Interreligious Dating

We were on a double date of sorts, walking around the Bab Touma neighborhood outside the old city and enjoying the Good Friday festivities. I slept through last week's Western Easter, though I could hear the merrymaking and bands.

We saw a bit of a parade, with a drumline, scout-like uniforms, and a giant paper-mache Jesus on a paper-mache rock, but left before the stage show because of the pressing crowd. It was packed on the street in front of the church, the kind of crowd where moving more than your neck was impossible, and waves of pushing with no discernible source swept through us.

After we extracted ourselves from the crowd with great difficulty, the other woman's mom called. I was instructed to go say something so the mom could overhear and rest assured that her daughter was hanging with the fairer sex. I ran over and said, "Hey! Where are we going now?" She looked at me quizzically. When she hung up I apologized, telling her the boys had sent me over so her mom though she was hanging with girls.

"Oh, she doesn't care that if there's boys, just that we're all Christian."

Earlier, the two boys and me had met up with her and some friends. "Don't mention anything about us being not Christian to her friends" her boyfriend whispered as we approached.

We were out late, until one, and took a taxi back to Jeramana. After we let her boyfriend out, mine turned to me and said, "It's sad. Their relationship can go nowhere."

It reminded me of the matchmaking I had done for some friends. "He's cute, he's educated... he's Druze."
"He's Druze! When can I meet him?"

Or remarks when two friends start dating: "Oh, and they're both Christian. Awesome."
Or sympathizing with a friend when she couldn't date a boy she really like cause it wouldn't go anywhere. "He's X. It's impossible." Or a Christian friend who eloped with a Muslim man. Her parents still won't talk to her. She called on Christmas and they wouldn't answer.

Not that it doesn't happen. Last summer an Alawi friend's relative married a Sunni Muslim woman. He reported that her family didn't seem that happy with all the booze at the wedding. But for every married interreligious couple I know, there must be 10 thwarted relationships, if not by the law, then by parents.

Not that this is a Syrian phenomenon: I know American couples who had to convert from one branch of Christianity to another in order to appease some parents, and a friend who was disowned for marrying a Muslim.

Polygyny

While there are some who think that most Muslims are marrying tons of Muslimas or that polygyny is the norm in the Middle East, I might be the opposite - I was expecting practically none and was actually shocked by the little I saw in Syria.

From when I began studying "the Middle East," or took some courses on Islam, it was repeated almost ad nasuem while though polygyny is allowed, and on the books in most Muslim countries (notible exceptions: Tunisia and Turkey), it is and has been throughout history not the norm. It's hard enough to afford one family, let alone two or four. When I studied in Egypt for six months, I can't say I exactly immersed myself in Egyptian society (I went to AUC) but I never met or heard a hint of these kinds of marriages. Oh sure, it happens, but rarely. Ok, it happens more than rarely in the Gulf, cause they have all that money.

Oh sure there are the jokes: I remember in Dubai once meeting an Emirati, family friend of a friend, who was gorgeous. My girlfriend and I stared. I failed to notice the wedding ring, but my friend (his friend) told me to cheer up: there's room for more. He's already got his respectable Emirati wife, you could be the scandelous foreign one. But this was all on the same level of serious as a teenagers catcalling a group of girls, "why don't you all mary me! C'mon, the religion says it's okay!"

In Syria, I have been amazed how many families with more than one wife I have met. Granted, if your stereotype of Arabs is oppressive men hauling around truckloads of wives, the few families I've met would contradict that. And it's important to note that they are a few among the many, many families I've met.

The first woman contradicted all of my stereotypes: she's a businesswoman, living alone with her children, making money, doing well. Married three times before, she divorced them all because each was an asshat in his own right. Her current husband lives in Lebanon with his other wife, and visits every other weekend or so. Sometimes she visits him. After some shitty, abusing, controlling husbands, this one suits her just fine.

The situation, though, does not suit the other woman fine. I've only heard about her, so this is all hearsay, but she's a foriegner who fell in love, got married, gave birth to seven children, and then was informed by her husband one day that there's another woman. Her son, my friend, told me the first wife stopped all relations and is still pissed. Husband can't believe it. He gave her seven children, a house, a good life. I mean, he remarried four years ago, get over it. I said that probably to her, her husband has been cheating on her twice a month for four years. She doesn't get over it, its a reopened wound every time he goes to Damascus. When they got married, I bet it never crossed her mind that a few decades later he'd be all, thanks for the babies and years, I'm gonna go get my swerve on in a religously-sanctioned fashion.

Most of the women I know who are in polygynous marriages are the first wives, which is obviously different than being the second wife. Their husbands, for the most part, seem like asshats, using weak-ass excuses to marry exclusively younger women. A friend was trying to tell me that some women don't mind - which I'm sure there are some who don't - but used the example of one of Um Tareq's friends. When her husband wanted to remarry, she went out and vetted the girls. I said this doesn't mean necessarily that she loves the idea, but thinks there's no getting around it and being involved in the process is a way to have some control over it. Months later, she comes to Um Tareq, crying that her husband ignores her and spends all his time with the other wife, who is now pregnant (and 20 years old - first wife and hubby are in their late 40s).

Another woman I know divorced her husband because he wanted to marry another woman. It adversely affected her living situation. This is a huge problem - if the woman doens't have any idependent wealth and her husband gets all asshaty and wants to marry again, what are her choices? Divorce, and live on what?



Another friend of the Umahat (moms), who mostly live in Jeramana and love me for some reason, is essentially separated from her husband. He wanted to marry some one "in order to have a boy". Nevermind the couple already has a boy - he's actually grown and getting engaged soon. When the subject has come up before, I've been told her inability to have a boy is a legitimate reason to remarry (even though in the same conversation it's been admitted that, yeah, the sex comes from the father). And in this, there's already a boy.

It's complete bullshit, especially when the source says treatment between wives has to be equal. Of course, the responsibilies are completely set aside when dudes are grabbing the "rights" afforded to them. That condition of equality doesn't interfer with marrying a younger woman, moving in with her, and ignoring the "old" wife in many cases. Then there are the men who go behind their wives back and secretly marry. Wife may know or not. Yeah, like I'm sure that's completely halal and exactly what God meant.

When polyandry has come up in discussion, I've been told that its because a woman just couldn't handle this - women are sensitive creatures who couldn't love more than one. Ah, bullshit.

I know polygyny is a lot more nuanced than this - my first example is some one who is very happy with her shared husband. It's possible there are some very happy families where everyone is pleased with the situation and gets along fine. I haven't met them. Generally, from my experience, it makes for some very unhappy women and asshat men. Though I'm not a Muslim, I'm in favor of the train of thought that interprets Sura 4:3 as historically limited or saying: marry one, two, three, or hour, but if you can't be equal, marry only one. And who can be truly equal and fair, besides God? No one. So focus on making that one wife happy.

Yes! Just Like That!

Did you know every social movement in any other society has an antecedant in American history? No?

I'm sick of seeing articles or hearing events in other cultures place somewhere on the American (or Western European) timeline. This is especially blatant with women's issues, but exists in other contexts, like this article in the NY Times today on "Jordanian Students Embracing Conservative Islam"

Across the Middle East, young people like Mr. Fawaz, angry, alienated and
deprived of opportunity, have accepted Islam as an agent of change and
rebellion. It is their rock ’n’ roll, their long hair and love beads. Through
Islam, they defy the status quo and challenge governments seen as corrupt and
incompetent.

Wow! Our rebellion was so innocent, with love beads and long hair, while theirs is Islam. I assume the journalist is attempting to help Americans understand this phenomenon by relating it something they know. But would that passage really suffer desprived of that reference? I doubt it. Why can't the Jordanians feel angry and alienated and want change without it being related to some American social movement from 40 years ago?

Getting Down at Eid

I was invited up to Aleppo for Eid by my boyfriend's family. They are no strangers to the draw of ajnabiyyat as his uncle is married to a Russian woman. We went out to dinner all together the first day,a group of more than 20 plus innumerous children running around everywhere (bill was only 8000 lira). Every one thought it was a little weird I don't eat meat, but Abd al-Karim's wife doesn't either so at least I had an ally. I've meet the uncle and his Rusiyya wife before, but this was the first time I had seen her outside of the house and was surprised to see she's muhajiba. Since last summer, she said.

"Maybe you'll be hijabing eventually too."
"Impossible."
"Why?" She and two of the other uncle's daughters leaned in.
"I already have enough trouble matching pants and shirts - match a hijab too? Impossible. I see how all the muhajibas got it going on - matching it all up. Look at me - today I'm wearing blue and black and white and green with a red coat. It's a disaster."


They laughed, and the subject was dropped. I thought this was easier than responding as I had, throughout Ramadan, to inquiries why I wasn't fasting: "I'm not Muslim." This would usually have to be expanded on with reference to Lent.
"Why don't you just try fasting?"
"I did Lent, so I'm good." or "We have our own fasting time." ("We" being Christians).

But this is just dishonest, and slids into that murky grey area where a little lie about being a Christian turns into immense discussions in which I have to defend Catholic theology. Not that I thought a pleasant Eid dinner would turn to dicussions of the divinity of Jesus; but still in awe of Syrian women's ability to put together an outfit, this is more true than professing my devotion to the Christian faith.


But luckily the family's religiosity on hijab did not extend to alcohol, and we were able to enjoy a regular bachanal (well, kind of). The second day of Eid we went to a Saher (staying-up-late) party at the Jalal Sport Club, decked out to look like not a sports club. On the way in I whispered to my boyfriend, asking if there would drink, and if so, would it be alright to drink in front of his family. He said probably, but since we're still on the trying-to-impress them stage, only if others are drinking.

There was a bottle of whiskey waiting for us at the table, with uncles and a cousin already sipping it neat. Most every other table had wine or whiskey as well. The table was overfilling with appetizers, most of which were meatless. A known singer entertained and during particularly engaging songs half the congregation got up to boogie. We ate and drank and danced till well past 2am. It was interesting to celebrate a Muslim holiday with a family where most of the women veil and the whiskey is liberally poured. I think there's a conception in America that Muslims as a rule are very religious and strict, when proponents of any faith vary in adherence to the letter and spirit of the Law.

But glad we're in agreement alcohol is the way to celebrate a holiday.

Hasan and Marqus

I saw the new Adel Imam film "Hasan wMarqus" last night. I ran into Manar, who had been negotiated a late curfew by having her company be her brother's friend and his sister. We decided to catch a film at Cham Cinema.

We all liked the film. It dealt with relations between Christians and Muslims in Egypt, but was not ponderous or serious. Adel Imam plays a Coptic priest named Boulos (Paul) who is threatened by terrorists so the government sends him and his entire family into hiding as Muslims and changes his name to Hasan.

Meanwhile, a skeikh whose brother was leader of some sort of Islamist terrorist group turns down leadership and derides the movement, leading them to firebomb his house. So he and his family also go into hiding as Christians and his name is changed to Marqus.

The two families end up living across from one another. The fathers become business partners and their college-age kids fall in love, each thinking the other is of their religion. Since Adel Imam's son (real son as well) is thought to be a Muslim, and the sheikh's daughter is thought to be a Muslim, they can go out.

It was intersting because there was a notable progression of animosity. At the beginning, at a religious understanding-type conference, Muslim and Christian clerics whisper among themselves. "We have no power!" the Christians complain, "Look how few ministers we have!" Meanwhile the Muslims complain, "How often do you see a Christian begger?" Everyone in the audience laughed at that, "It's so true!" my friends next to me said.

The animosity builds into a full-out religious riot by the end, but not before much hilarity ensues. In their guise as Muslims, Adel Imam and his son must pretend to pray and are even called upon to give a religious lesson. The son responds to these invitations to pray by fainting. The son also is asked to be a candidate in student government for some Muslim student association, a request he responds to by turning and running. The sheikh pretending to be Christian has it much easier: when visited by a bunch of priests, he can claim ignorance about some of the finer points of worship by saying he had been living in America for many years. The priests understand, because irreligiousity is widespread in America and will infect even the most devout of Coptics.

The two families discover each others' secret when the love-sick kids confess their religions, each thinking the other will be happy.
"I'm Christian, like you!" says the boy.
The girl's face squinches up. "No!" she yells. "I'm Muslima!... Muslima!" She runs away.

Tension builds in the apartment and two families no longer talk. But a fire during that religious riot reunites them and they walk, Muslims and Christians, holding hands, through the fray. Together. Because in the end, we are all Egyptians!

One issue that is not addressed at the end is what's going to happen to the kids' romance. The son, now Christian, cannot marry the girl, now Muslim. That's illegal in Egypt (and Syria) though not the other way around. There's no way the son would convert because he's portrayed as very devoted to his Christian faith.

But despite this oversight, the film is good and it's probably a good time for it considering the tension between Muslims and Christians that have been building in some areas of Egypt.

After the film, my friends agreed that this kind of thing was not possible in Syria. "I've never heard anyone talk like that!" Tariq said people in Syria are scared to talk like that, against other religions. We don't want fitna."
"Look at Iraq!" someone said.

The film was also good in that it finally allowed me to refute crash. One of my friends in attendance has long harangued me about racism in America. Exhibit A is the film Crash. And Bringing Down the House. I tried to explain at the time that these films were exaggerations, hightened to make a point. "Why would they try to make themselves look worse?"

Throughout the film, this same friend criticized the extent of animosity, "It's not like this!" and "It's not this bad!" Afterwards, I asked if relations between Christians and Muslims are like this. "No! It's an exaggeration!"
"Like Crash!" I said. I think he finally got it.

Muslims are Similar to American Anti-Contraception Pharmacists

In the current Pharmacists-for-Life controversy in the States, on a group of pharmacists who refuse to sell birth control, some writers like to make analogies to show just how crazy these pharmacists are and how wrong it is for them to shove their beliefs down others' throats. And guess who is a great analogy for that? Muslims! And racists, naturally.

I usually like this blog, because they write some posts on international reproductive health, but I was not a big fan of this recent post from Reproductive Health Reality Check:

If a pharmacist refused to fill out a Viagra prescription for a black man he saw walking around with his white wife, we would have no problem seeing this behavior as bigotry, even if said pharmacist claimed that Jesus told him to do it. But if a pharmacist refuses to sell birth control pills to a woman who isn't wearing a wedding band, somehow that's legitimate religious expression, even though his rights are extending well past her nose. If Muslim pharmacists started refusing to fill out prescriptions for Christians because those Christians don't share their beliefs, we would have no problem seeing that the religious freedom pinched was that of the customer's, not the pharmacists.

Because you know that's a part of Islam: refusing to give medicine to Christians. What? Sorry, where did you pull that out of?

Earlier post from the same blog:

If, however, we're going to let everyone's political beliefs or religious enthusiasms govern our important life decisions, then we must allow that any political or religious convictions can hold sway. In this case, why not permit a Muslim fundamentalist pharmacist to simply put up a sign politely explaining that his religious beliefs require him to deny a woman's prescription for any medication? No doubt Aryan pharmacists have a belief system too. Why should they be forced to violate their dearly held beliefs and serve blacks?

Because Muslims hate women? I think I remember hearing that sura, in which antibiotics and allergy medication are denied to women. It's a core religious conviction in Islam.

From Feministe:

What happens if next, pharmacists or doctors refuse to serve non-Christians? Or if it comes back to bite them in the ass when, say, a conservative male Muslim paramedic refuses to touch women? Or if religious doctors and pharmacists decide that STDs are appropriate punishments for the sexually active and refuse to fill prescriptions for treatment medicine? Or if a paramedic or doctor refuses to deliver the baby of an unmarried woman?

Cause Muslim men never touch women, and Muslim doctors don't perform thousands of procedures everyday on women. If any man did have qualms about touching women, I doubt he would become a paramedic, which I think is the point of this post: don't become a pharmacist if you can't do the freaking job.

I understand why Muslims are getting thrown into the mix, alongside Aryans (do they mean Iranians and northern Indians?) and racists. It's an attempt to expose the hypocrisy of these right-wing movements, that are all for respecting religion as long as that religion is Christianity. But claiming Muslims would deny medicine to Chrisitans or to women, is smearing Muslims based on common stereotypes:
1) that Muslims hate Christians
2) that Muslims hate women, I mean, they must since they veil them and don't let them drive and don't let them get an education and... 60 other misconceptions people have about Muslim women.

There are other analogies that could be made, such as an orthodox Jew refusing to give out condoms (according to some Talmudic interpretations, birth control is allowed for women but not for men, so pill in, condom out), but of course Jews just aren't as scary as Muslims.

Later in the Feministe post, I think they did a better job with analogy:

Wingers were all up in arms about the Somali women who wanted to wear more traditional clothing to work (even though they were still doing their jobs) and the Muslim cab drivers who wouldn’t pick up passengers who had alcohol on them, but if it’s fundamentalist Christianity that’s an excuse for not doing what you were hired to do, and if it’s women you’re refusing to help, then it’s a-ok.

This exposes the hypocrisy of the right, eager to defend the right of Christians lock-step with their views to exercise their religious views, but quick to lambast Muslims for the same. And this features actual events where Muslims felt that some aspect of their job and their beliefs were at odds, not random hypothetical that accuse Muslims of hating Christians and women. When, from personal experience, I know many who are very fond of both, especially the combination. Oohh!

Muslims to Potentially Call for the Blood of Obama

Obama just can't win.

First he was criticized for being too "in" with the Muslims. He was accused of being one, of being indoctrinated at an Islamic madrassa in Indonesia, of expressing sympathy for the Palestinians, and for the endorsements of Hamas. While Obama has replied by shoring up his "I love Jesus" cred and declaring himself no less a friend of Israel than Clinton, the insinuations continue.

Now, an op-ed in the New York Times goes the other way: Obama would piss the shit out of Muslims. The author, Edward N. Luttwak of the conservative thinktank Center for Strategic and International Studies, begins by benignly praising Obama's charisma and well-organized campaign - this so we know that what follows isn't an attack on Obama, just fact.

Theoretically speaking, Luttwak posits, Muslims the world over would demand Obama's blood, should he become president.

What? Oh, I'm sorry, Luttwak's position is a bit more nuanced:

As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslin under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother's Christian background is irrelevant...

Wow! who knew that you could be born Muslim? However do the babies say the shahada? As far as I know, Obama has never had said the shahada (profession of faith), and therefore has never even been Muslim. Islam is not a religion; not a race.

Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him. His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is "irtidad" or "ridda," usually translated from the the Arabic as "apostasy," but with the connotations of rebellion and treason.

Oh my god you're using Arabic! And well enough to scoff at simple translations of "ridda", since you know the connotations as well! Bravo! But, since Obama has never actually been Muslim - can he really be an apostate?

Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit... the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric... It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries to no mandate execution for apostasy.

But that last part doesn't matter because we all know that Muslims are thirsting for blood no matter what the criminal codes of their countries say! He goes on to mention two famous cases of apostates: an Iranian man in 1994 and an Afghani man in 2006. Luttwak does allow that even Iran or Saudi Arabia would probably not prosecute President Obama, but

...another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing. At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.

Right. The incredibly lengthy and seemingly unending election has not provided opportunity enough to get to know this new guy - despite the fact that al-Jazeera has been inundated with coverage of the race, which is only displaced by news from Gaza or Lebanon. And naturally, Obama's being an "apostate" would hurt America's war on terror and rapport with the Muslim world more than the man who started a war, calling it a "crusade," and is overflowing with love for Israel. As for exporting democracy and human rights abroad - I don't think the US could be doing much worse than currently, so why not try the apostate?

The worst part about this article is that is sees the "Muslim world" as a vast monolith, mentioning only Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Afghanistan to represent this massive and diverse region. The Muslims themselves are not individual people, with the ability to say, measure a man's supposed apostate-ness versus his policy in deciding whether or not to stone him, but a herd of sheep expected to bleat hatred once the secret is out. It is obvious that Luttwak has not spoken to a single Muslim, but who needs to when scripture tells you everything you need to know about the adherents of a religion?

While Syria is not representative of every Muslim country, every person I've talked to here about the American election is now solidly behind Obama. They note his international background, how he wants to pull troops out of Iraq, and his being black, which I'm told "is a good step for America". A few people have told me that they hope his having Muslim family in Kenya means he will be less biased against Muslims than the current administration. In Tunisia, another, very different Muslim country, I only spoke on the subject with two people, when they brought it up, asking me if I was going to vote Obama since they want him to win.

But what do I know? I'm no thinktank. So take your pick: either Obama is too sympathetic to The Muslims (and thus, terror) or he's going to cause them to all go batshit insane and hurt the wonderful democracy-spreading America's been up to lately. Either one is obviously a valid reason to Vote McCain.

What do You Think About Islam?

I have been occaisonally asked this question by two broad groups of people: Muslims in the Middle East, and non-Muslims in America.

The question always catches me off guard coming from the former group. It's not an everyday occurance, somewhere around 1/100 of how often I'm asked my marital status. I'll meet some one new, we'll chat, and then, working to maintain the causual ambience, they will ask what I think about Islam. The question is dropped in apropos: "Your Arabic isn't bad. What do you think about Islam?" My answers to this are always awkward. "Oh, Islam? It's... cool." Sometimes the question is worded in such a way to imply that I, as an American, may have a problem with Islam. "Oh no, I don't have any problem with Islam. It's... cool. I like the sweets at Eid."

C'mon, what does one answer to this? "What do you think about Baptists?" Um, I don't really. "What do you think about Hindus?" That they are... fine... and stuff? The question is weird to me because, like "Weren't you expecting us all to be terrorists, what with the lies of your media?" I thought my existance in the country would preclude an affirmative answer. "Thanks for asking. Islam actually scares the shit out of me." I mean, that's why I live here. For the thrill.

Once I've answered that I have no problems with Islam, and that all religions are pretty much the same, the other person is usually happy to have met an unbrainwashed American. Sometimes, they dig to find out what I know about Islam, which is quite a bit, surprising them.

With the second group, non-Muslims in America, the question is usually delivered in a lowered voice, conspiratorally. You can tell me. I got this after going back from Egypt. I considered it the follow up to the warnings that preceded my going to Egypt: Be careful, you know, there's a lot of Muslims there.

I tell these people that Islam is... fine. People are normal. They do their shit. I knew I'd stayed up too late hearing the 4am-ish call to prayer. I don't really know what this group is expecting, maybe something along the lines of "IT'S CRAZY!" Or maybe they really are just curious to hear "what it's like" from someone who has been in a Muslim country.

I'd like to see what would happen if the first group asked the second.

Ashoura

Every year on the 10th of Muharram (first month in Islamic calendar), Shi'is mourn the death of Hussain, grandson of the prophet. While Karbala and the most important holy sites are in Iraq, Syria has Sayida Zeinab, his sister, and Sayida Ruqayia, ensuring a steady stream of Iranian pilgrims. Ashoura this year was on a Saturday (January 20), when I'm in Sitt Zeinab anyways, teaching English, so I walked down the road and watched a procession of what other viewers told me were Pakistanis, beating themselves in time, rising and falling intensity.
I followed them into the Sitt Zeinab mosque, quickly transforming my scarf into a hijab.

I missed the "hard core" stuff - the cutting themselves with swords - because it was at 6am, but my friend Miqdad (British) caught it, though he has very strong opinions about inflicting pain to one's self being un-Islamic and unsupported by text. But he also told me to look out for Arba'een, forty days after Ashoura, when Sitt Zeineb is supposed to see even more pilgrims.

Being Christian

can get a little annoying when you are not actually Christian. Athiesm is a cultural no-no in the Arab World, where any faith (even Jews: as my family likes to tell me over and over again they don't like the Zionists, but they love the Jews. "We used to have Jews" they say sadly, before America pressured Syria into making their Jews go live in America) is better than no faith.

So except with very good friends, I am a Christian. Catholic, to be exact. It's rather easy to remember who I've told what to, as those who ask are usually those who it's just easier to lie to. This is rarely onerous, as few people get into the nitty gritty of faith. But for those who do, it's lucky that I once was very Catholic, so that I can convincingly pretend to believe. Plus, playing Christian leads people to rethink their views of a irreligious US, because in truth were I to be an "average American" I would be Christian, though I probably wouldn't travel to Syria.

But with my family and my private teacher Ibrahim sometimes I regret having told them the Lie because of how often I have to check myself and say things as if I were actually Christian. With Ibrahim this isn't such a big deal, especially now that we don't do much conversation (I now get enough of that from Life). But with the family this comes up a lot.

I especially hate getting quizzed by Abu Mazen, i.e. "How old was Jesus when he died?"
"33."
"Bravo!"
Or lectured by Abu Mazen. I have so far endured the Bible/Qur'an stories of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Soloman, and others. When I attempt to speed up these recounts by filling in the details, Abu Mazen always, always acts surprised. Honestly, as a Christian why is it surprising that I know the story of the Messiah? The other night my family complemented me on being muthaqifa (cultured). "You know about politics, science, history, religion!" Thanks, but as the Catholic I say I am, the last part really shouldn't be all that surprising.

Sometimes I'm lecured on Islam, and the knowledge I have on this is also apparently astounding, but this is more understandable. But still, I get to hear how the Qur'an tells people to be clean, for example you can't enter into a mosque unless you washed and you can't pray until after absolutions, and women can't enter a mosque on their period, but don't get them wrong, "the Christians here are also very clean people, and good. They also cover their heads when they go to church." I told them that you don't have to be physicially clean to enter a church, but you have to be mentally clean (ol' State of Grace) to receive communion. But, you know, we do shower out of common sense and all that. They were shocked when I told told them that women on their period are allowed to go to church. "The Christians here don't do that," Um Mazen said somewhat disapprovingly, perhaps imagining a libertine West in which women are allowed to pray while bleeding out of the vagina.

I really hope the family looks to my frequent flossing and not the admittedly scattered state of my room to judge my cleanliness.

Defending America

My friend Rusha invited me to an iftar at her friend's apartment this week. Nine women, all about 23-24, all working, two married. They teased the one who's been married for 10 months about her lack of pregnancy - "after a year!" she protested. It was a potluck type meal so everyone brought a dish to pass. I bought some chocolate croissants.

The woman who's apartment it was in lives alone, which is rare in Syria, especially in Midan, one of the more conversative areas of Damascus. After dinner some of the women watched Bab al-Hara, an insanely popular Ramadan series, while others grilled me about America. "There is no religion in America - it is sad. People think that they do not need God but then at some point in their life they feel empty." I explained that actually America is a very religious country. Our congress starts everyday with a prayer. "Really?" I also was asked about Israel and America, and wound up explaining how the first five books of the Bible are the Torah, and how Christianity came from Judaism, and how Jewish law and Sharia' are quite similar, both in form and in derivation of law, as distinct from Christianity which emphasizes orthodoxy over orthopraxy.

But most of the time I tried to explain that not all Americans are afraid of Islam or Arabs. "There are places with much ignorance of Islam, but there are also places with many Muslims and everything is fine" (my Arabic isn't exactly eloquent). In fact, I think it's better for immigrant Muslims in America than in France or Germany. "What about Israel? I hear Americans only get one side of the conflict." Actually, that's true.

But these girls were so sure that they knew exactly how these issues are debated in America, and about American society in general. While there is a lot of ignorance in some areas, there is also quite a lot of tolerance of all religions (except Mormons:) and it's not a godless Sodom and Gomorrah, no matter how much I wish it were.

It was very similar to classes I had earlier this week, in which a discussion of media had turned into why America Hates the Arabs, and a one on Edward Said and Orientalism turned into the America is Colonizing Iraq Hour.

The Australian giving a presentation was making a point about how America in Iraq is different than Britain in Iraq/Palestine/Egypt or France in Syria. "The Americans want to leave." But the teacher and the other classmates did not buy this. "No they want to stay and control the oil. They never wanted Democracy, they just want to control the oil and occupy the land."

Hold up. No fan on the occupation of Iraq myself, I had to make a few distinctions. America is not against Democracy in Iraq. The administration doesn't care that much about the type of government that emerges, as long as Iraq is friendly on foriegn policy and to American business interests. The problem with Saddam wasn't that he was a dictator - we're friends with enough of those, but that he threatened our good dictatorial friends the Saudis. And oil. If he had remained the nice dictator he was in the 80s, shaking hands with oil companies, there would have been no reason to invade. I tried to explain that an idea had developed in the Bush government that if Saddam was removed, Iraq could become another Turkey - friendly democracy that doesn't controvene the US on foreign policy. If it is an unfriendly democracy, well, look at Palestine. Or going back in history, Congo, Iran...

America does not want to occupy Iraq. Bush wants a nice elected government that does fuck all domestically (who cares?) but goes with the US on important international matters, and gives business a whack at the resources. I'm not saying this is admirable, but it is not the French in Syria.

Back in the States, I am not at all reticent about criticizing US foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, or American misperceptions. But here, I often feel compelled to defend America under attack. At least through most of the debate, "American government" or "Bush's goverment" was used instead of the general "America", and I often express skepticism with my own goverment. But when people talk about America as a monolith of ignorance and hatred for Islam and the Middle East - c'mon. I know we have Fox News and a shitload of assholes who were mad that Keith Ellison got elected (first Muslim in Congress) not to mention all the assholes who would be mad if they actually followed the news enough to know that Mr. Ellison had been elected, but we also have a diversity of debate. Half of us were against the war from the start, for example. Half of us voted for Kerry. What, 70% of us finally realize what a horrible fuck up the war in Iraq is. And some of us are Muslim or Arab, and many of us have friends, colleagues, or family who are Muslim or Arab. I don't mean to say America is a happy land of handholding and racial/religious tolerance, but shit, people aren't lighting cars on fire in our banlieues.

At least at dinner we could agree on one thing: "My teacher told me to read 'The World is Flat' by Thomas Friedman, and it was so bad! I hate that man." Amen.

Mad Props

No disrepect to Ramadan or Islam is intended on my part. Fasting during Ramadan is mad hard, hard enough that I couldn't keep it up for long. I was more making fun of myself for fasting because unlike Muslims I don't have any religious or spiritual reasons behind it, and I'm a pussy who couldn't do it. I was really just doing it for the experience, but when I realized I was looking forward to my period for the first time ever (women can't fast during that) it was clear that Ramadan isn't for me. So I don't know which is really more offensive: my complaining about how hard Ramadan is or fasting as an atheist "trying out something new!" I'm done fasting now since never getting sick or having a digestive problem when I was in Egypt is catching up with me (what happened to my stomach of steel?).

"Dude, fasting is hard. How long till iftar? I want some water."

"Why are you doing it if all you do it complain?"

"..."

And here's a random fun quote from a friend: "In Syria, we worship the moustache."

دعيفة وسعيدة

That didn't last very long. Yesterday, the third day of Ramadan, I broke my fast. I had run a shitload of errands, and was hanging with my friend Colin deciphering a newspaper (he's working on Jahin). The sun was brutal. Fuck it, I bought some water. ya haram! But it was delicious. Maybe with the promise of heavenly rewards I could have held out. Food, that's not so hard but water? That's just cruel. So I drank. I was weak and happy- دعيفة وسعيدة . But I guess that's quite common for me ever since I lost my religion, whereas in my younger, religious years I would have savoured suffering for god. I'm weak and hedonistic, and loving it!

My I-need-some-water position was reconfirmed today during the first day of classes. I actually tested into level 5, though with how the test went I had been readying myself for 3. Four hours a day - I can't get through that without something to drink. Food in my belly from a more recent time than 4am suhour would also be nice. Also, suhour makes me dead tired. Iftar at 7 means I'm not that tired until 11 or 12. Suhour at 4am. When suhour is over before 5 (after helping clean up and all that) It takes me a while to get to sleep, what with having just eaten and the tea forced upon me each morning. Another girl in my house also broke fast today with Coke and juice. I'll still not eat during the day (for however long that lasts on this, the fourth day of Ramadan) but give me that water.

Ramadan Karim

Ramadan began today. This meant Um Zahir woke us all up at quarter to 3:00 am for the morning meal. She knocked on my door and asked "Aneet, tasoumee?" (Are you fasting?) Well, once I'm awake, why not. We groggily went downstair and ate, before going back to bed at 4:00am. While we were eating the family recieved calls and made call wishing people a happy Ramadan, and found out that we were an hour early. The Ramadan calendar Sandra bought yesterday was off my an hour - ouch.

So I've decided to fast. Everyone's doing it, except Mindy who's been too sick to leave the house. Why are we all doing it? None of us are Muslim. But by fasting I'm adding to my white girl foreigner experience of this crazy different culture! What other reason do I have? My excuse is that fasting means meals with the family, meaning more Arabic. Sigh... only 3 more hours until I can eat (7pm). What am I saying? I can eat anytime I want. 3 more hours until I allow myself to eat.

I had my placement test at the University today, which just about raped me. Two hour test of four thirty minute sections: listening, reading, grammer, writing, and then an oral portion. I fucked up, but I hope not bad enough to be put in a horribly low level, at which point I should just give up.

I started talking to this Syrian girl while I was waiting for my oral, and I was telling her how I find Arabic hard. "I think it's beautiful," she said. Beautiful, I concurred, but still hard. "Language is not hard if you really love it and commit yourself to it. I'm learning Japanese right now and it's supposed to be a hard language but because I love it and the sound of it I love to study and so it's not hard."

Thanks. Arabic isn't hard, I just don't love it enough.

To Fast or Not to Fast?

Ramadan might start tomorrow if the moon is visible tonight. Should I fast or not? Zahir asked me today after my marathon with the bureaucracy whether I was planning on fasting. I hadn't really considered it... after all I'm not Muslim. I told him maybe, but I like food. He and Um Zahir laughed at this, but said I should think about fasting.

Lindsey is planning to fast. Initially, for solidarity with her Muslim husband. When she told him, he got mad, and told her that she shouldn't fast for him, fasting should be only for God. She set off to the Bible and a translated Qur'an to find out whether she could theologically justify her fast. She's fasting, she decided, for God. It's the same God.

I feel as though I shouldn't fast, despite Jolianne's "Ramadan Diet" success (this was just a good side effect, not her aim in fasting last year). I am, after all, an atheist and fasting for God is therefore not a possibility. Would it be wrong of me to fake piety? Or worse, fast for the aesthetics, meaninglessly attaching corporal and temporal concerns to what is supposed to be a religious act?

I won't be eating or drinking in public, which is rude when everyone around you is fasting. But what will I say when the family invites me down for iftar (the meal to break fast), and asks me whether I fasted?

Also, it's really hot and I can't imagine making it from 8am (classes at 9) to sundown without water. And a month is a long-ass time.

2006: Damascus: Mosque Party!

I had finally made it to Damascus after a fun journey. I was dropped off at al-Haramein hotel on Sharia Bahsa, got a room, threw my shit down, brushed my teeth, and took a long-overdue shower. Despite having not slept since the ferry the previous day, I felt envigorated and went out into Damascus.

It was immediately apparent that I was in Syria: pictures of Bashar al-Assad everywhere. Not just on giant billboards, but on the backs of cars and in store windows, like a mustachioed icon, a saint in sunglasses. Some back car windows even had the trinity of the current president, his late father the former president, and his late brother the former heir to the Republic (all in sunglasses naturally).






I followed the copied pages from the Lonely Planet Middle East and went to Suq al-Hamidiyya. Since it was Friday the street was pretty empty and most of the shops were closed. But the Ummayad Mosque was sure open!

There are seperate entrances for tourists and the faithful, the former needing to give up about a dollar in entrance fees and don a black abaya. Once inside, you can wander and photograph to your heart's content, as I did. It was after Friday prayers so it wasn't stuffed, but still had a bit of activity. The Ummayyad Mosque was a Roman temple to Jupiter turned into a Christian church under the Byzantine Empire then turned into a mosque under the Ummayyad Empire. It's very cool because vestiges of the mosque's previous incarnations are visibile: the structure. The mosaics looked Byzantine to me.

Just outside the mosque are the bones of the gosh darn bestest Muslim in the world (at least according to every Crusader): Salah ad-Din. Without much fanfare or signage, twin sarcophogi are lit up by green florescent lights. Salah ad-Din was buried in a wooden sarcophagus in 1193, but in 1893 Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany donated a marble one. The body was never transferred so there remain the two.

Away from the Ummayyad mosque, I went to the Shi'i Sayyida Ruqayya Mosque, daughter of Hussein grandson of the Prophet. Built by Iran, Lonely Planet finds the mosque "quite alien, but very striking, Persian".Those with better standing to evaluate Persianity must judge. I once again was handed a temporary abaya (this time by a man, who also tried to help me secure it). Handing it back to him when leaving I discovered that he spoke English, and he discovered that I was an unsaved soul in need to proselytizing. "Meet me tomorrow. I will tell you all about Islam" he said, giving me a paper with his number. He was cute, and I wondered if he was trying to convert me, hit on me, or both.

I was mosqued out so I ate some falafel (delicious) and made for Azem Palace, residence of the wali (governor) of Damascus during the Ottoman Empire. I took a free tour in Arabic, of which I understood a surprisingly large amount (surprising to me). I even asked a couple of questions. The guide was very impressed, as many people are when a foreigner, especially an American, speaks Arabic. Sadly, the bar is set very low: I guess "Sabah al-gheer" is a welcome change from "EX-CUSE me, do YOU SPEAK ENGLISH? ENGLISH?", at least in Egypt. In Syria people were surprised that I was even in their country.

COMING UP: I explore the Christian Quarter which means Church Party!

Douchebaggery! Thomas L. Friedman

In honor of Independence Day, a reminder that free speech extends to douchebags:
The incomparable Thomas Friedman in his Wednesday column found it necessary to comment on the recent attempted terror attacks in England.

Describing the chaos, two bombs, and "Allah," he queries the reader "Where was I? Baghdad? Kabul? Tel Aviv?" You know, scary places. "No, I was in England." Holy shit! Terrorism? In England? Impossible gov'ner! "But it could have been anywhere. The Middle East: now playing at a theatre new you."

The overwrought drama aside (and his inclusion of Kabul in the "Middle East") this doesn't even make sense. Terrorism is apparently a new, exported Middle Eastern thing, like the hookah bars popping up everywhere. We can easily find incidences of terrorism in England's history that don't have to do with Muslims, or even the Middle East- several involving a little organization called the IRA. When there's a Tamil Tiger attack in Sri Lanka, is that the Middle East? What about Marxist rebels in Nepal? If shit blows up anywhere in the world is that the Middle East playing?

God no, of course not. Friedman clears that up for us: only if Muslims are involved. Looking at several events in the past couple years and the disparate identities of the terrorists, their disparate aims and methods, yet their common espoused religion, he concludes that these Muslims are fucking crazy and no one in the Muslim world is condemning it. Why are these Muslims angry? They think their religion is right and are all pissed off about the prosperity of non-Muslims. "This creates a real dissonance and humiliation. How could this be? Who did this to us?" Variation on a theme, similar to Bernard Lewis, that "They hate us because of who were are, not what we do."

First of all, Juan Cole has already dealt with this: there are denunciations of terror from Muslims - important ones too. Second, every religion thinks it's right to the exclusion of all others. Third, why can't Muslims or Middle Easterners (cause it's all the same, right?) be pissed off about real political events or policy? For example, cutting off aid to the Palestinian people when they elect a government we don't like. Or maybe, the Iraq war.

Silly me, Thomas Friedman is right. Muslims are crazy motherfuckers who hate us for our freedom- I mean our prosperity/their poverty/our porn/the Crusades, and if not lovers of terrorism, then at least chill with it. Otherwise, Muslims would condemn it, and Thomas L. Friedman says they don't. And he wears the moustache of truth.