So the article titled "The Challenge of Cultural Realism" makes the main point all cultures have different morals and values, and that because of this, there can be no "true" morality.  This continues to be explained throughout the article until, it the last few paragraphs, it throws the twist in that even if you had a choice in your culture, you'd choose your own because it's familiar and that we have to live with open minds. Well, then.

I've heard stories from my parents that have experienced "culture shock" firsthand.  They lived in Saudi Arabia between 87 and 90.  In this 3rd world country, public executions were very popular and were used to teach lessons.  It was perfectly normal for a husband to stone his wife or throw acid in her face.  Thieves had their hands cut off daily. Decapitation by sword was entertainment.  My parents' friends that actually witnessed executions recall that the Saudis would force the Westerners to the front of the crowd so they would learn a lesson.

This is similar to the tribal cultures in Things Fall Apart, in which Ikemefuma was killed because he was a sacrifice to the Mbaino tribe when a Umofian girl was killed.  This was the norm of this culture.

This is in stark contrast to Western culture, like in the U.S.  We believe that it is morally wrong to kill someone no matter what they've done.  The death penalty is hotly contested.

So what do I think this all means?  I agree with Ruth Benedict, in that there is no truth in morality. Who are we to judge others? How do we know which culture is right: the Westerners, the Africans, or the Middle Easterners? The point is we can't possibly know.  The only thing we can do is what Benedict stated: keep an open mind and don't tell anybody else they're wrong just because they believe in something else.