Pre-Soliya Reflection

1. Cognitive / Intellectual Learning

One of the most impactful readings for me was “How ‘African’ is Northern Africa?” (Global Voices: https://globalvoices.org/2018/05/28/how-african-is-northern-africa/). This reading challenged my assumption that identity is simply rooted in geography. Instead, it showed me that our understanding of identity is deeply shaped by historical narratives, generational prejudices, and social stereotypes that we gradually internalize and come to embody. It made me realize that geography alone does not define identity; rather, it is the people, cultures, languages, and traditions within a place that give it meaning.

I began to see land as almost a blank canvas, while the people who inhabit it become the art that defines it. However, what struck me most is how societies often resist this fluidity. There is an unspoken expectation that identities should remain fixed, contained, and “pure,” leaving little room for overlap or integration. This is especially evident in how people are often segregated along racial and ethnic lines, where physical features, skin tone, and cultural markers are used to draw boundaries between “us” and “them.” These divisions are not natural, but socially constructed, yet they are reinforced so often that they begin to feel real and unquestionable.

Mixed identities, like mixed forms of expression, are often viewed with discomfort rather than appreciation. It is as if we are told that we cannot mix watercolors with crayons, that cultures must remain separate in order to retain their value. Reflecting on this, I now question whether this separation is truly necessary, or whether it is a product of othering and the human tendency to categorize in order to feel a sense of control and belonging.

This idea of separation and categorization also connects closely to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s talk, The Danger of a Single Story (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg). In this video, she explains how many of us fall into the trap of accepting a single narrative, often one that is filled with stereotypes or incomplete representations of reality. These limited perspectives shape how we understand entire groups of people, reducing complex identities into simplified and often misleading images.

Reflecting on this, I began to recognize that even though I consider myself relatively culturally aware, due to my exposure to diverse environments, I am not immune to this way of thinking. I still hold onto ideas that have been presented to me from one perspective, without fully questioning what might be missing. What surprised me most was realizing that this applies even to my own identity. As an Egyptian, I often assume that I understand my culture, yet in reality, I have only been exposed to certain narratives within it. I have not fully engaged with the diverse experiences of different individuals who all contribute to what Egypt is.

This realization made me rethink what it means to truly “know” a place or a people. How can we claim understanding if we have only been exposed to one part of the whole? It is like trying to understand the human body by studying only the lungs while ignoring the heart, even though both are essential for survival. In the same way, relying on a single story creates gaps in understanding that can easily turn into stereotypes.

This connects back to “How ‘African’ is Northern Africa?”, as the divisions and assumptions discussed in the article are not formed in isolation, but are reinforced by repeated, one sided narratives. When people are only exposed to a limited version of reality, those partial truths begin to feel complete. In this way, the “single story” becomes a powerful force in shaping identity, perception, and ultimately, the boundaries we place between ourselves and others.

This realization about the power of a single narrative also made me think more critically about the role of language itself in shaping what stories are told, and which ones are left out. If our understanding of people and cultures can be limited by the stories we hear, then the way those stories are communicated becomes just as important as the stories themselves. This is what led me to connect these ideas to Lina Mounzer’s “War in Translation: Giving Voice to the Women of Syria” (https://lithub.com/war-in-translation-giving-voice-to-the-women-of-syria/).

In her work, Mounzer reveals that language is not simply a neutral tool for communication, but something deeply tied to power, identity, and emotion. She shows that translation is not just about transferring words from one language to another, but about carrying meaning, history, and lived experience across cultural boundaries. However, in doing so, something can be altered, softened, or even lost entirely. This creates a tension that feels unavoidable.

Although this is a truth we must accept and acknowledge, I believe that the effort to move beyond a single story must still continue. A single story is far more destructive than multiple, even imperfect, versions that attempt to represent a fuller reality. To combat ignorance, taking small steps toward broader understanding is more valuable than taking no steps at all out of fear that those efforts may be incomplete or flawed. At the same time, I am aware of the ongoing tension between accuracy and progress, the question of whether we should prioritize perfect representation or wider inclusion. Ideally, it should not be one or the other. Why not both?

This tension brings me back to Mounzer, whose work embodies this struggle. She attempts to share stories that would otherwise remain unheard, yet she is also deeply aware of the inevitable loss that occurs when those stories are translated into another language. There is both purpose and pain in that process.

These ideas also connect to our discussions of empathy, sympathy, and compassion. Engaging with multiple stories does not only expand knowledge and reduce stereotypes, but it also creates the opportunity to strengthen these emotional and ethical capacities. However, these are not automatic outcomes. They require active effort and practice. Exposure alone is not enough. Without the ability to engage thoughtfully and respectfully, simply encountering different perspectives does not lead to meaningful understanding. This raises an important question for me: what is the value of being exposed to multiple stories if we do not develop the skills needed to respond to them in a constructive and empathetic way?

I’m excited for the ‘Soliya’ Opportunity as I believe that it will be an interactive way to tie everything that was mentioned above together. Having access to different stories from different individuals will allow for stronger understandings of different communities or perspectives on common topics which will allow for a more holistic understanding of these topics. It will also , hopefully, allow me to learn to think in a more well rounded approach. Having learnt the skills of compassion, empathy and sympathy, I also hope to be able to practice these skills to truly engage proactively.  

2. Intrapersonal Learning (Self-Awareness) 

This part of the course has pushed me to reflect more deeply on my own identity and biases. I began to realize that much of identity exists internally, in the assumptions and perspectives we carry without questioning. Through our discussions and activities, I found myself revisiting ideas I had previously taken for granted and examining them more critically.

One moment that stood out to me was the role play activity, where we acted out different forms of discrimination. I left that class with many questions. My immediate instinct was to focus on racial discrimination, even though it is not the form of discrimination I experience most directly. This made me wonder why that was my first association. Perhaps it is because it is widely discussed on a global level, or because I have witnessed it more frequently from a distance. At the same time, forms of discrimination that are more personally relevant to me, such as gender based discrimination and harassment, did not come to mind as quickly. This realization made me more aware of how exposure and dominant narratives shape what we recognize as important or urgent.

Another aspect that struck me was my emotional reaction to the activity. Even though I understood the purpose of the exercise, I felt deeply uncomfortable, not only while participating but even while watching others perform. The atmosphere of racism and harassment, even in a simulated setting, felt heavy and difficult to sit with. This led me to question why I felt this way when, on a rational level, I understood that it was part of a learning process.

Reflecting on this, I realized that I respond differently to different forms of prejudice. When I encounter subtle or unintentional bias, I tend to interpret it as ignorance or something shaped by upbringing, which makes it easier for me to process. However, when prejudice feels more explicit and intentional, it becomes much harder for me to accept. I tend to believe in seeing the good in people, so when faced with actions that cannot easily be explained or excused, I find myself struggling. It raises a difficult question: how do we respond to forms of hatred that cannot be rationalized or softened?

This connects to our discussions on empathy, sympathy, and compassion. I appreciate these concepts because they offer a more constructive way of engaging with others and encourage more positive interactions. However, I also recognize that these are not automatic qualities. They are skills that must be consciously developed and practiced. You cannot simply tell someone not to be discriminatory and expect change. Prejudice is not something people are born with, but it is deeply learned, which makes it complex to unlearn. While I am unsure whether it can be completely eliminated, I do believe it can be managed and challenged.

As I move toward the Soliya experience, I am curious to see how these perspectives might evolve. I hope that engaging with people from different backgrounds will help me see a broader picture and approach these issues with more understanding. At the same time, I am aware that it may also challenge my views further and bring up even more questions. In either case, I see that as part of the learning process.

3. Interpersonal Learning (Interacting with Others)

Through this course, I have learned that interacting with people who are different from me requires more than just being open minded. It involves active listening, self awareness, and a willingness to question my own assumptions. I now understand that exposure to different cultures is not enough on its own. Without empathy and reflection, it can remain surface level. I have also learned that people’s perspectives are shaped by their experiences and the narratives they have been exposed to, which has made me more mindful of avoiding quick judgments.

I still have questions about what it truly means to be a global citizen, especially how to balance expressing my own views while remaining respectful of others, and how to engage in difficult conversations without causing harm. Through the Soliya experience, I hope to develop stronger communication skills in a digital environment, such as listening without reacting, asking thoughtful questions, and engaging in respectful dialogue. I also hope it will help me move beyond single narratives by exposing me to multiple perspectives, while allowing me to actively practice empathy, sympathy, and compassion in real interactions. Ultimately, I want to use this experience to become more confident and effective in engaging with people from different cultural backgrounds.

4. Anticipating Difficult Conversations (e.g., Palestine, Iran, Middle East)

If I were able to help guide the discussion, I would try to create a space that emphasizes listening and understanding before debating or defending a position. I am very scared to face, although anticipated, pro-isreal views, as I know I will struggle to stay emotionally calm. I am aware of how irritated I will get, and likely view the person. And I know that this puts in practice what we’ve been learning in class about a single story, and being open to hearing others interpretations, and that my perceptions are generationally taught. However, although generationally taught, this topic is also something I have individually learnt and chosen to agree with and I believe in the cause. I know I will stay calm as I am confrontational, but I know I will likely be unsettled and annoyed that I will have to defend a cause which I see as common sense and humanity. But maybe, i’ll be the person to start the questions in their head, so i need to remain in that mindset rather than an attack, and take it as a professional opportunity to raise awareness. To direct the discussion, I would like to address media literacy discussions, about where they got their information from, talk about comparing the media sites and attributes like photos, language etc. Especially how this is my area of expertise, and will provide less emotional talk but more productivity.