The Lady

Last night I watched a movie called « The Lady ». I never read summaries, or grades or critics a film has been given before I watched it. The only thing I look at is the poster. If I like the poster I will watch the movie; if not, I won’t. This is a very peculiar way to determine whether you will watch or not a movie, I know. But critics, grades and summaries have the tendency to spoil the suspense. So I chose to watch “The Lady” thanks to its poster. By looking at the poster I knew just enough about the movie: Aung San Suu Kyi.

Indeed, the movie is about Aung San Suu Kyi. This made me quickly understand that the film was biographical. If you have never heard about her (which is very unlikely), Aung San Suu Kyi is a Burmese opposition politician and General Secretary of the National League for Democracy (NLD) in Burma.

I really enjoyed that movie. I have to say that I am a fan of biographical movies (some examples of other great biographical movies: J. Edgar, The Iron Lady, A Dangerous Method, The Queen, The Young Victoria [movie that gave me the will to write my thesis about Queen Victoria]). They are really true, because everything that is said in these movies is true. Moreover, they are the source of a lot of knowledge because most of the time, these movies depict the life of a big personality, people that have marked the history.  “The Lady” shows how Aung San Suu Kyi was divided between the will of freeing and saving her birth country, Burma and staying and being with her husband (Michael Aris) and her two children. It is an epic love story as well as peaceful quest of a woman being at the core of Burma’s democracy movement.

The movie was directed by Luc Besson (The Fifth Element, Leon, The Big Blue). Michelle Yeoh (Aung San Suu Kyi) perfectly plays the duality the woman encounters, being tormented between the distance, long separations she has with her family and the hostile regime Burma is facing.

It is pretty obvious that I really recommend this film to anyone as essential viewing, whether or not you have an interest in political affairs or not. The politics in The Lady is so simply set out and self- explanatory that anyone would understand the issues at hand.

Unitarian Universalism.

Unitarian Universalism (commonly referred to as UU) was formed from the merger in 1961 of the Universalist Church of America (UCA), a liberal American protestant church and the American Unitarian Association (AUA), a Unitarian congregation association. Today, UU is essentially characterized by its plurality and syncretism that looks forward to go beyond its religious and cultural roots. Unitarian Universalism is theologically liberalist and supports a “free and responsible search for truth and meaning[1]“. Without sharing a creed, Unitarian Universalists are united by their need of spiritual growth. As every religious community, UU has guidelines for daily life as well as restricted behaviors. These provoke some controversies from the church/state.

Unitarian Universalists draw their practices from a variety of traditions, often turning to various forms of prayer, meditation, or yoga. Unitarian Universalists believe that divine can be found in all people and in many faiths. In different surveys, American Unitarian Universalists most often identified themselves as humanists, while others identified themselves as earth-centered, agnostic, theistic, atheistic, Buddhist, Christian, or pagan. This diversity of views is considered as powerful in the UU movement. The emphasis remains on the individual search for meaning among its members rather than adherence to any particular doctrine. As far as the clergy and the UU leadership are concerned, “ministers” usually lead congregations and worship services but they have no priestly or sacramental function. In terms of ritual, congregations typically meet on Sunday mornings, and they celebrate versions of Protestant Christian, American, and other holidays as part of a liturgical year. Unitarian Universalism draws its moral inspiration from several sources, including most prominently the Jewish-Christian tradition and the ethical teachings of the world’s religions. Unitarian Universalists hope to realize their ideal society, one in which principles of justice, freedom, compassion, tolerance, and equity spread to all corners of both human society and the natural environment. Unitarian Universalism has always been at the forefront of movements for gender equality; today that emphasis embraces sexual equality as well. Unitarian Universalism is one of the few religions to unequivocally support gay clergy and gay marriages.

There are external and internal controversies. On the external plan, this large diversity Unitarian Universalism is so proud of has given place to controversies, namely if UU was really a religion or if it simply was a hotchpotch of beliefs. The fact they do not share a creed is also a source of criticism, namely that UU is without religious content. On the internal plan, Unitarian Universalists do not agree with each other whether they should return to a traditional religious language or not. Some say they should create an authentic UU “language of reverence” while others consider this as being an attempt to return to more orthodox Christian worship patterns.

Unitarian Universalism’s main characteristic, that is to say its plurality and the individual search for meaning among its members rather than adherence to any particular doctrine, is its best advantage but also its worst disadvantage. This movement raises the possibility for different kinds of religion to coexist in a same congregation.

 

Sources:

http://www.uuyan.org/

http://www.uuworld.org/

http://www.unitarianuniversalism.tv/

http://www.hds.harvard.edu/library/bms/merger_timeline_1900s.html

http://unitarian-universalist.wetpaint.com/

http://www.discoveruu.com/

---

[1] The 4th principle of Unitarian Universalism –  http://www.uua.org/beliefs/principles/

When I was in the military they gave me a medal for killing two men and a discharge for loving one. ~Epitaph of Leonard P. Matlovich, 1988

Homosexuality is sexual attraction to persons of the same sex and sexual activity with another person of the same sex. It is one of the biggest issues of our time. The case of Matthew Sheppard shows how far discrimination can lead. Hopefully progress have been made on homosexual discrimination.

It is important to know that homophobia kills. This is the case of Matthew Shepard. Matthew Shepard  was born on December 1st, 1976 in Casper Wyoming in the United States, and died on October 12th, 1998 in Fort Collins, Colorado. He was a student at the University of Wyoming and he was murdered by two young men at the age of 21, because he was gay. On October 6th, 1998, Matthew Shepard went out alone in the Fireside Bar in Laramie, Wyoming, as his friends had refused his invitation for different reasons. Left alone, Matthew was approached by two young men who asked him if he was gay. After he said yes, he was offered a ride. But the young men took Matthew outside the city, brought him out of the car and pistol-whipped him. Matthew’s assailants tied him to a fence, beat him to break his skull, and left him die. Still tied to the fence, Shepard, who was still alive but in a coma, was discovered by Aaron Kreifels, a cyclist who initially mistook Shepard for a scarecrow. Emergency vehicles arrived 18 hours after the attack and brought him back to the Poudre Valley Hospital, Colorado, where he died on the evening of Monday, October 12, after several days in a coma, surrounded by his family.

The reactions were numerous and varied. After the announcement of Matthew’s death, gay associations reacted by organizing “candlelight vigils,” that is to say vigils where everyone comes with a candle. The purpose was twofold: to come together to make a silent tribute to Matthew and to demand the adoption of the law against hate crimes to prevent this tragedy from happening again. The first vigil was held on October 15th in Washington on the Capitol steps. More than 5,000 people gathered there and listened to the speeches by Matthew’s friends, famous people, representatives of gay and humanitarian associations, and political figures. On October 16th, the day of Matthew’s funeral, anti-gay fundamentalist Protestants, led by Reverend Fred Phelps, appeared near the church where the ceremony was taking place and cried, “God hates fags” and “Matt in hell”. Romaine Patterson, one of Matthew’s friend, held a counter-demonstration. People wearing white robes and gigantic wings (looking like angels) gathered around the group of homophobes, allowing the funeral to take place in respect. In 1999, the two murderers of Matthew Shepard, Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney, then aged 21 and 22, were sentenced to life imprisonment without any possibility of release. The story of Matthew Shepard inspired three films: The Laramie Project (based on the play of the same name), The Matthew Shepard Story and Anatomy of a Hate Crime. The Laramie Project and The Matthew Shepard Story both won numerous awards.

The modern world abolished capital punishment for sodomy in several countries in the nineteenth century and decriminalized homosexuality in the twentieth century. Although this trend seems to have made an enormous step in two centuries, especially involving Berlin and Paris in the beginning, sometimes  the repression of homosexuality was normal. Despite their image and their stereotypical values, the U.S. military would also have to tolerate more diversity in troops. Unfortunately, today, the progress of the late twentieth century was haunted by the development of AIDS. The fight of the twenty-first century is now for equal rights and freedoms, for example, the right to marry and to adopt a child jointly. A law against hate crimes was filed on March 20th, 2007, on behalf of Matthew Shepard. It went to the Senate of the United States, but President George W. Bush said he would veto it. Reintroduced several times under different names, the Matthew Shepard Act was passed by the House of Representatives on October 8th, 2009. It was passed by the Senate on October 22nd, 2009, and it was finally signed by the President of the United States Barack Obama Wednesday, on October 28th, 2009 .

Sources :

– Pickett, Brent, “Homosexuality”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/homosexuality/&gt;.

– “homosexuality.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2011. Web. 14 Nov. 2011. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/270637/homosexuality>.

– http://www.matthewshepard.org/

– http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=277685&page=1/

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca

It is very hard to define what exactly a religion is. A standard definition is anthropologist Clifford Geertz’s (used in religious courses), who defines religion as a “collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values”. Religion adresses important human dualities such as life & death and good & evil. Moreover, at the beginning religion gained credibility by explaining things that nobody could understand, such as the creation of the world. This is how religion gained more and more power throughout the years. Today, with the emergence of science, people tend to think and not just let themselves be influenced by what they are told. This is how religion has lost  influence over the years (see the PEW research). However, religion still affects everyday life and American affairs, and it can divide people or unite them.

The first two articles (from The New York Times and Forbes) discuss whether a Muslim group should be allowed to build a mosque near Ground Zero, where the attacks on 9/11 took place. These two articles show how religion divides people.  The editorial “Mistrust and the Mosque” from The New York Times is in favor of the construction. It has a positive view and says that New York is “the country’s most diverse and cosmopolitan city”. It explains that stereotypes are easily made, but they are far from always being  true. That is the case with Muslims. Americans must not see all Muslims as terrorists, and they cannot forget that many Muslims also died during the terrorist attacks. however, the column “The case Against the Ground Zero Mosque” from Forbes, by Abigal R. Esman is against the construction of that mosque. It explains that it is completely out of place, and she cannot believe that a (very expensive) mosque, which is, according to her somehow the symbol of the “19 Muslim men that stopped the world” could be built on place that is still very controversial.

In the third article,  “Troubled Waters” from Notre Dame Magazine, Michelle Krupa depicts the consequences of the explosion on the oil rig Deepwater Horizon that killed 11 workers in the Gulf of Mexico, near Louisiana. It emphizises that victims are helpless; since the explosion, their whole life has paused and they havehad trouble finding work, money and food. It is very common during hard times to see an increase in people’s religious belief. That is often the case during wars. People do not know what to do or to whom they can speak, so they turn towards religion. That is what happened in the Gulf Coast communities after the oil rig explosion. In this situation, religion brought people together, made them hope together, and stregthened communities. That was the Archbishop Gregory Aymond’s message during his Mass: “We are a people of faith, and we don’t give up”.

As these situations show, religion can be helpful, as well as harmfulfor a society. Sometimes it brings people together, and sometimes it divides them up. However, the controversy over the Ground Zero mosque and the reaction to the oil spill show that it still can be very powerful.

“Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster.” G.Hofstede.

What makes America, America ? What are the values that Americans hold? These are the questions we ask the most when we think about America. Two values I have chosen to discuss and compare to Belgian values are  individualism and work ethic.

I. INDIVIDUALISM

What does individualism actually mean  ?  According to the Britannica Encyclopedia Online, it is the « political and social philosophy that emphasizes the moral worth of the individual. » The individualist would focus on his or her goals and desires in the first place rather than promote the collective approach. We understand then that individualism is the opposite of collectivism. Individualistic societies are societies in which people are expected to look after themselves.  This is the case in America, and the famous « American Dream » is a good representation of this strong, individualistic belief. As you read stories about the American Dream (John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men is a good example) you will usually find people coming to the USA alone in order to have a better life-  and fighting to have a higher standard of living than their parents did and to raise themselves from poverty. Geert Hofstede is a Dutch social psychologist who did a pioneering study of cultures across modern nations. To compare individualism in the United States and in other countries, Geert Hofstede divides the culture into five dimensions.

• PDI is the power distance index. This shows the degree of cultural acceptance of unequal status and power between individuals. This dimension indicates the degree of respect shown by the people towards their hierarchy and authority.
• IDV is the individualism. It expresses the freedom degree of an individual towards a group. In other words it expresses the degree of autonomy towards the group, social norms,  and commitment to community values.
• MAS is for the masculinity. The question is whether a company is on the one hand somewhat more sensitive to emotional factors (female) or factual (male) and on the other hand organized with a clear separation or mixed up with both gender working together in the tasks of everyday life.
• UAI represents the uncertainty avoidance index. This refers to the degree that a culture of tolerance can accept towards the anxiety caused by future events. The relationship of uncertainty is different in each society. Some use forecasts and devices to handle events (such as Vigipirate, the French security devise meant to prevent threat or terrorist attacks).
• Finally we have the LTO (long-term orientation). The values associated with short-term orientation are the respect for traditions and the fulfillment  of social duties. The values associated with a long-term orientation (so-called “truth”) are economy and perseverance.

Country	PDI	IDV	MAS	UAI	LTO
USA	40	91	62	46	29
Australia	36	90	61	51	31
United Kingdom	35	89	66	35	25
Netherlands	38	80	14	53	44
New Zealand	22	79	58	49	30
Italy	50	76	70	75
Belgium	65	75	54	94
Denmark	18	74	16	23
France	68	71	43	86
Sweden	31	71	5	29	33
Ireland	28	70	68	35
Norway	31	69	8	50	20
Switzerland	34	68	70	58
Germany	35	67	66	65	31
South Africa	49	65	63	49
Finland	33	63	26	59
Poland	68	60	64	93
Czech Republic	57	58	57	74
Austria	11	55	79	70
Hungary	46	55	88	82
Israel	13	54	47	81
Spain	57	51	42	86
India	77	48	56	40	61
Argentina	49	46	56	86
Japan	54	46	95	92	80
Jamaica	58	41	43	59
Brazil	45	39	68	13
Egypt	69	38	49	76	65
Iraq	80	38	52	68
Turkey	66	37	45	85
Uruguay	61	36	38	100
Greece	60	35	57	112
Philippines	94	32	64	44	19
Mexico	81	30	69	82
Ethiopia	64	27	41	52	25
Malaysia	104	26	50	36
Hong Kong	68	25	57	29	96
Chile	63	23	28	86
China	80	20	66	40	118
Ghana	77	20	46	54	16
Singapore	74	20	48	8	48
Thailand	64	20	34	64	56
El Salvador	66	19	40	94
South Korea	60	18	39	85	75
Taiwan	58	17	45	69	87
Peru	64	16	42	87
Costa Rica	35	15	21	86
Indonesia	78	14	46	48
Pakistan	55	14	50	70
Colombia	67	13	64	80
Venezuela	81	12	73	76
Panama	95	11	44	86
Ecuador	78	8	63	67
Guatemala	95	6	37	101

Of course we notice that the United States have the highest individualism score (91). Belgium closely follows the US with a IDV score of 75. When we take a closer look to the countries  at the top, we notice that all of these countries are developed countries. And that brings me to the conclusion that people living in an industrialized country will have the tendancy to develop a individualistic beliefs. In these societies it does not matter who you are. What matters is what you do, which means that people have to notice YOU and not your neighbor. That is why people have developed this tendency to work, to act and live for themselves.

II. WORK ETHIC

The second value I have chosen to discuss is work ethic. The American work ethic is « Work hard and you will be rewarded “right here right now”». I wrote “right here right now” between quotation marks because originally, the work ethic came from  the Bible, which says “you will be rewarded one day”. However, this was before religious belief has been placed second next to the first and most attractive thing in the world: money. One might wonder why Americans want to work so hard. First of all we have to remember that consumerism is king in America so if people want to afford all the objects that they desire, work is essential. Also, many Americans think that if you work really hard all your life, when you retire you will be able to relax and enjoy the fruits of your labor. In Belgium we have similar mindset, but it is less extreme. We have to work because no work means no money and no money means… you will not have the means to live.

Laura Petrussa.

Sources :

– Images : http://www.getmilked.com/comics/IndividualismIsEasy.html & http://www.freakingnews.com/Gothic-Work-Ethic-Pictures-85344.asp

– http://www.britannica.com/

– http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php