immigrants and social norms

Noor is an immigrant from a repressive regime and she is confused by her new government's insistence that everyone must now give up existing freedoms in order to fit into a new social norm.

"What I love about this country is its diversity and its freedoms," says Noor. "What are these social norms I keep hearing about and why must we give up our diversity and freedoms in order to fit into them?"

"It seems to me that when 'social norms' are construed they are done so by the government in cahoots with vested interests and the losers in these deals are us, the general public, who have no say in the matter, no seat at the table."

"Oh, yes, of course we have the honor of electing our representatives in government," laughs Noor, "but I quickly learned when I came here that no one person can possibly represent the diverse people in his or her electorate and has no illusion about doing so."

"In the end, a democratically elected representative is no better or worse than one placed in power by a dictator," says Noor, "and the only reason they seek such positions is to exercise power over mere mortals like us."

"If anything they do actually benefits us, it is merely coincidental," laughs Noor, "and when two lobby groups are pushing their agendas there is rarely a rational conclusion -- a compromise -- which satisfies both. The government goes with whichever lobby group pays more. It's as simple as that,"

"The only real difference between a democracy and a dictatorship -- apart from the illusion of elections -- is that a dictator makes no bones about what he wants," says Noor. "He makes all decisions, up front, and is not unduly influenced by lobby groups. His appearance, manners and thoughts constitute the 'social norm' that all follow slavishly."

"So, in relation to social norms," explains Noor, "there is no doubt about what is expected of you in a dictatorship. In a democracy, however, what is socially acceptable one day can be socially unacceptable the next -- according to which lobby group pays more -- and you don't know where you stand from one day to the next."

"Okay," laughs Noor. "Maybe I exaggerate about social norms changing from day to day, but you get my drift, right?"

"Your country -- my new country -- has a history of this sort of change and cannot understand, perhaps, how difficult it is for immigrants from repressive regimes to adapt to a culture of constant change."

"When my family first came here we saw diversity and freedoms we never before imagined," explains Noor. "It took us a long time to understand that this diversity and freedom was the 'social norm' of the time, and that things were constantly changing."

"A freedom today can be taken away tomorrow, and what was restricted yesterday can be a freedom today."

"This is all very well, but it worries me that more and more of the freedoms my family enjoy are being taken away and life here, in those respects, is becoming more repressive than the life we once had elsewhere."

"Take the freedom to smoke, for instance," says Noor. "In our old country it is something we have done for centuries -- long before your country was discovered. Smoking, to us -- especially our menfolk -- is like eating. It is so normal for us that it would be abnormal to come across a man who did not smoke. "

"We don't drink alcohol, it is against our religion, but we are happy that everyone else has the freedom to do so," says Noor. "Similarly, we are more restrictive with our women in respect to clothing, marriage and behavior, but we are happy that other women have the freedom to do as they please."

"We have assimilated very well into our new country and have not met with any discrimination whatsoever -- until the smoking bans came into force."

"This does not affect me directly because I don't smoke," says Noor, "but it distresses my father and my brothers because they are heavy smokers and are having tremendous difficulty fitting in with the new non-smoking 'social norm'."

"There was no discussion of the matter and no compromise either," sighs Noor. "The anti-smoking lobby gained precedence over the tobacco lobby and suddenly workplaces, public spaces, airlines, public transport and restaurants became non-smoking."

"Had a compromise been achieved with separate smoking rooms or areas, nobody would have been inconvenienced," says Noor, "but a total ban turned my father and brothers into pariahs and criminals, just like that!"

"Where is the democracy in this new 'social norm'? Where is the respect for the civil rights of smokers?"

"All of a sudden, decent people who loved my father and brothers turned against them, accusing them of being poisoners," sighs Noor. "They were told that non-smokers had a right to clean air, everywhere, and smoking was no longer acceptable."

"The air now belongs to non-smokers, it has their ownership tag on it," sighs Noor, "and pretty soon they will start smelling vehicle exhaust fumes and factory chimneys and perfumes and want to ban them, too."

"I believe that every job and every environment comes with its pollutants," says Noor, "and it's illogical to ban one pollutant or one hazard without banning the others."

"What would happen to the economy if everyone refused to work in places with potentially damaging pollutants or hazards? asks Noor. "What job doesn't come with health risks? I am a hairdresser and I work with a lot of dangerous chemicals -- I take reasonable precautions but accidents happen."

"My sister is allergic to vehicle fumes and cannot travel without suffering extreme discomfort," says Noor, "yet she accepts that other people have a right to pollute the air she breathes with their vehicle fumes. She, and others like her, could possibly form a lobby group and gain enough financial support to sway the government into banning vehicles from densely populated areas."

"It sounds crazy, I know, but this is exactly what the anti-smoking lobby has done."

"Okay, the 'social norm' is now a non-smoking one, and in time the smokers who stay here will be forced to adapt," says Noor, ''but my father and brothers do not believe that such a decision should have been made without the input of smokers and feel they are living in a dictatorship worse than the one they left. They are even considering moving the family back to the old country, and this distresses me terribly."

"They want to know why they should be forced to adapt to someone else's new-fangled social norm," sighs Noor, "and I can see their point of view. Non-smoking wasn't the social norm when they made the decision to make this country their new home, and they are rightfully angry."

"They are prepared to compromise on the issue to make the non-smokers happy -- to smoke in designated areas," says Noor, "but even that civil right has been taken away from them. Soon, they say, there will be no smoking in private vehicles and premises."

"Coming from a regime that repressed freedom of speech, this sort of dictatorial 'social norm' is abhorrent to my father and brothers," says Noor. "It is dictatorial to force a group of people to fit in with another group's ideas about what is normal and what isn't, and it is hateful to vilify and criminalize people for something they've always done and is part of an ancient culture."

"I can appreciate that social norms can and do change in a democratic society," says Noor, "but changing them by force with false, frightening and hate-mongering propaganda is something I didn't expect to happen here."

"It's usually a sort of fashion-statement thing led by trendsetters -- you know, a movie star shaves his head and hey presto! everyone is doing it and being bald is the new, trendy social norm for men."

"This non-smoking thing hasn't come from the people, it has been imposed from above in a dictatorial manner," says Noor, "and it has been accepted by the people based on the sort of fear and lies that evil applied psychologists use."

"This is what my father and brothers object to most," says Noor. "Had the non-smoking movement been started and led by the trendies it would have caught on naturally."

"The only 'face' of the non-smoking lobby we see is an ugly one -- full of hate, lies and a dictatorial manner," says Noor. "No wonder only the very weak smokers have quit. They cannot handle being 'de-normalized'. It is a cruel and unusual way to get someone to change their ways."

"The real cowards, however, are not the weak smokers but the anti-smoking lobby for not having the guts to show their faces, tell us their names and what their real agenda is," says Noor. "I don't mean the many people who've jumped on the bandwagon after the bans. I mean the small band of people who formed the initial lobby group. Does anyone know who these people are? They would have to be very rich, wouldn't they, to buy off the government?"

"Dictators in a repressive regime hold power not only by brutality," explains Noor. "They also need to have an incredible physical presence, beauty or charisma, otherwise people would take no notice of them."

"If these people, the initiators of the smoking bans, were required to face the public," says Noor, "I doubt very much that they would be the sort of people anybody in their right mind would want to follow. Ugly is as ugly does, right?"

Noor's story first appeared as ugly faces behind social norms and is reprinted with permission.