Thursday, November 17, 2005

Americans Abroad, Pt. IV

...a continuing series on people, perceptions, and stereotypes discovered on the road

Once in a while I'll write something about America or Americans and I'll either get email of support or contention. The supportive emails go something like this, "Yeah... when I was traveling, people said that to me, too." The contentious emails are more along these lines: "Hey... why are you so negative about America, the greatest country in the world?"

Like many people, I too grew up thinking that America's the best country in the world. Our parents and teachers teach us this as children. We are a nationalistic people, Americans. We are proud people, right down to the bumper stickers you see on some cars that proclaim, "My kids are 'straight A' students at Pioneer High School." I've seen others that say (and these give me a chuckle), "My kids at Bully High kick the butts of your geeks at Pioneer High." I'm sure you've seen them -- they may read differently, I'm not quoting... but this is the general gist. My point is that we are a people focused on 'being the best'... maybe we are also just a tad competitive as well, and failing to 'be the best' doesn't have much of a place in society. In fact, competition has defined America in conversations I've had with Europeans. And they site this American trait as a reason for the technological innovations that come from the U.S., the fact that we are a leading economy and power in the world. There you go: something positive...

I have come to realize just how nationalistic we are when I receive the contentious variety of email from people who are a bit annoyed that I have something negative to report on our great country. And that's just it -- for the most part, I am reporting, not editorializing my own opinions (although this is my journal so there is bound to be some opinion). Basically, I write about (and respond to) things people say or historical events that are relevant to my travels. I have not set out, in this blog, to 'diss' the U.S. for the fun of doing so. I have a whole other blog for doing that (just kidding).

Anyways, c'mon folks... nobody's perfect, including the USA. There's always a little room for criticism. Especially in the US; it's one of our inalienable rights. Also, if some of you are wondering why I am focused on America in these posts and not other countries, the answer is because I am American traveling through this world and for that reason, this is where my focus lies. If I were French or English or Dutch, I wouldn't be talking about America but France or England or the Netherlands, and so on. In fact, you be reading something like this, 'Des félicitations sauterelle, vous avez maîtrisé de niveau un. Vous vous êtes avéré être très futé. Très futé en effet. Mais, mon peu le vert un, pouvez-vous également maître niveler deux?" or this, 'De sprinkhaan van gelukwensen, heeft u niveau beheerst. U hebt zich zeer slim om bewezen te zijn. Zeer slim inderdaad. Maar mijn weinig groene, kunt u niveau twee ook beheersen?'

And now, I will move on to the main point of this edition of 'Americans Abroad', and lucky for me and those worried about my loyalty to the U.S., I have positive things to say... There have been many times that I've left a country we visited thinking, "Thank God I come from the States." Much of the time, it's, "Thank God I come from the States, especially being the female that I am."

Women in America enjoy much more freedom and equality than their counterparts in Asia and for this, I would have chosen America as my homeland over any of the countries I've visited all those years ago when I was just an idea in someone's head (actually, my conception was accidental so I never really was an idea in someone's head until after a missed period and a visit to the doctor, but I digress...).

In the male dominated society in India, for example, I moved around the country feeling like an invisible person. I was largely ignored -- all greetings were, "Good morning, Sir," addressed to Benjamin. He was the point of contact in almost all interactions -- I would pay the bill, he would get the change. I would finish my drink, he would be asked if I'd like another. This kind of thing became frustrating and it didn't take long before I felt the toll. It's amazing how in such a short period of time, I came to feel inadequate and unimportant. I can only imagine the mindset of girls and women born in similar places: inferiority is bred and women are defined by their relationships to men. For example, in newspapers the stories about women always started off saying something like, "Aamani Kumar, the wife of Rajish Kumar and the daughter of So-and-So..." before even getting on to the story. That kind of long winded introduction in America is reserved for people who are defined by celebrity parents because otherwise, their story wouldn't interest us. We need to know why this nobody who has wrecked his car is important enough for national news.

Also in the newspaper, there are ads that read, "Save the Girl Child." This is because male children are more desirable. One reason is due to the practice of dowry, which make daughters financial burdens. A family must pay to get its daughter married off and the better the dowry, the better the husband, and a good husband is one from a family with social and economic standing. Arranged marriages, which most are in India, are more like contracts that result in a better social circle, network, and wealth. Selective abortions and cases of female infanticide are not unknown... aparently the lives of enough girls are still at risk to warrant ads in the paper to protect them.

Although I have much more to say about India, this topic is a good bridge to the next country I want to talk about, China. I had a conversation with a pleasant Chinese man about male/female roles in his country, which stemmed from discussion about China's one-child policy and the desire for male children. If people can only have one child, they want a boy. The pleasant Chinese man explained to me that boys are 'better' than girls because they carry on the family line. It's not hard to understand the general principle because in the West, male children carry on a family's name and that is important to many people. They want at least one son... but they are not devastated to have daughters. Daughters are welcomed into families with joy regardless of how many sons have or have not been born.

But as I talked with Mr. Pleasant, I was surprised to hear that it's not only the carrying on of the family name, but it's that male genes are more potent or pure or superior to those of females. This I couldn't understand. "But a girl or a boy coming from the same parents will have the same 'quality' of genes, despite their gender," I argued. But he was having none of it.

In regards to passing on the family name, it is possible for daughters to keep their surname even after marriage and, perhaps, pass it onto her children. The thing is, no-one does that and it would be a horrible fight, even in America, between a wife and her husband to name the children after the woman's lineage instead of the man's. This I could make no argument against because I could understand it, even though I don't necessarily agree with it -- it's a practice based on tradition. There is no biological or other reason children are named for their father's family today, other than that's the way it's always been done. Maybe there was some organization of society back in the old days that started this tradition and it made 'sense', but as I write this, I have to wonder: why are our family names (females) less important?

I spoke to many women in China about marriage and work and equality. Whereas in India, women don't work but remain in the realm of the household, women in China were at work everywhere. This doesn't mean they are 'equal' to men... it just means that in addition to the household chores, they also work. Women are expected to marry young, have children, run a tight household, and make money for the family. If a woman doesn't marry or have children (of if she has a child out of wedlock), she is an embarassment to her family. If she is an 'old' woman, say over 27, and not married, she is the joke and object of ridicule in town: obviously there is something wrong with her. I met young women who want to have a life of their own before the requirements of marriage and children and work take up all the hours of her day. These women described the life I have had... one in which I have the ability to make my own decisions with the support of my family. One in which I have been able to pursue my own interests... all the way to the age of 33... as a single, childless, independent person. The gravity of this was not lost on me and it's because in America, I have the option. Thank God for America.

One last thing to say about China and gender (in)balance -- in the Yunnan Province there are Naxi people, a matrilineral society -- meaning, women occupy traditional roles of men. In other words, they run the show. Even still, the men I talked to about this laughed that while the women work and make decisions, the men have time to play cards, paint, practice music, and just hang around, lazing about. Ultimately, they had a good thing going. It was as if the unusual role reversal of 'power' the women hold is a big inside joke. These men cited an old Chinese saying that explains the bent, humped backs of old ladies, "The cheek is to the ground and the back is to the sun." Look at any of China's countryside and this makes sense: there are lots of women doing the farming. So, even in a community where women are more 'equal', they are not really equal, as long as their male counterparts take advantage of the situation.

I lied... there is actually one more thing I'd like to relay about women in China. Because of the one-child policy, there are more men than women. Not only will this present a problem in China's future populance, but it means that in some places, women are 'sold' by poor families to be wives for men who cannot find one. Sometimes the women are even kidnapped. In Vietnam, we were told by one young man that they ship the ugly Vietnamese girls off to China to be wives. I'm sure someone makes a profit in that, too. Human traffiking of women (and children) in Asia happens with more frequency than I'd like to even imagine, whether it's migrant labor, prostitution, or for marriage. Countries with acute poverty have desperate people and profiting from the sale of a daughter, family friend, or stranger is the way some survive (but don't get me wrong, the traffikers are rich). Lucky me that I never had to worry about this in America. I can't imagine even the poorest of families resorting to this -- but having said that, I shouldn't presume it could not or does not happen.

Cambodia has a saying that goes something like, "men are gold and women are cloth." What this essentially means is that if, say, you dropped a piece of gold in the mud, it can be cleaned. If you dropped a piece of cloth in mud, it would be stained (this must have been written before stain repellents and washing machines). I learned about this saying in the context of the Asian view on sexuality. Men are free to sow their oats and women are not, lest they 'ruin' themselves. This isn't all that surprising -- in America, too, fathers wink at their sons for shagging a hot girl but look upon sexually active daughters with disappointment. That's generalizing, I know, but it is true that men who sleep around are 'studs' and women who do are 'whores'. Of course, there are whores and there are girls you date/shag/marry and in America, you can be the latter and it's OK, unlike many parts of Asia. In Asia, the divide is more extreme -- women who play around before marriage probably won't find a husband who'll want them. American values have changed and it wasn't long ago that only virgins could wear white to their weddings and now, when women do, people secretly smirk amongst themselves because they know she ain't no virgin and that's as far as it goes, it's pretty much acceptable (unless you're a die-hard Christian and will spend eternity in hell for pre-marital sex). In any event, women in America aren't stigmatized the way women in Asia are in regards to sexuality -- and much of this comes from having a society where girls and boys grow up as individuals, worthy of their own merit, with a greater degree of equality.

To take it one step further, women in America are not held accountable for the sexual desires of men, except by the type of simpleminded and cretinous person who places the blame for rape or sexual misconduct on the way a woman dresses: the old "she was asking for it" excuse. In India (and many other countries), the tradition of covering one's self from head to toe in fabric is to help men control their voracious sexual desires -- it, in some strange logic, is the woman's responsibility to hide herself so as not to tempt men because they cannot help themselves. It's a bit pathetic, if you ask me -- that men, the strong and macho and 'we know best' men, cannot control themselves in the presence of beauty. The role of 'temptress' carries with it negative conceptions of a 'bad girl', one with corrupt morals. It immediately places women a few rungs lower on the ladder.

In short, I am happy to be an American woman. I am so happy to be one, I jump up and down and click my heels in my head when I think about all of the things I have experienced and learned about the place of women in other societies. But that's not the only thing I'm happy to be an American for. I am happy for the freedom of speech. In China, information is controlled with a tight fist and access to even blogs on the internet is denied to its people. When we were there, I could access the site where I make entries to this blog, but I could not read the blog itself, like all of you could. It was blocked. In the next year, there will be a law in China requiring all bloggers to register themselves with the government. They want to keep tabs on what people are saying. I'm sure these people won't say what they really want to when they're being watched. In Myanmar, where we'll be traveling in the coming weeks, the oppressive military regime has even blocked hotmail and yahoo so citizens have no access to free email. Freedom of speech is one of the most important of American rights and for this, I love my country (because I am trying to only be positive in this entry, I will refrain from commenting on the erosions of this right under the current right wing Republican administration - hey, I know what you're thinking: there she goes again... but humor me, will ya? this is my blog, afterall...).

One last stroke for the ole' U.S. of A. We are wealthy. Even the poor are wealthy in comparison to the poor in the developing world. It's easy to take for granted because at home, it's normal... and in fact, at home I don't even feel wealthy -- I get by. But because of America's wealth, I have had more opportunity than many people in much of the rest of the world. One example is this trip I'm on -- many people cannot dream of travel and may have never even left their village or city. Of course it's hard to compare a first world nation with third world countries, but the point is that on the whole, life has been easy for me. People see America this way and that's why so many of them wait in long lines for days outside of our embassies in other countries. I've seen it first hand, years ago in Prague and recently in Bangkok. It is rather startling to see a line of people a mile long who all want a chance to come to America. It really makes you think. It really makes you feel lucky to live in the U.S., and to have gotten there so 'hassle-free' (although from what I hear, birth is the most traumatic experiences of a human life. I'm happy I can't remember mine).

As you can see, I have a lot to say -- positive things. I haven't been focusing on the negative about America all this time... I've only been saving all this good stuff up so I could make one huge, monumental blog. Not to take away from all the love, but I feel I should say this: I'm certain had I been from France, England, and the Netherlands (and others), I could say the same things that I have just recounted about America. Perhaps this blog is really about something 'bigger' than America: the West as opposed to the East, first world as opposed to third world... But I started this entry out by stating I am focused on America because that is who I am so I will leave this piece as it stands.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Women's Traveling Ways Written in Thai Tribes' Genes

A new report shows how genes can help reveal how societal rules affect mobility. The genetic study focused on traditional tribes in Thailand and found that in some societies, many more women than men migrated for marriage. One explanation is that men have been keeping non-related men out of their villages.

The findings raise questions about how society structure can impact genetic diversity in certain locations. This kind of research may also lead to the use of genetic analysis to determine early society structure.

The researchers studied six traditional populations in northern Thailand to determine the effect social organization has on the migration patterns of men and women.

Three of the groups were patrilocal societies, societies where married couples move to the husband's village. Three more groups were matrilocal, societies where married couples typically live in the wife's village.

The researchers found that the two societal arrangements result in significantly different postmarital migration patterns, despite the fact that the groups are all agriculturally based and live in the same geographic region.

"What we find is that in the patrilocal societies, the females are moving much, much more than the males are," said Laurent Excoffier, a population geneticist at the University of Bern in Switzerland.

"In matrilocal society males are moving a bit more than females, but it is not at a rate that is statistically significant—essentially the males and females are moving at about the same rate. It's clearly different from what is happening in the patrilocal society."

The hill tribes studied included the Ahka and two groups of Lisu, representing a patrilocal society. The Lahu, Red Karen, and White Karen represented matrilocal societies.

All six groups are agricultural, hacking a difficult livelihood out of marginal lands in the isolated backcountry of Thailand.

The study showed that, in patrilocal societies, 15 times more women than men were being exchanged among these neighboring populations.

"Our findings raise interesting questions about what is controlling male-versus-female migration in these groups," said Mark Stoneking, an evolutionary geneticist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany.

"The fact that the matrilocal groups are fairly loose and that, even though they prefer that males migrate to the residence of the female, there's obviously a lot of female migration still going on. ... In patrilocal groups they've basically completely shut down the migration of males between groups. [That] is compatible with the hypothesis that men are strictly controlling male immigration in patrilocal societies."

Using previously published genetic data to track migration patterns, the researchers developed a statistical model to examine the differences in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome data among the six groups.

Population geneticists study mtDNA and Y chromosome data to determine an individual's genetic history.

Mitochondrial DNA is passed on from mothers to both sons and daughters. Y-chromosomes are passed only from fathers to sons.

Every so often random mutations in a DNA sequence occur. These mutations, which happen naturally and are usually harmless, are called markers.

Once a marker has been identified, geneticists can count the differences within and among populations, defining a unique lineage of descent. These lineages can be used to track migration patterns.

Prior to this study it was not possible to estimate male and female migration separately. The genetic data allowed the authors to compare the movements of males and females within the same society.

What they found is that among the hill tribes of northern Thailand, on average, fewer than one male entered a patrilocal society per generation, but there were lots of new females—more than seven per generation.

The ratio of female immigrants versus male immigrants was much more balanced in matrilocal hill tribes. Here, the number of incoming men and women was close to the same, with around four males and three females entering per generation.

The study raises interesting questions about how social organization affects genetic diversity and suggests that genetic data can be used to interpret social organization in the past. The study is published in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Looking at Prehistoric Societies

Future studies may enable scientists to look at genetic data and determine the social organization of a particular group.

"One idea is that, perhaps earlier in human history, most groups were matrilocal or at least there wasn't a great deal of control over whether males or females migrated," Stoneking said.

According to the theory, only when resources became abundant did patrilocality arise. Stoneking said that by staying put and keeping other males out, men controlled those resources.

Under this hypothesis, patrilocality would emerge, depending on the region, between 6,000 and 12,000 years ago, as groups converted from hunting and gathering societies to agricultural societies.

"What we'd known before is that in human populations, we find, in general, bigger differences between groups for the Y chromosome than for mitochondrial DNA, which is consistent with patrilocality," Stoneking said. "In this study we were able to test what we already knew and to actually estimate male and female migration rates."

"The novel conclusion of this study is that patrilocality and matrilocality are not just simply the opposites of each other," he said. "There's a lot more going on in terms of social control of movement of individuals. ..."

3:15 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home