This weekend, I was at an interesting panel discussion in my city of Ottawa, Canada. It was unusual in that all panellists were young — four women of around 20 and a boy of 13! The moderator was a middle-aged mother, a family doctor, with origins in Pakistan. The female panellists were from Somalia, Guatemala, Pakistan and Congo. There were about 30 in the audience, of the usual scatter of ages, but nowhere near the age of the speakers. There was the usual opening statement followed by questions from the audience. All the speakers were either born in Canada or had come there very young. Their English was perfect and without accent. Three of the five were Muslim, one wearing the hijab.
It was clear that they all did well at school and at university or in finding their places in the job market. The conversation was partly about integration into a predominantly white society where they made up what Canadians and others call visible minorities. Since Canada’s population is made up entirely of immigrants or the descendants of immigrants, it is extremely common to hear the question: “Where do you come from?” something I heard hundreds of times since I came to Canada 40 years ago. They found it irritating. Needless to say, there are some immigrants whom you need not ask the question, such as a Sikh who keeps the tradition of wearing his turban. But in the majority of cases, the ethnic background is not so obvious. It is an innocuous and innocent question, representing the genuine curiosity of the questioner. It is even more understandable when the “visible” person speaks English without accent, as in this case! And so, I would have thought that, rather than finding the question annoying or provocative, they should take it as a great compliment about their impeccable command and pronunciation of English.
I host a weekly radio show in Ottawa which I created six years ago under the title Dialogue with Diversity. I recall that I interviewed an Arab immigrant who was clearly annoyed by that question and said so on my radio show. A few days later, I received a hand written letter from a Canadian lady of Irish origin, who asked me to tell my guest not to be so hypersensitive to that question, which is simply used to initiate a conversation or is a genuine expression of the questioner’s anthropological interest. She also pointed out that people asked her the same question as soon as she divulged her different accent and so it had nothing to do with skin colour!
A second subject dealt with by the panel was the sexualisation of the female, by the media, in Canadian society today. There was all-round condemnation of that, not limited to the three Muslims. The pressure on young women to feel included, and to belong to the herd, and to conform is enormous. It is apparently not good enough to be intelligent and industrious and to get high grades, but it is also imperative to look beautiful and desirable. In the final analysis, the young panellists placed the blame for that squarely on the shoulders of the media and their insatiable thirst for gossip and tidbits that boost their sales.
The third major discussion was about the rights of women. Part of that was the issue of polygamy, as practised openly in Muslim society, for example. The overall attitude was that polygamy was not something for them, that it was not to be encouraged, but that there may be societies that accept it and if so, that was their choice. It was at that point that I had to intervene. I said that I, a post-retirement male was surprised that they, mostly females in their 20s, would have such a tolerant attitude to a system that legitimises, more than any other, the marginalisation of women and their considerations as lesser beings than men. We then heard the usual excuses for polygamy that are trotted out by men; namely that men tend to be more sexually active, and that men, even in the West, have affairs. So why not make it “legal” by allowing polygamy! What was forgotten in that argument was that since it takes two to tango, for every man that has an affair, there needs to be a participating woman! Another argument was that there are more women than men in this world, which is marginally true at present. But another older man asked if that argument could be used in reverse if the ratio was reversed, as might happen in parts of India where gender selection of male fetuses is taking place. One of the young ladies then countered by saying that it would not, because every child has the right to know who his father is; adding as an afterthought, that with DNA testing, establishing parenthood should be easy.
For me, the debate was a worthwhile experience, to be encouraged and exported to the Middle East. On the other hand, I was surprised and disappointed at the tolerant attitude shown, in Canada of all places, by young educated women, of all people, to a practice that entrenches the abuse of women’s rights more than any other.
Dr Qais Ghanem is a retired neurologist, radio show host, poet and novelist. His two novels are Final Flight from Sana’a and Two Boys from Aden College. His non-fiction My Arab Spring, My Canada was published on Monday by Amazon..
