The use of Arabic Words in the Media

This article which I found interesting was in the LA times a few days ago. Here are some excerpts:

“English has always had a special fondness for other European languages, a neighborly soft spot -- perhaps because Britain has been invaded by speakers of those languages from the onset of its recorded history.”


“So whenever I come across an Arabic word mired in English text, I am momentarily shocked out of the narrative. Of course, English has pilfered numerous bits of Arabic -- "artichoke," "zero," "genie," "henna," "saffron," "harem," "tariff" -- but the appropriation was so long ago that few English speakers know the words' origin. These dictionary entries were probably introduced by the Moors into Spanish first, and then by the Spaniards into English.”

“If we take away the familiar food pilferages ("hummus," "falafel"), words recently adopted from Arabic are all troublesome: "hijab," "intifada," "fatwa" and "jihad." For an English speaker, the first suggest humiliation, the last three violence.”

“English has yet to incorporate these words fully, and history suggests it might never do so. The language is filled with words that are culture specific: "sahib," "coolie," "effendi," "bey." The word "emir" simply means prince in Arabic, but in English it is a prince or ruler of an Islamic state. When my sister in Beirut tells her daughter a bedtime story, the emir kisses the sleeping princess awake. No mother in the U.S. or Britain would let an emir anywhere near a princess' lips. No princess will ever sing "Someday My Emir Will Come.
"”

“That in some ways is how it should be. Language, after all, is organic. You can't force words into existence. You can't force new meanings into words. And some words can't or won't or shouldn't be laundered or neutered. Language develops naturally.”

“I bring all this up, however, to get to the word whose connotation I would love to see changed -- "Allah.
"”

“In Arabic, Muslims, Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians all pray to Allah. In English, however, Christians and Jews pray to God, and Allah is the Muslim deity. No one would think of using the word "Allah" to talk about any other religion. The two words, "God" and "Allah," do not mean the same thing in English. They should.”


“God, however, is a big deal. The word for God matters quite a bit more than what lands on one's table for dinner at night. We never say the French pray to Dieu, or Mexicans pray to Dios. Having Allah be different from God implies that Muslims pray to a special deity. It classifies Muslims as the Other. Separating Allah from God, we only see a vengeful, alarming deity, one responsible for those frightful fatwas and ghastly jihads -- rarely the compassionate God. The opening line of every chapter in the Koran is "Bi Ism Allah, Al Rahman, Al Rahim": In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful. In the name of Allah. One and the same.”

“The separation is happening on all sides. This year, the Malaysian government issued an edict warning the Herald, a weekly English newspaper, that no religion except Islam can use the word Allah to denote God. No such edict, or fatwa for that matter, is needed for the New York Times: a quick search through the archives shows that Allah is used only as the Muslim God.”

I’ve written about the issue of orientalism in the media before. I also agree the author that the word Allah should be more inclusive on all sides. I don’t agree in not using it all together however, or using it in a non-Muslim context necessarily, but nevertheless good article.

An understanding of the power the media uses in their methodology to describe Islam is crucial when considering the significance of their representation. There is nothing simple or contained about the way language operates. In the Western dichotomy of self and other, the self always holds the universal truths and the position of good, while that which the other holds as truth is incorrect and the label as a whole takes on the position of evil. When labels become widely accepted definitions, such that they actually shape what they are labeling, the glaring inequality between the labeled and labelers truly come to light such that the cultural and ideological imperialism of the West fundamentally defines and constructs the Islamic World through discourse.

In light of this, we, as media audiences, must be aware of the motivations and reasons for the current media coverage of the Islamic world. To what extent is the coverage and investigation of Muslims and their culture rooted in America's innocent curiosity and need to know, and to what extent is it fueled by the post-9/11 paranoia and other national interests that associate Islam with terrorism. Ideas and information spread by these news sources can lead to dominant definitions worldwide and have the ability to manufacture the opinions and consent of significant numbers of people, such as the consent to rescind civil rights from certain groups of people, to go to war, and to view the deaths of innocent civilians on foreign soils as "collateral damage."

Islam remains, as Said argues, the last association of peoples where malicious and derogatory generalizations about them remain accepted in the mainstream. We, as the media's audience and as producers of media, must reexamine our perceptions of Islam and be skeptical of the dominant images of Islam in the media.

Frank talk from Muslim Sex Therapist

Cairo-based Heba Kotb tackles sensitive issues within the framework of Islam.

By Jeffrey Fleishman, Times Staff WriterJuly 29, 2007

CAIRO — In the delicate realm where the Koran meets human desire, Heba Kotb, a Muslim sex therapist in a ruffled gold head scarf, has strong opinions on vibrators, foreplay, premature you-know-what and why more men can't seem to locate the G-spot.

An hour in her clinic, where some women wear black abayas that reveal only their eyes, is a liberating venture into a culture that has traditionally relegated talk of sex to a family whisper. Demure she may appear, but Kotb's voice is strong and unapologetically public. The Koran, she said, forbids sex outside marriage, but within that union carnal satisfaction is a requisite for happiness."

I deal with pleasure, desire, orgasms, masturbation, sexual frequency and erection problems," said Kotb, whose TV show, "Big Talk," is popular across the Arab world. "Neither the Koran nor the Sunna, however, address masturbation. My advice is that it's OK to masturbate, but only if you need it badly. Masturbation has become more prevalent here because sex is forbidden outside marriage.

"In a society in which male clerics issue fatwas, or religious edicts or opinions, addressing all layers of family life, a feminine voice on something as intimate as sex has made Kotb a celebrity and a cultural revolutionary.

Some conservative clerics accuse Kotb of catering to sinners and Western-influenced permissiveness, but, overall, there has been little outcry about her frankness. Kotb's advice on sex is meticulously framed within the context of matrimony, which she says is a gift from God."

Everyone is searching for better sex, but people aren't having the best sex," she said. "Sex within Islam is the best. It covers the man's rights and the woman's rights. Islam is the ultimate sexuality. It's beyond the stereotypes of Islamic oppression. I'm replacing that template. I'm replacing the stereotypes."

Kotb's interest in the subject arose from conversations with sex offenders while working on her forensic medicine degree at Cairo University. She later studied sexology and philosophy at Maimonides University in Florida; her dissertation was titled Sexuality in Islam. She wrote advice columns for newspapers, including one called "Behind Closed Doors." In 2006, she started her own late-night TV talk show on the private Egyptian satellite channel El Mehwar."

I thought about the core of sexuality and religion," she said. "How many relationships could I save knowing about this? At first, there was a state of shock over the TV show. Gradually it was accepted, and today people love it. I think, outside of the sex act, people have little idea about their own sexuality. Five years ago, I'd see two or three patients a week. Today, I'm booked three months ahead."

Kotb has a lively face bordered by a hijab. She wears rings and bracelets; her cellphone hums incessantly, and she seems comfortable with her high profile. She blends science and anatomy charts with the Koran and the Sunna, teachings based on the life of the prophet Muhammad, who, Kotb noted, tended dutifully to his wives.

Kotb advises her listeners that every sexual encounter outside marriage leaves an indelible mark, and that the accumulation of those marks can destroy a relationship and push one further from God. But her larger aim is to help Muslims overcome sexual ignorance by showing them that scripture from centuries ago is relevant to today's preferences and inhibitions.

"It's hard for people to confess that they have no idea about sex, especially men — they think they're Valentinos," Kotb said, referring to those unschooled in the intricacies of the multiple orgasm. "Sometimes men believe they know everything, and some are, in fact, lying."

To add religious legitimacy to her show, Kotb invites young preachers to answer questions from viewers. Many are part of a movement that emerged in the 1990s that offers a less conventional interpretation of Islamic theology. On one program, Kotb and Sheik Khaled Abdullah discussed the misconception that sex is forbidden during the holy month of Ramadan."There is no correlation between how faithful you are to God and how much you avoid having sex in Ramadan," Kotb said.

Abdullah added: "Whenever you feel you need [to have sex] with your wife or whenever your wife feels the same according to God's rule, you can exercise this right and you will be rewarded for that … as long as you do it between sunset and dawn prayers."

Economics is also a factor in a nation where widespread poverty delays or prevents many couples from marrying. This, along with the increasing Western influence, most notably from risque music videos on satellite TV, is nudging more Egyptians into sex outside marriage.

Read on here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sextalk29jul29,0,7141531.story?coll=la-home-center

jeffrey.fleishman@latimes.com--Special correspondent Noha El Hennawy contributed to this report.

The Case for Islamophobia

No, this is not just another right-wing opine piece, it is down right islamophobic, racist, offensive and disgusting. I cannot believe the LA Times would publish something like this.

Below are excerpts that are particularly disturbing:

Now, despite friendly and long-lasting relations with many Muslims, my first reaction on seeing Muslims in the street is mistrust; my prejudice, far from having been inherited or inculcated early in life, developed late in response to events.

The fundamental problem is this: There is an asymmetry between the good that many moderate Muslims can do for Britain and the harm that a few fanatics can do to it. The 1-in-1,000 chance that a man is a murderous fanatic is more important to me than the 999-in-1,000 chance that he is not a murderous fanatic: If, that is, he is not especially valuable or indispensable to me in some way.

And the plain fact of the matter is that British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution even of moderate Muslims. The only thing we really want from Muslims is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property prices and to sustain the luxury market; their cheap labor that we imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant.

In other words, one of the achievements of the bombers and would-be bombers is to make discrimination against most Muslims who wish to enter Britain a perfectly rational policy. This is not to say that the government would espouse it, other than surreptitiously by giving secret directions to visa offices around the world. But why should a country take an unnecessary risk without a compensatory benefit?

!!!!!!

I won't even begin responding to Theodore Dalrymple (his real name is Anthony Daniels) because I think there's a serious problem with his whole attitude and approach to the situation. Criticising Muslims for not doing enough to prevent and condemn terror acts is one thing, but calling for all Muslim immigrants to be deported or barred entry is another.

I can't believe that a 'respectable' newspaper would publish an article like this.

A Democratic Israel- an oxymoron?

"Why then does the U.S. government continue to fully support a country whose very identity and institutions are based on ethnic and religious discrimination that victimize its own citizens?"

That is an amazing question. I can not even begin to explain why we in the United States continue to support a country that has broken more UN resolutions then Saddam, or why we in the West continue to believe the lie that Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East- if elections make a nation democratic then by all means we have more democracies in the Middle East then we readily admit to- but unfortunately democracy is not just about having elections. It is about freedoms and rights that are protected, it is about institutions and civil structures.

For those of you who do not know, Israel is a Jewish state, and any who are not Jewish are second class citizens. If we in the West continue to feed into the this idea and support a state that is not truly in line with Democratic principles then we are fooling ourselves and setting up for a catastrophe of great magnitude.

We can not champion democracy in the Middle East- ARAB NATIONS- and continue to hold Israel as a exemption. If Israel is to be truly considered a liberal democratic society then it needs to be held to higher standards then we currently hold it as. We can not lower the bar for this nation or any other. Israel has to be criticized and brought into line with all liberal democracies. No more special treatment.

Get rid of the Pharaoh in Egypt along with the Prince of Israel.

Read more about the second class status of non-Jews in Israel.