texas Equal Rights Amendment to minority voting and redistricting
• Establishing a habeas corpus mechanism to review claims of innocence for persons sentenced to death
• Winning the right of blind voters to cast secret, adapted election ballots 
• Banning mandatory polygraph testing of state employees (and establishing privacy as fundamental right under the Texas Constitution)
• Protecting United Farm Workers Union members from retaliatory employment termination
• Securing the right of blind people to use dog guides in public accommodations 
• Seven McAllen police brutality class actions suits that reorganized the department

The most recent and profound personal development, as mentioned earlier, was coming to work with hizmet. It started with one of the movement’s interfaith dialog trips to Turkey and eventually led to writing a book on the eight-year-long political trial of Fethullah Gülen, which ended successfully and actually helped the process of more deeply democratizing Turkey.

International human rights law had always been a passion, and it was an honor to write on a subject that no one else in the world had written on. In subsequent trips, I met so many people in hizmet and was always singularly inspired by their good deeds, hard work, amiability, and commitment. It reminded me that people from all walks of life and faiths are struggling for democracy and human rights.

There remains much to do, of course. Human rights is a life-long struggle; it is painstaking to build civil society. As Eugene Debs, the renowned American labor organizer, said, every struggle for human rights is lost, and lost, and lost, before it succeeds. Indeed, many people have given their lives over the years, and suffered enormously to help make the world a better place for its people.

Civil society has yet to define and accept broader human rights, such as the right to employment, the right to a social and economic safety net, the right to medical care, the right to participate in community’s cultural life, the right to adequate standard of living, and the right to an education. The struggle goes on, building on those who went before us, for the benefit of those who come after us.

Eleanor Roosevelt put it well in her remarks at the United Nations in 1958:

Where, after all, do universal rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.

Such has been the journey of those of us inspired by John F. Kennedy all those years ago. It has been an incredible blessing to “labor in the vineyard” with so many good and decent people; they have contributed to my own growth as a person. I hope and pray that I have given back to them a portion of what they have given me. That, after all, is what living in the human community is all about:

We make a living from what we get.
We make a life from what we give.
What we have done for ourselves dies with us.
What we have done for others and for the world is immortal.
MaryAnn Evans

Harrington is founder and director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit foundation, promotes civil rights and economic and racial justice throughout Texas, for low-income people. He is author of Wrestling with Free Speech, Religious Freedom, and Democracy in Turkey: The Political Trials and Times of Fethullah Gülen.

Now I am going to ask you a “Fill in the Blank” question. There are political, economic, cultural, oppressive, feminist-based, family guidance-based, place of birth-based, religious, sociological reasons why woman… (Fill in the blank with: Cover or not cover their hair)

To understand the issue of head covering it is important to realize not all women choose to cover or not cover based on the same reasons. For example a woman may cover simply because she was born in a village in Sivas, Turkey, and this may come naturally. She will see it as something people in her family have been doing for hundreds of years, and might not even give a second thought to the practice. A woman born in Utah, USA may not cover because she has never seen anyone doing it in her family and might not even think about it. Both of these women are not consciously given decisions. They are just the way they are.

Another example may be that a woman in Pakistan, going to a more religious school, may cover not to stand out because she is afraid of peer pressure. And a woman in England going to a liberal school may be afraid of covering because she will stand out and be subjected to a different form of peer pressure.

In different sects of Christianity, Judaism, or Sikhism women may choose to cover their hair. Similarly, they may choose to shave their head if they are practicing Buddhism. Some Muslim women may cover, and others may not. So as you see, the argument about to cover or not to cover is really endless, and as far as I am concerned, is a time consuming debate which could go both ways depending on who is arguing it, and why they are arguing it. Arguments will usually take people nowhere because people going into the argument already have a predetermined opinion. During an argument, the only thing they are focusing on is defeating their opponent. So they are constantly thinking of coming up with new ways to prove why “they are right”, and even if they have not been able to convince their opponent by the end of the argument, they have convinced themselves even further by finding 100 more reasons on why “they are right.” So no, I am not here to offer you my argument on the topic. But instead I am here to share. I will share why I choose to cover and what I feel when I cover, realizing this is utterly personal. I am not speaking on behalf of all Muslim women, nor am I speaking on behalf of what is the right thing to do. I am speaking on behalf of my experience with the Muslim veil; so I can grow, and perhaps you can grow, and by the end perhaps we might be a little more inspired compared to our starting point before this article.

I come from an international family, so I was not raised Muslim. I embraced Islam at the age of 22, only a couple of years ago. My encounter with Islam didn’t come from my family or friends, but it was rather personal. I see it as something that was meant to be and so it happened.

In the days when I used to do makeup and my hair, I would say I could bring some attention to myself; yet no matter how much I dressed up, there was always a woman more beautiful than me in my immediate surroundings. Before submitting to Islam, I did try to compete and shine and draw attention, and I really think that was necessary for me to understand the meaning behind veiling.

It happened very suddenly. I was a student, doing my bachelor’s in the USA. I didn’t really think about it, nor did I really weigh the consequences. One night, I was turning in my bed, from left to right, right to left, unable to sleep and the next day I went out of the house with a black scarf on my head combined with a Victoria’s Secret hoodie and loose jeans, to meet my friend. I texted my friend before meeting her; my text said: “Hey, so I don’t want to shock you, but I am coming to meet you with a Muslim head scarf.” So that is how my story started. But I am not writing to tell you my story; I want to write about the state of worship I feel after I covered.

There is no doubt that female beauty was created by God in such a manner that it almost screams out the beauty of the Divine. And yet, just as many ideologies such as Feminism have pointed out, female beauty and sexuality has been turned into a matter of pure arrogance between woman, dictated by an industry run by men, whose only desire is to make money out of it. To use it and abuse it. Unfortunately, something so Divine, has been turned into something so shallow. They have used it to sell their products and they have used it to control power. And I had bought their story: this is how I know the amount of damage it can cause to a woman. Because it also damaged me. A lot.

I was created fairly beautiful, but instead of being thankful for it, I always competed with it. Sexuality and beauty had turned into things I would compete for, things that I would look at jealously in other women, and realize other women envied in me. It was a cruel competition, when women’s magazines constantly bombarded me beauty products, fashion, surgical and non surgical ways to beautify myself so that I could hold my man’s eyes upon myself. Things I needed to do so he wouldn’t cheat on me. Then I would turn the page, simply turn one thin layer of paper to come across an article about self confidence and the keys to feel beautiful and sexy the way you are. Between two millimeters of thickness lay two incredibly huge concepts that women have been enslaved to. We’ve produced this race that nobody will ever win; and that is the exact point of producing it in the first place. Feeding our ego that makes us feel so good when we declare our beauty to the world, and betrays us when something better comes along.

My aim with my veil is to internalize the philosophy of Rumi, who said, “Die before you die.” I tell myself: “It’s ok, there is no race, step aside. Be humble. Keep your beauty within. Liberate yourself from things that don’t matter. Be afraid that one of your sisters may feel pain in her heart because she feels less because of your beauty. Understand that the most precious creation in this Universe is a human heart. Be sensitive toward the women who have lost their families because of the cruel sexuality games. Be sensitive to those who are going through the pain of anorexia. Care for the ones who are depressed because of their weight. Care for the women who have been used and abused by rich business man only to be thrown away like a piece of garbage and who are feeling lost and empty inside. Don’t judge the women who don’t cover. Don’t judge women who have sexual relationships in return for money. Don’t judge anorexic women trying to models. But instead, care for them. Be sensitive to their feelings, to their inner battles. Step aside from the silent completion that is going on between them, hide your sexuality and let women who are in the competition feel safe in your presence. Be their shelter. Allow her to look at you and know that you are out of the game. Try to give her a moment of peace while she is with you because only God knows the struggles she is going through. Suppress your ego. Know that your value does not depend on how you look but depends on your spirituality. Take every part of ego in your heart and crush it. Crush your desire to be superior to other human beings, in every single aspect. Internalize it in every possible aspect of your life, including spirituality, physical beauty, success, fame or money. Love them, care for them, nourish them. So before going out from your house, first wear your veil over your heart that will protect it from the evil in the world, then complete it with your physical veil. Be at peace. Smile like the Virgin Mary…”

And quite surprisingly, when I was in the Western world, the moment I tried smiling like Mary, I would encounter people acting like Jesus. I am in no means saying veiling is the only way to accomplish this, but I am saying that veiling, together with other practices, has led me to this path and I am very thankful for it. Veiling has become a means of healing for my heart. And for the first time in my life, I felt satisfied with how I looked, which led to self confidence and internal peace. No matter what I say, I can’t express myself better than Rumi did, so I will finish with a quote from him:

“With God two ‘I’s cannot form. You say ‘I’ and he says ‘I’. Either you die before him, or let him die before you, then duality would not remain. But it is impossible for him to die, either subjectively or objectively, since he is the ever living God, the undying. He possesses such gentleness, that if it was possible, He would die before you so that duality may vanish. But since it is impossible for him to die, you die, so He may manifest himself to you and duality may vanish.”

Honor killings are not a new type of murder or unique to any particular time or place. They are not associated with Islam, and there is no difference in their base causes or those of Femicide and crimes of passion. Several religious and cultural traditions have held the view that women are second class citizens compared to men; that their place in society is to benefit men; or that they are possessions to be dealt with in a manner befitting a man’s choice. In Ancient Rome, “honor played an important part in the structure of Roman society… justifications for honor killings can be found in the family law of the Roman Empire” (Shah-David, 2011 p. 191). The legal differentiations between honor killings and other forms of homicide are based in Roman law. The father, or pater familias (head of the family), had jus vitae ac necis (power of life and death), thus no punishment could be imposed on a father or husband for killing their female family members (Bettiga-Bourerbout, 2005). It is also said that Judeo-Christian religious tradition claims men and women were punished because of Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit; women were punished further by being made subservient to men, and made to suffer through the pain of child birth and menstruation (Azeem, n.d.). Yet as Shah-David claims, killing in the name of honor is also found in other societies, such as Hindu communities and in Sardinia and Sicily. Despite these incidences, “this does not mean that Roman Catholicism encourages it” (2011 p. 191). In Australia, in a case of a Western Caucasian couple, a man strangled his wife, and community members claimed, “It is an honor killing…to avenge his male pride, to reassert his status in the world. He saw himself as the patriarch of the family and refused to accept her right to leave.” (The Age, 2006). The question must be asked why Islam remains as justification for femicide and why its occurrence is amplified when committed in Muslim societies.

Islam calls people to unburden themselves from the restraints and false claims of the material life and to return to God and the true way of life. As such, a society with material values will stand against such an ideal (Abushouk, 2006). Honor killings are a cultural practice, just as the Western media magnifying their occurrence is also cultural. It is statistically recorded that crime incidents against women in some Western countries are drastically higher when compared to Muslim and some non-Western countries. (Nation Master, 2011). These statistics support that Islam is not behind the underlying attitudes of violence towards women.

Honor killing is the murder of a person who has supposedly brought dishonor to a family and where a public display condemning that person is required to restore family respect. This supposed shame is most commonly attributed to a family member who commits – or is accused, or suspected of committing – an indecent sexual act. Even rape is sometimes considered to “blacken” a woman’s chastity, and thus tarnishing her family’s honor. There is a belief that blood will remove the stain upon the family. This means the death of the woman – and sometimes, though less often, the death of the man, too. These deaths are very often public.

Honor killings may also occur when a woman will not enter into a forced marriage, seeks to obtain a divorce, or acts in any way which may be considered sexually promiscuous and a male family member feels dishonored by such displays (Merry, 2009). Being “too Western” is also a reason given to justify this type of crime (Chesler, 2010).

However, Islam gives very clear instructions about behaviors regarding women, adultery, divorce and legal testimony; these instructions go against any justification for honor killings. Women are considered the spiritual equal of men, their responsibilities towards God the same. There are differences between a man and woman regarding their respective worldly duties, but there is plenty of evidence in the Qur’an and in the practice of the Prophet that women should be treated fairly and gently. They are to be treated with a deep respect, going so far as to lay heaven under a mother’s feet (Hadith, Ahmad Nasai), and are entitled to receive honor and the best form of care: “The best among you is the one who is the best towards his wife” (Muslim).

Therefore, the relationship between men and women is to achieve mutual benefit and pleasure, and to help each other achieve their purpose in life. With regard to adultery, both men and women are equally responsible. Even though couples are encouraged to stay together, divorce is still halal (permissible) in Islam if a man and woman feel they cannot be equitable to each other and if they have exhausted all possible solutions. As such, claiming that wanting a divorce is grounds for dishonor and murder cannot in any way be ascribed to Islam. The Qur’an also states that four reliable witnesses be brought to testify against a women they claim is impious (An-Nisa 4:15). This is far from a support for honor killings on grounds of suspicion. A lack of Islam and cultural reasons can be the only other basis for this rationalization. And many people – both Muslim and non-Muslim – have expressed concern over “Western values” spreading through the Islamic world (Abou El Fadl, 2005). Sexual promiscuity may be seen as encouraged by Western media and Hollywood. Yet the concerns people express over this is by no means an excuse or justification for murder, but rather an example of why Islamic values must be holistically implemented, especially in Muslim’s lives.

Any justification for killing in the name of honor goes against true honor from God. Culturally developed and encouraged desires have an influence over people and their self-control, allowing a justification and belief to develop that they have a right and responsibility to commit heinous acts. No example in Islam can support honor killing. Therefore, we see that it is a cultural practice caused by the incorrect or incomplete application of Islam in Muslim societies. There are many examples, as given above, which prove that honor killing or other forms of femicide are among many very serious human problems. It is a grave form of human violence, and a true and comprehensive interpretation of Islamic values proves that Muslims can, and must, positively contribute to solving this problem, not the other way around. If some disgraceful practices are being attributed to Islam, it is not because they are part of Islam but because some Muslim communities are simultaneously practicing and propagating a blend of Islamic, contemporary, and Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance) teachings. Islam is a holistic religion; a person’s life, death, actions, beliefs, feelings, obligations, and their very nature is addressed in the Qur’an and the Prophet’s practice. Through the revealed scriptures and the examples of the Prophets, God has taught humanity about our vices and virtues, but also how to overcome and strengthen them so we can achieve balance and happiness. A proper understanding of how to achieve this balance entails a thorough, rather than partial, reading of the wonderful sources at our disposal.

Kim Soltani is a student of Islamic Studies at the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation, Charles Sturt University, Sydney, Australia.

References

• Abou El Fadl, K. 2005. The nature and role of women. In The Great Theft. New York: Harper SanFransisco.
• Abushouk, A. I. 2006. Globalization and Muslim identity challenges and prospects. The Muslim World. 96(4), 487-505. Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur.
• Azeem, S. (n.d.) Women in Islam versus Women in the Judaeo-Christian Tradition: The Myth & The Reality. Canada: Queens University.
• Bettiga-Bourerbout, M., 2005. “Crimes of Honor” in the Italian Penal Code: an analysis of history and reform. In Honor: crimes, paradigms and violence against women. (eds S. Hossain, & L. Welchman,) Victoria: Spinifex Press.
• Chesler, P., 2010 Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings. In The Middle East Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.meforum.org/2646/worldwide-trends-in-honor-killings
• Hadith. (n.d.). Ahmad Nasai, Retrieved from http://www.soundvision.com/Info/mothers/inquran&hadith.asp
• Kaandhlawi, Z., 2004. Faza’il-e-a’maal (A. R. Arshad, Trans.). India:Millat Book Centre.
• Merry, S., 2009. Gender violence: a cultural perspective. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.
• Murad, A., (n.d.).Boys will be Boys. Retrieved from http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/boys.htm
• Nation Master. 2011. Crime Statistics Rape (per capita) (most recent) by country. Retrieved from http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita
• Quran. (n.d.). Trans. Sahih International. Retrieved from http://www.quran.com
• Shah-Davis, S. 2011. A women’s honor and a nation’s shame. In Gender, Sexualities and Law (ed J Jones, A Grear, R Fenton, K Stevenson). New York: Routledge.
• The Age. 2006. Honor killing in the suburbs. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Honor-killing-in-the-suburbs/2004/11/05/1099547388469.html%E2%80%9D
• United Nations Department of Public Information. 1996. Women and Violence. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1772e.htm

All the home-cooked dishes were delicious. It was obvious that the secret ingredient of my Turkish hosts’ cooking was love, spiced with intriguing conversation. I had not known that Turkish cuisine was one of the best three cuisines of the world, along with Chinese and French. As the IID members we had a great time eating the meals, sharing experiences and world views, and indulging ourselves with delicious and sinfully sweet Turkish desserts. During this trip, I had an ample opportunity to learn about Turkish everyday life as our hosts showed us their entire houses and explained Turkish customs and manners. Unlike contemporary, always busy, American or Japanese households, eating meals together still constitutes the core of Turkish family life, and this practice binds each member to the family unit.

Since my 2007 trip, I have been involved with various social activities at the Little Rock Raindrop Turkish House, and chief among them is the cooking course. A friend and I took the course for a few years, and we are now able to cook some dishes with ease, thanks to the classes and also our Turkish friends who gave us private lessons in their kitchens.

The Raindrop Turkish House cooking classes are taught by Turkish women volunteers, most of who are in their late 20s and early 30s. Some are housewives with small children, and others are teachers, researchers, and graduate students at university. When some of these women’s mothers visit them from Turkey, the older ladies often volunteer to show us different dishes that require some special techniques—which I would describe as “tricks.” I learned that Turkish cuisine is characterized by regional differences from the visiting mothers, who come from different parts of Turkey.

Students taking the cooking classes are diverse; some are university professors, school teachers, secretaries, university and high school students, housewives, and retirees. Their ages range from the high teens to low 60s. The nationalities of the students vary, too; during any semester, there are students from the U.S., Japan (me!), Mexico, Columbia, Uzbekistan, Poland, and Turkmenistan, among other places. The classes are thus international, for over the years I took the classes, a number of different languages were spoken besides English and Turkish.

The religious affiliations of the participants differ, too. All the Turkish women are Muslim, and some of them wear the scarf called Esharp, while others do not. American students belong to Catholic or Protestant churches or Jewish synagogues. I practice Zen (meditation).

The classes are very informal and take place once a week during the evenings. When too many people want to enroll, the classes may be offered twice a week. Usually, the class size varies from 4 to 13 students and two to four Turkish teachers. Recipes are given at the beginning of the class, and students learn about the ingredients, cooking techniques, regional differences, and the significance of the meal as they chop or mix vegetables and meats, and talk about life experiences.

The reasons for taking Turkish cooking classes vary. Zelda, an American woman aged 50, who is married to an attorney, said, “I am interested in the development of food, its difference and similarities with different ethnicities and regions. Plus, I like exploring new cuisines and cooking techniques.” Zelda is a dedicated cook at home and always brings a set of sharp knives to the class. She taught her sons how to cook Turkish meals, too. My colleague recommended Amber, a 23-year-old student to take the class to learn about Turkish culture. It is part of her project for a linguistic anthropology class. Kim, 59, a Jewish homemaker, said “I love to cook and learn new traditions and recipes. I enjoy getting to know the other participants,” when I asked why she wanted to learn about Turkish cuisine. Lynne, 62, said, “The food we’ve learned to make is excellent, but my favorite part is learning from and spending time together with the young Turkish women who teach the class.” She went to the IID’s Houston headquarters for a cooking competition in February, 2011, and won an honorable mention award.

Food is often a symbol of national identity, and it helps define cultures. Food can influence and enrich cuisines of other cultures, too. Historically, food was part of cultural imperialism and colonialism as well. Food unites people and standardizes the world as well—as we can see from the spread of American fast food chains thriving all over the world. As a result of globalization, the boundaries between cultures based on tastes and availability of foods have become much more ambiguous, and certain cuisines have merged in recent years, resulting in the food fusion phenomenon.

For me, as a sociologist, food unites the women at Raindrop Turkish House for world peace. Utilizing the Durkheimian theory of religion, we can say that these cooking classes are an integrator of all the participants from different nations and cultures. The class experience is similar to religion.

The teachers and students gather weekly in search of good food in a cathedral called the kitchen. The cookbook is like the Bible or Qur’an that is used as guide to successful cooking. Chopping boards, knives, ladles, and spatulas are items necessary for the “rituals,” and are comparable to an incense burner, a Yad (a pointer for reading the Torah), candle sticks, a Kiddush cup (for the rabbi to bless the wine). The teachers preach the way of cooking and tell us the significance of the specific meal. Some of the Ten Commandments of Cooking include:

• Always cook with love
• Wash the grape leaves before you wrap them with filling
• For the syrupy dessert, the cake must be warm and the syrup must be cold
• Sauté chopped onions with olive oil before you add the tomato sauce
• Use only the freshest and best ingredients

We work in a close proximity and in unison with all the participants. We laugh together as we dice carrots, mix minced meat, roll sarmas, and make mantis in huge quantities, and we cry together as we chop onions. After the cooking comes the tasting of the food we cooked with love. We open bottles of water and soft drinks to quench our thirst and become our nectar of life. We eat the meal that will become our flesh, blood, and energy to keep us going. We talk about experiences in our countries, share stories, and bond. Georgiana, 63, a secretary, said, “I am taking the class for the fellowship of others—to learn about the Turkish culture, to expand my horizons by meeting people from other walks of life. I love the lessons and I love all the folks!”

The teachers and students in the cooking classes are mothers, university professors, and school teachers who are raising the next generation of Americans. The children, youth, and young adults will grow up to be less prejudiced, more open-minded, and have more knowledge and understanding of each other’s nations and cultures because of the socialization process of their mothers and teachers/professors. By talking casually as we cook and eat together about our experiences, nations, and cultures, the participants can relate better to each other in spite of their different backgrounds and world views. The cooking class companionship promotes international understanding, friendship, and appreciation. This is the first step toward peace.

The Latin origin of the word “companion” includes the words “com,” meaning “with” and “pan,” meaning “bread.” Thus, a companion is basically a person you eat bread with! In Japan, there is an idiom, “eat from the same rice pot.” Our cooking-class companionship makes us bond and become friends. At Raindrop Turkish House, we say “Delicious!” in different languages, appreciate the food, and discuss matters that are important to women everywhere in the world. As women, daughters, wives, mothers, and grandmothers, we do share feelings, emotions, and thoughts about certain things, and they are universal to humankind: feelings of love, understanding, empathy, and compassion.

One night, my friend said at the table, “You know, we eat together, share experiences, and try to understand each other’s countries and culture. We become friends, and we will never think about bombing each other’s country or harming each other’s people.”

I hope that a day will come when there are no more wars in the world, and people live together in peace. And we can begin our efforts right in the kitchen!

Dr. Kinko Ito, Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, U.S.A.

Historical events mentioned in the Holy Qur’an reveal critical clues about the social arrangements of the tribes onto which God has sent His messengers. By scrutinizing on these parables one can easily notice that whenever a prophet is sent to a group of people, his message was denied at first by the ruling clique of that social order. In various places of the Holy Qur’an, these people, who are at the climax of the society and who oppose the prophets and their followers, are addressed as al-mala’ (the chieftains). Mala’ is a distinctive group in tribal culture because, even though they are small in number, they are rich, influential and well respected. Among the society in which they live, mala’ appears to be the ultimate preservers of the status quo where they have the final say. According to the Qur’an, arrogance is the central characteristic of mala’ which gets in their way of accepting the religion:

“The leading ones among his people, who were arrogant and oppressed the others, said to those that they scorned, to those among them who were believers: “Do you really know and consider Sālih as one sent by His Lord with a message?” They replied: “We do indeed believe in what he has been sent with.” Those who were arrogant said: “What you have come to believe in we indeed disbelieve.” Then (without enduring any longer to see her as evidence of the truth of Sālih’s message), they cruelly slaughtered the she-camel, and disdainfully disobeyed the command of their Lord, and said: ‘O Sālih! Bring upon us that (punishment) with which you have threatened us, if you are of those sent (by God with the truth)!’” (Al-A’raf, 7:74−77)

Even though mala’ portrays itself as a completely sovereign and self-sustaining group, it necessitates the full obedience of jumhoor (majority of the society) in order to continue its existence. This is the main reason why mala’ has been the foremost opposing group towards the messengers of God. The message sent to people via prophets, and the notions attached to it (e.g. tawheed: accepting that there is no god but God, tasleem: surrendering to the God, tawakkul: reliance on God by accepting that He alone is sufficient for all the needs) in every way undermines the very existence of mala’. The particular teachings of the prophets that turned mala’ against them include:

• Wealth or genealogy does not reflect peoples’ positions before God
• No group of people is inherently superior or inferior
• Worshipping God does not require any mediators

Based on the verses of Qur’an and traditions of the prophets, the methods used by mala’ in order to alienate the prophets and their followers can be categorized and exemplified as follows [1]:

1. Fabricating misconceptions about the prophets, their messages and followers: Claiming that the prophets are wizards, liars and/or mad people. (7: 65-66, 109-110)
2. Ridiculing and mocking. (11:38)
3. Encouraging materialism and denying the afterlife. Using material tendencies to divert the attention of people from the teachings of religion towards worldly pleasures. (23:24, 25, 33)
4. Violence: Torturing and killing prophets and followers publicly or secretly, casting them out of their homelands. (7:121-124; 127)
5. Creating fear among the laypeople either through violence against the believers or through misconceptions (7:90; 7:88)

Mala’ in the present day

The intervention between individuals and high moral values, for the sake of personal interests, is still continuing to this very day, only changing its form. So Mala’ still executes a very subtle yet effective plan to protect the socio-economic status of the “privileged,” at the expense of depriving society of morals. In the modern times, thanks to the blooming ideas of freedom and democracy, it has been well accepted that social orders, in fact, sustain themselves much proficiently in the absence of an aristocrat group which is meant to rule the rest of the society. That is the main reason why, in today’s societies, it is not as easy to refer to a specific group as mala’ as it was in the past. However, according to some theories, mala’ has never ceased its existence. According to these claims, even though today’s democracies are designed in the best way to reflect the majority’s opinion on governments, mala’ has generated novel ways to control society without being exposed as a distinctive group. Mala’ of modern times prefer to perform its methods behind the scenes by simply making laypeople believe that it does not exist. It is not involved in matters openly as it used to be but rather reaches its objectives via manipulating majority thinking [2].

These theories might be quite stirring but they are still in need of conclusive evidence. On the other hand, if we re-examine Qur’anic verses explaining the tactics employed by mala’, we can easily notice that similar practices are still being used for various propaganda purposes, especially in the mass media. According to Noam Chomsky, institute professor* of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the mass media is the ultimate milieu of spreading propaganda in the contemporary world. In his book Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda, Chomsky claims that in modern societies propaganda is the ultimate strategy employed by the elite clique to be able to pacify the masses and control them: “In what’s nowadays called a totalitarian state, or a military state, it’s easy you just hold a bludgeon over their (society’s) heads and if they get out of line you just smash them over the head. But as societies become more free and democratic, you lose that capacity. Therefore you have to turn to the techniques of propaganda. The logic is clear. Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.” Chomsky summarizes the methodology of propaganda as follows: “The people in the public relations industry aren’t there for the fun of it. They are doing work. They are trying to instill the right (!) values. In fact they have a conception of what a democracy ought to be. It ought to be a system in which the specialized class are trained to do their work for the service of the masters, the people who own the society, and the rest of the population ought to be deprived of any form of organization because organization just causes trouble. They ought to be just sitting alone in front of the television set and having drilled into their heads daily the message which says the only value in life is to have more commodities, or to live like that rich middle class family you’re watching…” [3].

Propaganda

The methodology of modern day propaganda was introduced at the first quarter of the twentieth century by Edward Bernays (1891-1995), so-called father of public relations, whose marketing skills made him one of the most popular advertisers of the time. According to Bernays, an advertisement could make consumers want things they do not need if it is prepared with the right tools; the tools that are capable of manipulating human thinking [4]. Nevertheless, these techniques necessitated a profound understanding of consumer psychology. Even though Bernays was not a psychologist by training, he had a very robust source from which he could obtain intriguing ideas about the ways the human mind work: his uncle, Sigmund Freud.

Freud was not a big supporter of the United States and he would not hesitate to criticize America openly. However, by means of his nephew Bernays, his ideas have influenced US lifestyle profoundly. Freud believed that human beings were in fact irrational creatures controlled by their primal fears and unconscious, selfish and bodily desires. Based on this assumption, Bernays concluded that instead of being logically persuasive, advertisements had to link the mass produced goods to people’s subconscious in order to be appealing. One of Bernays’ first advertisement campaigns is a great example of how this new approach worked: George W. Hill, president of American Tobacco Company, hired Bernays in 1929 with the intention of convincing American women to smoke. This was not an easy task in the 1920s because in that era smoking was perceived as a masculine habit, one which was unthinkable for women. After discussing with various psychoanalysts, Bernays decided to start an advertisement campaign called “The torches of freedom” which portrayed smoking as a symbolism of free women [4]. To this end Bernays used mass media to distribute images of top models wearing the most fashionable outfits of the time to create a “free woman” image whose indispensable constituent was smoking cigarettes. The campaign turned out to be a triumph for the American Tobacco Company. Soon smoking became a central habit for modern American women. Ironically, American women became addicted to tobacco on their quest for freedom. Even today majority of advertisements targeting women are based on similar slogans.

Manufacture of consent

After his successful advertisement campaign with the American Tobacco Company, Bernays worked for other big US corporations such as CBS, Procter and Gamble, General Motors and General Electrics. His achievements in the marketing sector started to influence political thinkers as well, such as renowned journalist and political commentator Walter Lippmann (1889-1974). Lippmann believed that mobs could not be entrusted with decision-making, thus, in the interests of power, ordinary people (or in his own words “the bewildered herd”) needed to be managed by enlightened experts. In the art of democracy public management was supposed to be obtained not by force but by what he called the “manufacture of consent.” In his articles he defined this concept as follows: “… the manufacture of consent is capable of great refinements no one, I think, denies. The process by which public opinions arise is certainly no less intricate than it has appeared in these pages and the opportunities for manipulation open to anyone who understands the process are plain enough…The creation of consent is not a new art. It is a very old one which was supposed to have died out with the appearance of democracy. But it has not died out. It has, in fact, improved enormously in technique, because it is now based on analysis rather than on rule of thumb. And so, as a result of psychological research, coupled with the modern means of communication, the practice of democracy has turned a corner. A revolution is taking place, infinitely more significant than any shifting of economic power.”

The revolution indeed took place. As Lippmann has foreseen the techniques introduced by Bernays, it has been vastly used by world powers in order to manipulate communities’ thinking. One of the most infamous examples is for sure the Nazi Party’s anti-Jewish propaganda before and during World War II. Dr. Joseph Goebbels, who worked as the Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945, was a passionate admirer of Bernays even though Bernays had Jewish origins. He tried to meet Bernays several times in his lifetime. He even claimed that he had one of his books autographed by Bernays. Goebbels used propaganda techniques to psychologically prepare German society for the annihilation of Jewish people. Unfortunately, it was neither the first nor the last case where propaganda techniques were employed to alienate a group of people because of their race, nation or religious beliefs.

True freedom

In 1990, Edward Bernays was named one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century by Life Magazine. In his book Propaganda, Bernays describes the extent of manipulation quite frankly: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind” [4].

Such means of social manipulation is indeed discomforting to consider, but remains a reality. In the contemporary world, the means through which propaganda spreads is stronger than ever. A single touch on our smart phones, let alone watching television or surfing the internet, can be sufficient to expose ourselves to a bombardment of manipulative advertisements, news and ideas. Consequently, the inevitable question that is raised is: “How is it possible to live and think freely without being controlled and manipulated by sources of propaganda?” Unfortunately, solution to this problem is not a trivial one. Rather than using logical arguments to modify society’s mindset, modern day propagandists try to change people’s lifestyles in order to influence their way of thinking. A quote credited to Prophet Muhammad’s companion, Umar ibn al-Khattab, underlines this threat quite successfully “He who does not live in the way of his beliefs starts to believe in the way he lives.” Perhaps, under such circumstances, the least we should do is to filter out materials that are intended to change our moral values bit by bit. In particular, elements of mass media tirelessly impose that an individual cannot be completely free unless he performs whatever he desires. Any external factor that prevents people from obtaining what they like is represented as a restriction to freedom. By doing so it is made sure that religious and moral disciplines do not interfere with people’s decisions and they are left alone with their yearnings. As a result, instead of becoming free men, society is being transformed into slaves of egoism and consumerism. In my opinion, being able to defy such threats depends on following the footsteps of the people who managed to reduce mala’s influence in the most effective yet peaceful ways, namely the messengers of God. Frugal but dignified lifestyles of prophets Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them all) and alike should be our points of references instead of the characters displayed on billboards, movies and television series. We should constantly remind ourselves the moral teachings which state that true freedom can only be achieved by freeing ourselves from selfish desires.

*Institute Professor is the highest title that can be awarded to a faculty member at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

References

[1] Muhammad Alshareef. Perished Nations, online lecture series.

[2] Bernays, Edward. 2004. Propaganda, Ig Publishers.

[3] Chomsky, Noam. 2002. Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda, Seven Stories Press.

[4] Curtis, Adam. 2002. Century of the Self, BBC.

With half the world living on less than $2.50 per day and with 46.2 million people in the United States living below the poverty line, poverty is a growing concern.

The United States is known all over the world to be a very powerful and rich country. It is not just American people who believe in the American Dream, but also many people from other countries have been dreaming of coming to the US to live in better conditions. Although the US is thought to be a rich country, we still see hungry and homeless people, especially women and children in the streets. Women, who are either married or unmarried, whether supported by their husbands or single mothers with no support, struggle to earn money for food, clothes, safe shelter, and other intangible needs such as love and happiness. When observed closely, it is easy to understand the reasons why this is so. It is because of the wage gap between men and women, the decreased amount of opportunities in having high income jobs, and the fact that more women are the head of their household compared to men, means that the ratio of poor women is rising, and the increased need for governmental help makes “welfare” necessary.

Understanding the definition of poverty becomes very important because it categorizes people into groups which are poor and wealthy. Richard Ropers states that poverty can be understood and described in numerous ways, and that people will not understand the meaning of poverty if they do not recognize the situation of the poor. To be poor means to not have any sustenance, shelter, or any support from family. However nowadays, living alone, or being pushed out of society, being under depression of unchanging destitution also describes poverty. Being fired from a job, losing self-esteem, having no power, or being away from cultural values are also other parameters to describe poverty (Ropers, 25). Ropers also describes “widespread poverty” as a disloyalty to the democratic values’ failure to gain optimism. Successful leaders must aim to provide economical comfort for their citizens. If the majority of the people are not happy because of poverty, it means the government is not as strong to deal with the problems.

The official poverty line is inadmissible as an accurate system to determine the number of poor people. “The US government identifies the poverty line by multiplying the cost of a minimally nutritious diet by three,” then the number of people who live in the same house is calculated (Popers 35). According to the Census data for 2011, 46.2 million people in the United States lived below the poverty line. According to Peter Edelman, a law professor in Georgetown University, even though there are so many hard working people, they are still living in poverty or just barely above the poverty line (Bilitteri, 723). These people are not given the necessary governmental support. There is also a huge gap between the poor and the wealthy people in the US (Cooper, 337). The highest income is $102,000 for households, just 1% of the population, and the lowest earning is $250 for people, who make up 90% of the population, explains Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez (Bilitteri, 723).

One given image portrayed in the media is that “the poor have only themselves to blame” (Mantsios, 638). The problem of poverty is not just one individual’s problem. There is a strong connection between the poor and society. How can a defenseless child be responsible for being poor, not having shelter, and for not earning any money? How can a single or divorced mother with a little baby, without any family help, be expected to work full time without feeding the little one for hours. The term “poor are eyesores” (Mantsios, 637) is not a responsible and thoughtful depiction, rather, it is a way of not being able to see the problems of the people outside and breaking away from the realities of the poor.

More and more women, especially single mothers, are experiencing poverty at a higher rate than the rest of society. Ropers notes that 58% of women are facing poverty, and in this category 48% of the women are the head of their household. According to Albelda and Tilly, 50% of single women are below the poverty line with no support of a husband. In 1993, while 16% of families struggled against poverty, simultaneously, 52% of single mothers, bereft of husband or family support, experiences real difficulty to provide for their basic needs. Most women work at least two jobs at the same time. On the one hand they work at home without earning any money, and on the other hand work outside to earn money (Albelle & Tilly 307). In 1947, about 38% of women were working mostly in paid labor jobs; however, in 1954, the number of working women who were African American, doubled to 54%. Then in 1996 the ratio of working women rose up to 88%, as reported by Albella and Tilly. Even though the number of hard working women is increasing year by year, they are still, except for a small percentage, earning low income and their situation still remains below the poverty line. According to Albelda and Tilly, “women’s earnings are considerably lower than men’s, approximately 70 cents to the man’s dollar.” This difference makes women’s lives miserable as they try to work outside and head the household all at the same time.

For so many years, women have been endeavoring to have the same rights, opportunities, and benefits as men have in their working lives. Although women’s working situations are not as bad as some years ago, women still face graceless and unpleasant discrimination when they look for jobs. Even though women are more educated nowadays and have more opportunities to get a job, there are distinctive wage gaps between men and women. Being the head of the family (Bernstein, 370), giving birth to a child, being under differentiation of occupation, and being sexually abused by employers are some of the common reasons as to why women are behind men when it comes to the benefits of the jobs (Wage Project, 373).

Family responsibilities are one of the most common reasons why women work in a part time job instead of having a full time job (Bernstein, 371). There are so many married or single women who do most of the household responsibilities while trying to work in a job. It is hard to deal with the chores and manage the expectations at work at the same time. For this reason, women in these kinds of situations prefer to work in part time jobs. According to Bernstein, only 25% of women are able to work full day, for the rest of the women cannot dedicate their whole day for work. This being the case, women cannot get the equal remuneration like other women who work in full time jobs. Interestingly, there is also a huge payment gap between women who work full time and men who work full time. Bernstein explains that “on average women work a lot less than men: 1,498 hours a year, vs. 2,219 worked by the typical man.” According to The Wage Project, part time women employees make only 38% of men’s full time yearly salary. Bernstein also mentions the Hartmann and Rose’s data which shows that women employees can have the same benefits if they leave all the family responsibilities behind and come to work behaving like a “traditional man.” The continuation of such unfair treatment is sure to wear down woman, a situation that’s already strained them enough.

Another reason for the wage gap between men and women is the choice a women makes to have a child (Wage Project, 378). Bernstein says after quoting Bergland that after delivering a child, women have to work part time or stay away from work for a while because they do not receive the necessary help from the society.

Nowadays, the position of women employees is assumed to not be as powerful as men’s by most bosses (Wage Project, 377). Even if men and women have the same educational level (Bernstein, 372) and women show more talent, the suggestions made by women are mostly not considered important until, of course, there is no other choice but to accept (Wage project, 375). Bernstein states that women’s yearly salary is much less than men’s, even when they are at the same educational level.

Sexual harassment is another important factor for women to leave their jobs (Wage Project, 377). Sometimes in situations like these, women are unfortunately seen as sexual means by their bosses. If the women, even if they are educated, do not accept the advances of their bosses, they have no choice but to leave or drop out of their jobs, benefits, emotional solidity, and sometimes even their lives (Wage Project, 377). Women encounter such discriminatory situations at the same time while they are dealing with difficulties which they have in their personal lives.

Some people think that people are getting welfare because they are too lazy and they don’t want to work. This theory can be true for just a few people. Making this kind of generalization for all people who are in poverty is derogatory against them. Albelda and Tilly say that the reasons for the poverty experience by single mothers and their families is not because of their laziness or lack of ambition. They are in poverty because they don’t have parent support, they face job discrimination, they earn less than men, and they have the added responsibility of taking care of their children. Blaming the poor is so easy, but being aware of their situation and helping them out of it would be the best thing for all.

Making reforms on the welfare program will make it work well. Some malicious people display themselves as poor to get support from welfare. Under the welfare program, the situation of the applicant must be clarified through an attentive investigation. Determining the really needy persons, eliminating their needs, and opening free high qualified career courses will make welfare a more beneficial program for the poor and will reduce the complaints made against the program.

Being in poverty is mostly not a personal choice. People in poverty don’t just lack food or safe shelter, but they have also lost their hope and happiness. Women, especially single mothers with no support, encounter the most difficult situations of all. Having an income less than men, taking care of their children without any support, facing job discrimination, and heading the family are the most common adversities faced by women today. Receiving no government support will not help reduce their problems; on the contrary, having access to effective government support will let people in poverty know that there are people with helping hands, people who care about them and who think about them. Poor people need helping hands, at least to not let them give up their hopes and dreams.

References

• Albelda, Randy.,& Tilly, Chris. 2001. “‘Women, Income, and Poverty’: There’s a Family connection.” Race, Class, and Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth,. 305-314.
• Billitteri, Thomas J. “Gender Pay Gap.” CQ Researcher 18.11 (2008): 241-264. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. “Domestic Poverty.” CQ Researcher 17.31 (2007): 721-744. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. Cooper, Mary H. “The Working Poor.” CQ Researcher 5.41 (1995): 969-992. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 “Income Inequality.” CQ Researcher 8.15 (1998): 337-360. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008
• Glazer, Sarah. “Welfare Reform.” CQ Researcher 11.27 (2001):601-632. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 Berstein, Aoron. 2007. “‘Women’s Pay: Why the Gap Remains A Chasm.” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. NJ: Worth. 370-372. Mantsios, Gregory. 2007. “‘Media Magic: Making Class Invisible.’” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Paula S.Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth. 636-643. Ropers, H. Richard. 1991. Persistent Poverty, New York: Plenum. Rothenberg, Paula S. (Ed.). 2007. The Wage Gap And Its Costs. Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. NJ: Worth. 373-378.