5 Times a Day

Documentaries rock!  I know that most Americans probably don’t agree with that statement, but I’ve always been one to fly my “nerd flag” proudly!   Real life, with all its twists and turns, can be infinitely more exciting than fiction.  For example, I recently watched the Muslim in America episode from Morgan Spurlock’s 30 Days series in which Christian, West Virginia resident Dave Stacy spends thirty days living the life of a Muslim American in Dearborn, Michigan and prefer Spurlock’s amazing examinations of the many facets of human behavior over American Idol any day of the week.  The Muslim in America episode is both comically entertaining (as in the last scene when Dave bids farewell to his Muslim-American hosts and the husband says, “Did he just flip me off?” to which his wife, in traditional hijab head covering replies, “No, he was giving you the ‘Peace’ sign, dude!”) and tragically honest as it reveals the hostile and often ignorance driven prejudice which Muslim-Americans are forced to endure.

Dave Stacy grapples with a number of concepts throughout his 30 day journey.  His emotional journey is palpable.  But what I found most interesting was the stark contrast between the seemingly limited amount of influence that Stacy’s Christianity seemed to exert upon his life compared to how central to everyday life the Islamic faith was to Stacy’s Muslim-American hosts.  For example, Stacy attends a “bachelor party” for one of his hosts friends who is about to be married.  Rather than a night drunken debauchery, these young men are playing basketball together in a local gym; an innocent “outing with the guys” designed to wish their friend well on the eve of his marriage.  It is also interesting to watch Stacy trying (rather unsuccessfully) to justify to his Arabic instructor why it is ok for him, as a Christian, to drink alcohol.  Stacy also comments several times that the Muslim traditions seem overly “strict” and wonders how and when his host family relaxes and has “fun.”

The item that struck me most, however, was Stacy’s inner conflict about the daily calls to prayer.  Worried because he does not understand the Arabic words, Stacy refuses to participate initially because he fears that to do so would somehow be disloyal to his Christian beliefs.  It seems that Stacy is not alone in this concern.  This 2007 CBS News Report discusses serious opposition to the Muslim calls to prayer from Hamtramck, Michigan residents.  In a country that many assert was founded as a result of an oppressed group (the Pilgrims) seeking religious freedom the idea that its citizens would be opposed to daily calls to prayer is astounding. 

For Christians who consider the Islamic call to prayer “offensive” I have a suggestion.  Instead of protesting, treating Muslim-Americans unkindly, or in extreme cases, making threats against these worshippers why not use the call to prayer as an opportunity to practice your Christian faith by praying to God in the name of Jesus Christ?  For atheists or agnostics, why not pause to during those times to relax, meditate, appreciate nature, or perform a kindness to a fellow member of the human family?  If everyone the world over took the time to stop and pray, meditate, or reflect each according to his or her beliefs five times a day, every day, how amazing would our world be?  If we all had to stop, five times a day and simply refrain from arguing, cutting people off in traffic, flipping people off, abusing our spouses, berating our kids, cheating our customers, ignoring the old, the disabled, or the homeless, how much better would life on this earth be for everyone?  By what percentage would robberies, rapes, drug-related crimes and even battlefield deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan be reduced if we all made the commitment to take a “time out” at least five times a day to engage prayer or some other type of positive thought or action?  Maybe Morgan Spurlock’s next project should be to find out what would happen if everyone in the world made a concentrated effort to pray, meditate, or perform a conscious act of kindness five times a day for thirty days straight.  We might all be amazed.

Do Americans REALLY Believe a Clothing Ad is Fueling “Gender Confusion?”

In the midst of various and sundry crises on the world stage (think radiation leakage from nuclear power plants in Japan, continued fighting and unrest in Libya, and an apparently distraught young mother, Lashaundra Armstrong killing herself and three young children by driving her minivan into the Hudson River), it is hard to imagine that pink toenail polish on a five year old boy could cause such a firestorm of controversy.

This adorable J Crew ad (http://www.jcrew.com/womens_feature/Jennaspicks.jsp) has critics raging over the fact that it features J Crew president and creative director Jenna Lyons laughing with her young son after having painted his toenails with pink neon nail polish.  Phrases used to describe the ad, including “inappropriate”, “disturbing” and “transgender propaganda” seem unbelievable to me on several levels.

First, is homophobia in the United States still so rampant that we cannot even enjoy the sheer fun and silliness of a boy with pink toenails?  As a kid I can recall laughing hysterically when my little sister got into our mother’s makeup and created eye brows and a mustache that looked suspiciously similar to those sported by Groucho Marx.  The idea that this affinity for “pretend facial hair” in any way suggested future gender identity issues never even crossed our minds.  It was silly; it was fun; it made us laugh.  To the critics I would say, “Lighten up!  The kid is five and he’s laughing!  It isn’t as if his mom is forcing to dress like a girl.”

Second, even supposing that there is some sort of credence to the idea that five year old boys who like to have their toenails painted pink will grow up to be gay or transgendered I would say, “So what?”  Our children are who they are and like what they like.  I have a 20 year old son whom I dressed in Dockers and preppy polo shirts and cardigan sweaters when he was young because that was the style of clothing that I liked.  However, once he started dressing himself he showed an intense preference for the “grunge” look.  While I miss the buttoned-down prep school look, his ripped and baggy jeans, crazy T-shirts and funny wool caps don’t make me love or value him any less.  It’s a preference; it doesn’t change who he is on the inside and if, at some point in his life he were to tell me that he prefers romantic relationships with men over those with women that wouldn’t change who he is on the inside either.  I might not agree with his preference and I would definitely be afraid for him in terms of the discrimination he might face from society, but it wouldn’t change the importance or value of my relationship with him.

Additionally, the scientific community is still much divided on what factors determine sexual orientation and gender identity as evidenced by this 2006 CBS 60 Minutes report on 9 year old twin brothers, raised together but possessing very different perspectives on gender identity.  While genetics and environment may play some role in sexual preference and gender identify, the fact that twin brothers raised in the same home by the same parents could identify so differently suggests that there is still some unknown factor that helps in determining this particular aspect of child’s personality and psychological make-up.  However, evidence does seem to suggest that it is highly doubtful that the gender identity and future sexual preference of any child can be significantly altered by outside influences.  Those critics who insist that the toenail painting is “damaging” to this little boy should be reminded that there is currently no evidence that anyone can “turn” a child (or anyone else, for that matter) who is predisposed to heterosexuality into a homosexual or vice versa.

Perhaps what is most disheartening about this story, however is the fact that while a photo of a smiling little boy with pink toenails can generate interest, controversy, concern for his well-being and, in some instances, even outrage against perceived exploitation and abuse the American public somehow cannot seem to generate the same levels of outrage against the real problems in our society like hunger, lack of education, homelessness, and children abandoned by drug addicted parents.  If we, as a society are going to take the trouble to work up a healthy batch of “righteous indignation” let’s at least make sure that it is over something that truly matters.