Mariya Ali

Dear Mr. Obama,

I was delighted to read this article. It was touching to see you so visually moved by the tragic and horrific gun crimes that have been  committed over the years. I applaud you for standing against the influential lobbies that sway congress and make (common sense) changes impossible. It was very astute of you to announce that mental health will have additional funding, so that ignorant people who think that the US gun violence problem is due to poor mental health care cannot pick holes in your argument.

I do understand that there are some instances where these crimes are perpetrated by people who have mental health issues, but the fact that this minority are able to acquire firearms easily allows them to carry out attacks. It is always a positive thing when the spotlight is shone on mental health and resources are allocated to it, as it is obviously a very serious issue which lacks sufficient resources. (As an aside, perhaps you could also address the fact that not all health care plans in the US cover mental health – that’s akin to saying “this plan covers all illnesses other than those that affect the kidney”. I’m sure that you can see that this is nonsensical and a very stupid thing to do).

It’s been a great 8 years in office and I feel like you have accomplished an incredible amount, despite having a congress that disagrees with you and blocks a lot of your bills. As a non-resident of the United States, your international policy has been steadfast and has somewhat redeemed America from the catastrophic PR that Bush Junior created.

Yours truly,

A quite content citizen of the world.

PS. Please don’t vote for Trump.

PPS. He’s worse than Bush. I didn’t think that I would ever be able to say that about anyone.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gestures and declares “You’re fired!” at a rally in Manchester, New Hampshire, June 17, 2015. REUTERS/Dominick Reuter TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY – RTX1GZCO

I read an interesting article about “positive” narcissism and how narcissists can be charismatic, compelling and inspiring – all great traits of a leader. With Trump, a clear textbook narcissist running for presidential candidacy, the question of whether this would really be a good move is very pertinent.

Yes, narcissists can be compelling, exceptional at inspiring people and highly successful people. They have a relentless drive to succeed. But what are their motives? Do we really want people who are highly manipulative, ruthless and with no remorse or empathy leading us? The question here, in essence, is what counts – the outcome or the character of the leader?

A friend of mine is friends with a guy who is a clear narcissist. I once asked him why, when he knows that this guy treats people very badly and lashes out without reason, is he friends with him?  His response, “I know he does a lot of questionable things, but he treats me fine.” I shared my viewpoint with him, that it’s very important to me that my friends are good people. I feel that the same applies here: I would feel much more at ease if the USA was run by a person with pure intentions and good character.

What are the consequences of being led by a narcissist? As someone who has (unfortunately) had the misfortune of encountering one, they are extremely manipulative and have the ability to wreak havoc.  They are unpredictable, ruthless, vindictive, shallow and remorseless, with no ability to feel any form of empathy. They have no feelings other than rage and anger, with all other feelings being mimicked.  They are essentially con men, making you fall for their charm with their lies.

Should someone like that really be elected?

I shudder to think.

I saw an article today about a television re-enactment of a horrific crime that took place in Afghanistan over a month ago. A “mentally unstable” woman was chastising worshipers who were praying to a shrine (a practice which is of much debate as to whether it is permitted in Islam), and was then (falsely) accused of burning pages of the Quran. What followed next is nothing short of horrifying.

The mentally ill woman, her face covered in blood, rose to her feet and looked out across the mob. She pleaded. But these men meant to kill her.

A kick sent her tumbling backward. In the courtyard of one of Kabul’s most famous shrines, men hurled stones at her and struck her with wooden planks.

When she was dead, they tied her body to a car and drove to the Kabul River. On the garbage-strewn bank, they burned her corpse.

Firstly, let me take issue with calling her a “mentally ill woman”.

A few weeks ago, Farkhunda had told a doctor treating her that she planned to commit suicide, a top police investigator in Kabul, Gen. Mohammad Farid Afzali, said in a phone interview. In recent days she had stopped sleeping, her mother told television reporters.

“Farkhunda had a mental malady, and we have been seeing many mullahs and doctors to seek a cure for her mental illness,” her mother said.

Having suicidal thoughts does not necessarily mean that someone has a mental illness. What is the point of this being highlighted anyway? It’s quite clear to see; the article is essentially trying to discredit this woman. This is absolving, or at the very least, minimising the extent of how horrific and barbaric this was. Whether a person is mentally ill or not, nobody, I repeat nobody, should ever be treated like that.

What I fail to understand is where is the humanity in the vile creatures that inflicted this pain on another human being? How can a person who willingly contributes to taking another person’s life sleep at night? Are they not plagued with images of this poor innocent woman’s face every night?

No. Not at all. In fact, many of the attackers took to social media, posting videos and pictures of their attack and actually boasting about their involvement. She was 27 years old, she had her entire life ahead of her. All of her hopes and dreams were extinguished because of a misunderstanding and a crowd of vile, conscienceless, pathetic excuses for human beings. All of this, in the name of religion? The only religion that would endorse this is Satanism.

It is stories like this that make me start to lose faith in humanity.

From a purely psychological standpoint, how are these men able to justify these actions to themselves? Do they believe that they are doing this in the name of religion, therefore they are doing it for the better? I truly don’t understand human nature enough to grasp how a person could willingly take part in such a heinous crime. I don’t understand how they are able to then go and boast about their involvement in taking the life of another person, even if they truly believed that this person deserved it (which clearly is not the case). What they did was truly sadistic and wrong on so many levels. How are they able to take pride in participating in this?

My.old.man Will.I.Am (and the Black Eyed Peas) said it well:
Yo’, whatever happened to the values of humanity
Whatever happened to the fairness and equality
Instead of spreading love we’re spreading animosity
Lack of understanding, leading us away from unity

Where, my friends, is the love?

In the Western World, homosexuality and bisexuality are no longer taboo. It is an accepted lifestyle, although there are always pockets of bias against them, for the most part, they are happily able to live their alternative lifestyle. Same sex marriages are allowed throughout the entirety of the UK and the majority of the US.

However, on a micro scale, it is completely unacceptable within the bohra community. Which leads one to a conundrum: With all the emphasis and pressure placed on marriage in our community, what happens to those who are homosexual? Do they live a lie, succumb to the pressure and marry? Do they take a stand and refuse to marry without explanation? What are the repercussions of this?

This is not a debate on whether Islam permits homosexuality (however, this is an interesting article on that topic), nor is it a debate on whether homosexuality is nature vs. nurture. This is simply random thoughts on a whole bunch of “what ifs”. I certainly have no authority nor enough knowledge to speak on either of the above points but mainly, I have no authority to judge others.

This article on same-sex marriage tells the story of an inter-race, inter-gender marriage and raises some good points.

Well, we live in a society where let alone homosexual, even love and inter-caste marriages are looked down upon by majority. In a scenario, where live-in relationships are condemned, married couples without kids are seen as outcasts, and unmarried women in their 30s are no less than a national issue, how open are ‘WE’ in accepting ‘Shannon and Seemas’?

Homosexuals have to deal with immense social stigma, outright rejection of their sexual identities, and are even compelled to marry people of the opposite sex. Same-sex marriage, as a concept is more or less a subject of ridicule and jokes.

In the hypothetical situation that this were to occur within our community, what are the potential outcomes?

In the case of joining the mainstream and marrying, regardless of sexual orientation:
1. Is it fair on the person who is being married?
2. Is it fair on the person who is homosexual?
In both circumstances, I would say no. But the latter poses a viewpoint that I think is often overlooked. Sure, it is unfair on the unsuspecting other party, who marries to create a life and family with someone under false pretenses. But it must be really hard on the person who is gay. Knowing that your choices will never be accepted and you can never be who you really are, or if you do, then it is at a high cost. Most likely being shunned by the community at large and potentially your family and friends. It could have ramifications on your family as well. After all, we are all too aware of how the bohra gossip mill is constantly working overdrive. A combination of stigma, lack of education and acceptance would make anyone who openly “comes out” a social outcast and would most likely have severe repercussions on the immediate and potentially extended family. I also wonder whether anything would be done to “correct” the homosexual tendencies. I know that in some sects, and indeed previously in England, hormone therapy was given to “treat” homosexuality.

What if the person resists the pressure to get married?
1. How do you answer/dodge all of those questions?
2. Could you ever openly be in a homosexual relationship?
I have no idea on the former, nor have I seen any examples or even attempts for the latter. I sometimes wonder what the reaction to this would be? Perhaps I have too active an imagination/too much time/both. In a community where marrying out is frowned upon, what would happen if a same-sex marriage were to take place?

I doubt that we will have a Seema/Shannon marriage anytime in the near and potentially even distant future. This topic is not even talked or joked about quietly, it is simply ignored. I wonder if the situation will ever arise where this will need to change. Until then, this remains a bunch of random hypothetical questions I come up with to placate my overactive imagination.