Comments on Saudi culture insensitive
Editor,
The Leader article, Saudi Arabia, Iraq Work: Cultural Eye Opener (by Paul Fugleberg) is a homophobic and egocentric view of daily life in Saudi Arabia. That the Leader would publish such a myopic view of one person's view of entire culture is grossly insensitive. A more appropriate title might have been: Culture: In the Eye of the Beholder.
Mr. Janeway eyes Saudi Arabian cultural in a xenophobic way that can only be described as irresponsible. Blanket ethnocentric testimonials concerning the eating habits, bathroom habits, religious practices, sexual preference, and women's rights depicted by Janeway and Fugleberg show no compassion or understanding of life in the Middle East.
The careless innuendoes reflected in the article are simply not true. And how could one, as a temporary spectator, gather enough constructive information in a few months to condemn the entire Arab world? Unequivocally, all statements made in reference to the Saudi culture are misleading and are directed at stereotyped behavior reminiscent of slurs made upon minorities in this country, this county, this reservation.
Many questions that should have been posed to Mr. Janeway were conveniently avoided. How many Saudis invited Mr. Janeway into their homes to dinner to eat lamb, rice, vegetables? Do we not eat hamburgers and pizzas with our hands? How many tea houses did Mr. Janeway enter in order to join in the political discussions over tea, shisha, and backgammon? Did Mr. Janeway mention that Arabs are very religious and attending daily prayers is a religious duty, not a legal one? (For a local church to permit such remarks at a "monthly men's" breakfast does not seem very Christian … or Muslim). To print and presume that tea cafes are packed with homosexuals is ludicrous! No more than men's night at the golf course or the local lodge is a subliminal expression of homosexuality.
The Arab people are very friendly, outgoing, and curious about Americans. However, if one was dressed in the manner Mr. Janeway was in the article photo, that person would not be invited to any social or religious function at all. In the context of the article, the accompanying photo seems to portray an ugly America regardless of who is wearing it. As the article states: '"There's a lot of hypocrisy," Janeway said, as many of the men go their own way.'
The hypocrisy, Mr. Janeway and Mr. Fugleberg, is that one is permitted to express intolerant views in print in an otherwise reputable newspaper. I submit that Mr. Fugleberg research the offending comments made in the article and clarify for public good, a revised version from an impartial, multicultural viewpoint that embraces positive, ethnic ideals of Western Montana.
As a Western Montanan, I have been an educator for the eight years in the Middle East and lived with my family in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, and Turkey. The students in the schools where my wife and I taught and my children attended were primarily indigenous peoples; however, the student body was represented by a smattering of 40 other different nationalities. After my oldest son (grade 8) read the article, he simply said, "What this person says Papa, is not true."
Whose eyes does this article open rather than close?
Gregory D. Collins
Polson