A recent article by NYU Abu Dhabi junior Olivia Bergen labeled Gulf Elite, a publication written partially by NYUAD students, as sexist. Beyond my personal opinion on whether I felt any of the articles in Gulf Elite objectified women or not, I would like to reflect on why these events matter to the NYUAD community as a whole.

The article claimed that Gulf Elite’s profile of Saana Azzam, 2010 Swedish Female Economist of the Year winner, objectified Azzam by making remarks relating to her sex appeal: "She opens the door and you see this tall dark brunette, with a pair of black stilettos, approaching the table … damn!". My first reaction when I read such a description was to agree with the article’s assessment. Yet when the Gulf Elite founder revealed that Azzam herself had approved the profile I had no choice but to reconsider the situation. It was no longer a black and white issue, sexist or not sexist. Could it be that Azzam does not know she is being objectified? But if this is the case, then does that mean that I know better than her what objectification means? Such a claim sounds at the very least condescending. Alternatively, could it be that she knows she is being objectified but she does not care? In which case, should we condemn her for not being a “true feminist?” Does the fact that she does not share the same concept of feminism that I do make her less of a feminist and me more of one? Or maybe she doesn’t consider the comment as sexist. Then, who am I to tell her that it is?

Gender equality and feminism are by themselves such complex issues that it is understandable that women themselves, let alone the men, cannot agree on what constitutes sexism and what the best ways to deal with it are. Even though most of us probably dislike sexism, making any collective claims as to what sexism is and how to approach it is probably out of our capabilities as a community. How can we talk about what we think if we do not even know who we collectively are?

I chose the specific part of Bergen's article that refers to Gulf Elite's profile of Saana Azzam because I felt it exemplified well how there can be different reactions toward sexism in the media. How do we respond to this issue? Do we just condemn Gulf Elite for writing an article perceived by some as sexist, or do we as a community work actively and constructively to achieve a better understanding of the issue? As a woman, I am aware of the inconsistencies that come with the gender. Am I being less of a feminist if I let a man buy me a drink at a bar? What if I find the ladies section of the bus extremely convenient? These are questions that haunt me on a daily basis. If women themselves struggle to look into their own actions and to figure out what feminism or gender equality means to them in their daily lives, then it shouldn’t come as a surprise that there can be differing views on whether a specific article is blatantly sexist, whether it is causing harm to the feminist cause and, most importantly, how to respond to it.

In a highly heterogeneous community like ours, disagreements are inevitable; yet, as much as criticism is welcome, it is important to not stop there. At NYUAD we have an exceptional chance to work together to reconcile the disagreements so that, ultimately, we can all learn from each other. This is why it is not acceptable for the chair of the Women’s Leadership Network, a SIG dedicated to women’s empowerment, to refuse to work with a publication to tackle the issue of sexism when approached. If anything, the information should have been passed down to the members of WLN, allowing them to make a decision as opposed to a top-down approach. This action assumes not only that feminism is a black-and-white issue but also that everyone in the NYUAD community shares the same corporate vision on the issue as the SIG. More importantly, it deprives our community of the forum to discuss these issues to cooperate, to figure out where the disagreement stems from and how such disagreements can be avoided in the future. It is important that all of us in this community set aside our egos and realize that we can all learn from each other, with no exceptions. If WLN is going to be a forum to talk women’s issues then it should be so, regardless of who is starting the conversation.

Whenever there is disagreement, the traditional solution has been to talk about it. Nevertheless, I would argue that a discussion is not enough to bring forward all the complexities of this issue that affects us all. Furthermore, the prospects of such discussion after WLN’s declination to cooperate on a common project could easily translate into a situation that is at the very least patronizing — or should I say matronizing? Microsoft Word tells me it is not a word, how unequal. To avoid such an unwanted situation, I think a true collaboration after such a discussion would create stronger incentives for many more voices to engage in offering a solution to sexism in the media. I personally think that the learning happens through working with somebody with very different views, through trusting each other with a common project, through the messiness of not agreeing on some principles. A success in such an endeavor would be all the more gratifying and meaningful for the NYUAD community.