Throughout
any given individuals life they will develop perceptions about every aspect of
their life that is pertinent to them. In the process of that perception
development there are factors that play a great roll in shaping it. As
Professor Ceron has mentioned in class lecture, these factors can be a
combination of information, culture, politics, economic concerns, social
position, practicalities of everyday life, desires and previous experiences.
Taking into consideration the fact that no two individuals will go through the
same process of perceptual development in regards to these factors is it right
to belittle or state that another’s perception of something is wrong because it
differs with your own? In the international context is it right for a westerner
to condemn the practice or belief of another culture because that practice or
belief has been as result of the shaping of an individuals perspective formed
from a completely different set of factors?
In the
American context we are familiarized to certain aspects of our culture to the
point where we take it as the norm. If we are not introduced to new, different
or conflicting variations of that cultural aspect then that is exactly what we
take it as; the norm. A similar idea is touched upon in Scrimshaw’s 2006
article on Cultural Behavior and Health. Toward the beginning of the article
the author brings the topic of ‘male menstruation’ to the readers attention.
This is an occurrence “in Egypt where schistiosomiasis was common and affected
the blood vessels around the bladder, blood in the urine was referred to as
‘male menstruation’ and was seen as normal”. It was defined as a way for the
males in this society to come of age as compared to the female form of
menstruation that occurs during the onset of puberty, hence the women coming
into womanhood. In our North American culture we may see this as absurd and be
quick to judge these societal beliefs of this condition and being violations of the norm we are familiar with. Given our educational
privilege and the disposition that puts us in in regards to these topics we may
feel that we could solve all the issues for these people in regards to the
‘male menstruation’ beliefs and educate them on how to sold the real medical
issue that is at hand for them. Before we go about doing that it is important
to take the others perception on the issue and adhere to that before going
about hurling all the aspects of our perception onto them in hopes to promote
change.
As black
and white that issue may seem to us there are plenty of issues that can be
brought up that have many more gray areas. In many regions through the central
belt of Africa there is a practice commonly referred to here as female genital
mutilation or FGM or FGC for female genital cutting. In this practice women,
who’s ages will vary from infancy to young adults in their mid twenties, tend
to be socially subjected to a form of induction to womanhood that involved
varied forms of vaginal cutting. In most forms of this practice the clitoris
and labia minora are partially or completely removed. In more intense form
infibulation occurs which means that the vaginal opening is altered to
completely block the vaginal opening and prevent premarital sex and/or birth.
There are numerous adverse effects that can occur as a result of the practice
that can even threaten the lives of the girls that are operated on. However, in
the practicing societies there is a great social benefit to completely the
operation. In most cases the women who come out of the operation successfully
are welcomed into the social circles of the elderly women, they become marriageable
to the men, and respected and avoid the alienation that would occur had they
not undergone the alteration. Taking our cultural perspective into
consideration we may perceive this practice as barbaric, sexually insensitive,
physically destructive and to have no benefit to the girls that fall victim to
it. In the perceptions of the members of practicing societies though, it is a
significant social aspect of maturing towards a respectable member of society
that has been deeply entrenched in tradition for thousands of years. When we
become shocked and concerned over the well being of the girls who are operated
on why do we feel that our perceptions of the practice are right and become
more significant than the practicing members to the point that we feel we must
intervene? Is it appropriate for us to intervene on a situation that a
practicing member with a different perception may feel is right? If we do
decide to intervene where do we draw the line in how involved we become?
These are
questions that are battled over with many issues involving different
perceptions and arguments over what is right and wrong. Ultimately, what
decides which perception of any given issue is right and should then trump the
perceptions of those who may be considered wrong?
In this image there is one static system of lines and color which make up the image. It is up the the perception of the viewing individual to decide what they may see. However, which perception would be considered correct? Two old men looking at one another or two men sitting, drinking and playing guitar?
Denden Embaye
ReplyDeleteThis blog entry discussed the ways in which we use our own personal perception to inflict or condemn others who have a different viewpoint. One of the reasons you included of why Westerners typically intervene with their perception of accuracy is because of our “educational privilege and the disposition that puts us in in regards to these topics we may feel that we could solve all the issues for these people.” You also then relate that to the genital mutilation of coming of age females in Africa and how some view that as barbaric. Then lastly, propose the question asking when is it appropriate to intervene and at what extent.
This blog kind of relates to the blog entry I had written about the cultural bias on normal medicine and how we use our perception of what is right/normal to dominate other beliefs. I completely agree with your stance about personal perception. Every individual does experience a different set of political, economic and social factors which produces their unique perception. Our perceptions differ from person to person within a group and drastically within cultures. Like you asked in your blog who has the authority to override their perception as accurate? One of the reasons you talked about is that Westerners usually inflict their idea as most accurate is because of their advancement in education. I believe that it part of the problem. I think that sometimes we can use our “advancement” in education as an excuse to force our ideas on other cultures. For example, in the article by Scrimshaw it talked about how Bolivians drank clay for calcium. Our advantage of using technology and lab test showed epidemiologist that it was not healthy and so we told the Bolivians to stop drinking it, and for that they became ill due to lack of calcium. Our tests and “advantage” of education came short of researching THEIR culture and testing if it was healthy for Bolivians at that time. The excuse that we are more educated to me falls short of an explanation.
You also talked about the circumcision of coming of age female African girls. A process where as you explained the labia minora and clitoris is surgically removed to block vaginal opening. There are opposing views we as the outsiders do view this as physically destructive. Honestly speaking, I personally do not agree with the practice. I believe it is hurtful nonetheless. I have generated this personal perception because it is not culturally normalized in the West. However, I know I have no right to exercise my disagreement. Every culture and everyone is entitled to their own perception and way of doing things. I’m not saying that we should never intervene but, we must accept the fact that we all have different views on things and we must get over the awkwardness we feel. Most importantly, I think we must stop using excuses like our advancement in education to manipulate and impose our views. In a society where cultures are constantly changing we must learn how to agree to disagree.
You addressed a lot of the topics that we discussed in quiz section last week. I feel like your main point was that other cultures are going to have different views on things and that does not make them wrong or us wrong for that matter. We may enter into a social setting that is different from our own where they practice what might seem strange to us. Just because we may have science to “back us up” does not mean that we should impose it on people. You did not specifically state that there had to be one right side, you left it open ended but I could tell that you obviously thought that each story has two sides and no set perception will be universal.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with what you were pointing at in your blog. Living in America I feel like a lot of us have the number one mentality that makes us feel that we are superior and always right. Many of us cannot even try to see an issue from another view point. If we stay in our own little bubble this is fine I guess, but once we venture out, a lack of seeing other people’s point of view can be detrimental. In Africa where they have the male menstruation for example is a great example of this. Western medicine tells us that the boys who are urinating blood are sick and infected with Schistiosomiasis. While technically this is true, it is not a problem for them. The people consider it a part of life and embrace it. It signifies becoming a man. People of the west probably think that it is their place to educate the population about what is really going on and give treatment. However, do the native people actually want that? I do not think so. Yes, medically they are sick but it is not a problem in their culture. It is a different perception on a part of life. It is almost silly that such a small detail can make such a big difference. If a boy in Africa did not urinate blood he would most likely be ridiculed and not considered a man in that culture. In our culture he would be ridiculed and the boy would most likely be considered a freak even after he had been treated by western medicine. The book I am reading for class briefly discussed FGM as well. I found one interview in the book particularly interesting. The author was discussing FGM with an African woman and was talking about how much it appalled her. When the African woman realized that the American woman had not been circumcised she was appalled as well. She thought it was crazy that anyone would marry her even though she had not been circumcised. The American woman just assumed that the African woman was upset that she had been circumcised when in reality it was the norm for her and it did not bother her. The African woman actually thought it was stranger to not be circumcised. This is just another example of what might seem wrong and appalling to us is just the norm in other places. It does not make either point of view incorrect, just different.
Stacie Larsen