Have you ever googled yourself? I think my mother googled herself before I googled myself. She told me to look up her name on Google; she wanted me to see that a Google search would bring up information about her and the book club she started for children. I did the search, and it was true- a google search of my mother's name brought up several links that were actually related to her. So, tonight rather randomly I googled me. I typed in my name Zarinah Muhammad, and taaa daaa, the return brought a few links truly related to me. The second link was more about my dad than me; I was just listed as one of his daughters when he passed away.
There were several links that were not about me but about other women who share my name. I find that rather puzzling, other women sharing my name. When I was a little girl, I never met another Zarinah, yet alone another Zarinah Muhammad. When I was 18, a sister from the masjid told me that she named her daughter Zarinah. I remember feeling a little irritated by it. I liked that my name had always been unique and original. Someone else having it seemed to diminish my name's value. When I was 19 years old, I went to audition for Singled Out, that old MTV show with Jenny McCarthy, and I saw my name on the audition list; only it was the signature of some other girl who was a year younger than me. That shocked me. I was like, "Wow, a Zarinah living in Las Vegas who shows up the same day as I do to audition for Singled Out!" It was really crazy to me. Years later, I called California traffic court about a ticket I received while driving through Baker. The officer on the phone pulled up another Zarinah Muhammad who had also gotten a ticket; however, she was three years older than me. Again, I was amazed. I wasn't the first Zarinah Muhammad? I know that it was narcissistic of me to want to believe that I had been the first Zarinah Muhammad to have ever existed, but my whole life, it had felt like I was.
I wasn't surprised tonight when I saw the significant numbers of Zarinah Muhammads out there. I was surprised, however, to see Zarinah Muhammad, J.D. It was like seeing myself in the future. I know it's weird and silly, but I felt like it was a sign, this sign that everything is going to turn out the way I want it, a sign that I'll finish law school. I clicked on the link of Zarinah Muhammad, J.D., and it brought up a pdf page from Alabama Metropolitan College listing Zarinah Muhammad, J.D., research analyst, office of of institutional research, planning and assessment. The connection between the Zarinah Muhammad, J.D. and myself continued to strike me.
When I was working on my doctorate degree, one of our professors stated that with our Leadership doctorates we could one day work in the field of institutional research; listed above Zarinah Muhammad, J.D. is Mark A. Cunningham, PhD. The funny thing is that the two together merge two aspects of my life, my past and my future. Before I got accepted into law school, I was working on getting my doctorates degree. I knew that I wanted to be a lawyer, but I didn't want to waste time that I could be spending earning my doctorate if by chance I was not accepted in the Boyd Law School at UNLV. So, I continued on with my doctorate program until I learned that I had made it into law school. The day the acceptance letter arrived, I remember being so nervous after pulling it out of the mailbox. After I read it, I felt my heart skip with joy in circles for days, never ending. I still smile when I think of how blessed and happy I felt knowing that I was being given the chance that I had always wanted. I wonder if the other Zarinah Muhammad felt that way when she got her acceptance letter from law school, and I wonder how she met up with the institutional research doctorate.
I wish now that I had never went to work on my doctorates because that is why I don't have anymore financial aid eligibility. If I hadn't taken loans out for the year I spent on my doctorates, I would have enough to get me through at least another full year of law school. Although when I really think about it, there is a good chance that having that year of school towards my doctorates under my belt was a part of the reason I was accepted into Boyd. It's probably best just to be grateful and lose the regrets.
Googling yourself may not bring up information that you wanted to see, and it may bring up information that you wish weren't there; but, googling yourself allows you to see something greater: a view of the many possibilities of you. Right now, I'm Zarinah Muhammad high school English teacher and law student. Three years from now, I pray to be Zarinah Muhammad, J.D. and mommy.
Who expects to be consuming pork ingredients when they're drinking a beverage? Most people would never think that when they are drinking a smoothy they might be imbibing pork bi-products. But, the unfortunate reality for many people who do not want to ingest pork products is that pork ingredients are in a plethora of products that most people would never think contained any animal product, let alone pork. Pork ingredients are no longer listed on lables as Pork. This is a travesty because it inhibits many people, especially Muslims and Jews whose religious faiths prohibit the consumption of any pork products, from being able to make the decision to refrain from eating or drinking pork products. The entire purpose of a label is to inform the consumer of the ingredients within a product so that the consumer knows what he/she is eating. "In 1990, the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act went in effect. The USDA and the FDA designed the requirements so that consumers would have useful information about the food they eat." Health Check Systems: What's in a Label?(http://www.healthchecksystems.com/label.htm). The purpose of a label is undermined by ambiguous and vague ingredient names, such as rennet, mono-diglycerides, and porcine enzymes. The average person would never associate pork with mono-dyglcerides. The majority of people who don't want to eat something will observe the product label to see if the unwanted ingredient is listed. If it is not, that person will buy the product, but if it is listed, then the person will not make the purchase. With the knowledge that millions of people, such as the masses of Muslims and Jews, will not purchase a product if Pork is listed as an ingredient, companies have become sneaky and underhanded about their product labeling. Instead of labeling pork ingredients as pork, companies have created new names for pork products that consumers have no background knowledge about to trigger an association with pork. For example, gelatin is made from animal hide, skin tissue or bones. Most often, it is made from a pig's hide, tissue, or bones. If a person does not know this about gelatin, he/she may eat a product, such as yogurt or Gelato, and unknowingly and against his/her will consume a pork product. Even people who have no prohibition against eating pork are unaware when they are. For example, Skittles contain gelatin, and whenever I tell someone that I can't eat Skittles because they have pork in them, the people are amazed and surprised that Skittles have pork. Mono-diglycerides may come from an animal source, such as the pig or cow, or it may come from a vegetable source. However when the ingredient is derived from a vegetable source, the product states vegetable mono-diglycerides. Natural flavors is perhaps the most ambiguously named ingredient; it could imply natural flavors from vegetables, fruits, or animal products or a combination of the three. When a consumer sees natural flavors listed on the label of a fruit juice, he/she would likely conclude that the natural flavors were derived from a fruit, when it is very possible that it is actually from swine. Food distributors have a significant awareness of the mass amount of Muslims, Jews, and Vegetarians who do not wish or desire to eat products containing pork products. Yet, these companies continue to disguise pork products under the aliases that the average consumer would never associate with swine. By allowing companies to list pork ingredients under aliases without notifying the consumer that the products contain pork, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is allowing these companies to infringe on the civil rights of consumers with religious or personal convictions against eating foods containing pork ingredients. A religious conviction against eating pork is analogous with having a food allergy to an ingredient. Just as consumers with allergies to specific ingredients are entitled to a clear indication of the inclusion of that ingredient on the label of the product that contains it, so are Muslims, Jews, and Vegetarians entitled to the same right to avoid an ingredient that their religious faiths or personal convictions prohibit them from consuming. The right to guard ones health is no more important than the right to practice ones faith without undue burden. All people must eat, and all people have a right to be able to refrain from eating an ingredient that they don't want to take in. When food companies label their ingredients with ambiguous names, they cause many consumers to unintentionally violate their religious faiths.
When consumers who have against their wills eaten an animal product come to realize that the seemingly innocuous products they've been ingesting contain unwanted animal products, they become offended and outraged. In the 90's McDonalds was sued by Hindus and Vegetarians who were incensed when they found out that a beef addictive was an ingredient in the natural flavors of the oil the fries were cook in. In 2007, many Muslims were furious when they found out that many Frito-Lay Products contained pork. According to Aurora Gonzalez, a spokeswoman for Frito-Lay, the majority of cheese products are made with by using an enzyme that may come from pork; the pork enzyme is used in the milk that goes into making the cheese seasoning. Abdelkader, Rima. Muslims now in their late twenties complained on their blogs that they were upset because they had been eating these Frito-Lay products that contained pork since they were kids. I myself ate Skittles until I was 13 years old. For more than a decade, I ate pork without knowing it. That is how long a pork product can remain hidden in a product before the consumer finds out that he/she has been eating it, decades. Muslims, Jews, and Vegetarians have been eating products that contain pork for decades without knowing and against their will.
Through the method of disguising pork ingredients under aliases, companies are denying citizens a right to choose to refrain from eating swine. People should not have to be food scientists in order to be able to refrain from eating pork products. Products that contain soy or peanuts have the ingredients clearly identified as containing Soy or Peanuts on the label. Soy is not disguised in a name like mono-diglycerides or rennet or natural flavors, and neither are peanuts. Products that contain pork ingredients should be labeled with the same transparency.
I believe that the FDA is obligated to mandate that food distributors label ingredients that contain animal products clearly as either containing pork or beef. I intend to fight for this cause, and God willing, there will come a day when reading labels doesn't require a degree in bio-chemistry in order to avoid eating animal products.
To see Frito-Lay products that do not contain pork read my blog http://zssmorgasboard.blogspot.com/2009/09/frito-lay-products-that-do-not-contain.html
If you like this article, please donate.
Weight this morning 130.8
