The Justice Logo

Brandeis University’s Independent Student Newspaper Since 1949 | Waltham, MA

Search Results


Use the field below to perform an advanced search of The Justice archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query.




OP-ED: Cut foreigners some slack; they'll return the favor

(04/27/04 4:00am)

Of late, the issue of cultural interaction has pre-occupied my thoughts. Foreign nationals often carry a different set of mannerisms with them when they arrive here in the United States. I am not referring to their viewpoints-I am concerned with the particular way they behave. These differences in behavior come in the way of interaction and relationships, causing latent tension and often making people feel uncomfortable. I feel most people don't understand the reason for this. While foreigners should then respect the local norms in the United States, Americans should respect the way they behave in return, as well as understand the delicate nature of interactions with others. These mannerisms should be appreciated along with more outwardly manifestations of culture, such as food or dress.This is a subtle issue, one that has not received much attention in the ongoing diversity debate. I remember an acquaintance of mine self-righteously lecturing me on how Americans were very "straightforward" but also "very polite." I don't wish to create crass stereotypes, but I want her to know what happened when I met an American in Paris last year. I asked this American for directions in broken French. He figured out I was a native English-speaker, and said rather arrogantly in English, "Sorry, I do not speak French." He was ostensibly making fun of my makeshift French, but then went on and said pretty much the same thing in French! In any case, I did not get directions. This goes to show that a lot of Americans tend to get very offended if people do not behave the same way they do. I feel this is just cultural arrogance on the part of many Americans, not to mention the way they flout the norms of other countries. However, the flipside to this is that people abroad must allow sufficient leeway to Americans when they are traveling abroad, understanding their unique cultural behavior. Some cultures, for example, allow pushy and forceful behavior. I met a rather friendly girl while touring the Vatican in Rome. She was advertising for a Chinese restaurant and wanted me to eat there. My intent, of course was to eat authentic Italian lasagna while I was in Italy. She told me the way to get to her restaurant, and I took the leaflet she had and said that I might go. She didn't stop, however, and clarified the directions by waving her hands. She went on; she took me by the hand and told me she would take me to the Chinese restaurant herself. I was becoming slightly uncomfortable-I almost had to shout out "no!" and walk away. This pushy behavior did not strike me as odd because it's a characteristic of many cultures-one that probably would not work here-but maybe it should be interpreted and understood as such. It should be tolerated, not shunned. That doesn't mean, however, that foreigners in a country should behave as if they can do as they wish. They have to adapt as best as they can-which means adjusting to mannerisms and norms here while not giving up that which they consider most important to themselves and their identities. Thus, given the extreme choices between completely surrendering one's identity to fit in with the surrounding environment and demanding everyone speak one's language, it is a fine line that must be drawn. It is a process of negotiation that goes on between the individual and the surrounding environment. What is important is that it is not just the individual who needs to compromise-the people around him or her should try to understand this different set of mannerisms, and tolerate them as far as possible. Anthropological studies show that the majority comprising the environment are not prepared to negotiate like this in the least because ethnocentrism is a highly common, perhaps even natural, way of being, and this is highly unfair to foreign individuals. Anthropologists have actually studied the issue of different cultural mannerisms for years, but having a PhD in anthropology does not guarantee one will become more tolerant of others, although I was assured by Prof. Sarah Lamb (ANTH) that this is usually the case. Yet I think that cross-cultural sensitivity is a skill that can be learned, and thus should be taught in classes as part of the overall diversity initiative, given that Brandeis includes pluralism and diversity among its pillars. Business management and M.B.A. programs did not appear until the 1930s-there was and is an assumption that upper level management skills could only be acquired with experience, much like tolerance-but these management skills are nonetheless taught in business schools all around the world. There is potential, then, for aspects of cultural behavior to be taught and explained with the course goal being greater tolerance. Nevertheless, M.B.A. students with no work experience have a difficult time in their management skill classes. The same difficulty can be expected in these tolerance courses. It is also difficult to imagine how students would be assessed in these courses, and what values a letter grade would represent. However, any solution to cultural intolerance is, by nature, extremely open-ended and fraught with challenges. In any case, an attempt can be made and debate can be started. I feel that both sides in cross-cultural interaction-the foreign individual and the people comprising the environment around the individual-have a duty to understand the other and be as hospitable and welcoming as possible. Within this realm it is possible to see one's behavior as an innate assumption of correctness, one that is a narrow band of behavior among the spectrum of possible behaviors. Also, the instant negative stereotyping of people, including Americans, based on their behavior must be resisted. People should be given a complete chance to prove themselves as good-natured and well-meaning.These changes can be implemented; all it takes is the will to do it. Over a decade ago, I was in Baghdad, and having visited a market, I was rather surprised with the apparent crudeness with which people spoke. I thought it was rude, and took offense. Now I realize that is just the way people there communicate. It is a learning process. I learned to accept Iraqi mannerisms, and I would hope they would learn to accept mine. For example, back home in the hot and dusty street markets of Karachi one is expected to bargain with retailers. For most Pakistanis it is very important-people save huge sums of money this way. Foreigners need not be too concerned because it's just a way of life there-experience it, learn something new, and have fun-haggling in Pakistani markets is like totally cool, dude. I just wish my Pakistani brethren wouldn't rip my American counterparts off! They should be more understanding of American cultural values and try to accommodate them.


OP-ED: Diversity and pluralism take hold when clumping stops

(04/20/04 4:00am)

The major pillars of Brandeis' principles include pluralism and respect for diversity. The events of last semester have led us to write this column because we care for our community and feel it has lost the values of mutual acceptance that its founding fathers sought to imbue it with. Respect for diversity requires an atmosphere of inter-communal mingling. However, that does not happen in an environment where people clump together. We argue that clumping, despite being a natural tendancy, is often counter-productive and does not promote an environment of mutual acceptance and understanding. Respect for diversity would, for example, mean the members of Hillel not just hosting the Brandeis Muslim Student Association (MSA) or South Asian Student Association (SASA) for Shabbat dinners, but going to MSA and SASA dinners as well.Any minority student (at Brandeis, read: non-Jew) who is a representative of his or her culture should not get offended when asked about his or her background. This frustration, which often comes from repetitive questioning, is also natural. However, students must ask themselves, if they aren't going to speak up for their traditions, who else will? Misconceptions and prejudices do not go away by themselves. By refusing to act as an ambassador, one risks strengthening the stereotypes that exist.These kinds of stereotypes, latent grudges and ignorance may result in occurrences reminicent of our "Dusty Baker incident" last year. Like many other people, we were shocked to read the manner in which Dusty Baker was "exposed" in the Oct. 21 issue of the Justice. We remember gasping in horror when a friend pointed out those lines to us last October. As horrible as the comment was, such intolerance cannot be dispelled without patient understanding and dialogue, because we all came to Brandeis with misconceptions. Patient dialogue comes through intermingling. One should lead by example, not by criticism. Instead of getting offended by people's actions and condemning them, it's better to challenge their misconceptions and educate them on differences.It is commendable that Brandeis discourages clumping during orientation. It is a fact of life that people will stick to whatever is comfortable for them. As a result, many interact with people from similar backgrounds. It is often difficult for students with different interests to interact beyond a superficial level, or to even agree on which movie to watch or concert to attend. As a result, it might be productive to create an environment during orientation where students are compelled to interrelate with those from different backgrounds that are already here. It is true people clump with those they are comfortable with, but perhaps, with careful programming and planning, students with different backgrounds can be made to feel comfortable with each other.Brandeis, as a social institution, does not yet structurally support diversity. However, this is not due to its historical background, but rather the current practices of some student organizations. In many cases, clubs and programs that are geared for students work to separate groups rather than unite them. It is admirable that Brandeis has many cultural, religious and social clubs specific to certain demographics. However, such clubs tacitly encourage people with the same backgrounds to clump together rather than intermingle. Just like one would expect that the membership of the Russian Club to be overwhelmingly Russian and the Brandeis Orthodox Organization to be Orthodox Jewish, one can equally expect the Korean Student Association to consist mostly of Korean students and the Brandeis Black Student Organization to be mostly black.The description of the Inter-Cultural Center's Listserv-to which any student can subscribe-is called the "IC Members and Minorities List." One wonders why the list is named that way when the ICC is supposed to serve the entire Brandeis community. We contacted Sujan Talukdar, the director of the ICC, and she agreed with us, saying she was not sure why it was set up that way, also adding that she did not start it. We were informed that mailings are not sent only to racial minorities, but they were sent only to those people who asked to receive mailings. Talukdar said she would look into modifying the list's description so it would be "more accurate." That is an attitude we appreciat-a very positive, receptive mood that tends toward inclusion.Cultural groups do provide a huge public service to Brandeis by putting on many culturally significant events for the entire student body to learn from and enjoy. However, students who are already familiar with the culture often attend such events. While these events are a great tool to help spread cultural awareness, those who are least knowledgeable about different cultures rarely attend them. There is no simple solution for the clumping caused by such groups. While these groups are open to the entire campus, many students do not identify with them and therefore do not feel comfortable joining. One example of a pluralistic trend is MSA having a non-Muslim as a member of their executive board. This board member ran for vice-president this year. Rev. Nathaniel Mays, the Coordinator of Diversity Services, is working on a series of diversity initiatives, the main goal of which is to bring people across the table to interact at a "human level." He told us that unless there is honest conversation, events will be meaningless. Mays continued, "unless there is some social risk-taking, where individuals and groups are challenged to have honest conversations about the many forms of difference on campus, the end result will be a legacy of having simply done diversity 'activity.' Even when it seems that we are struggling on thea diversity front, we see order in the chaos of miscommunications that take place on campus around diversity." These initiatives, however, will definitely result in more events. Like many frustrated and disenchanted advocates and pluralists across the Brandeis campus, we can only keep our fingers crossed and hope that these initiatives will result in the honest, interpersonal dialogue needed to restore Brandeis to its original vision.If Brandeis is truly to be what the most vocal of its students desire and true to its pillars, it's up to all Brandeis students to take it upon themselves to fulfill those values instead of blaming others for not doing so. At the end, we feel that the desire to be inclusive and welcome individuals of other communities as equals rests with each student. We feel that no amount of coercing, suspensions/resignations, or cross-cultural events will do the trick, until students come to a realization on a profound internal basis and make the attempt to look for comfort beyond clumping.