Gender Roles

In a recent post Anar refers to an article in Forbes magazine on Careers and Marriage. The male writer cites various scientific studies to support statements such as "you [men] will be more unhappy if they [women] make more money than you", "your [the man's] house will be dirtier" and "you are more likely to fall ill". The author clearly is prejudiced by the traditional model of gender roles, where women stay at home and raise children while men work and make money.

If we (men in particular) are to open our minds just slightly we will see that these arguments are all based on the comfort of men and completely disregards the independence of women. A little bit of google search will provide a wealth of information from research in anthropological and social sciences that will support an alternative model for a family where both men and women can have a career.

A discussion on gender roles in wikipedia points out that "there has been a perception of Western culture, in recent times, that the female gender role is dichotomized into either being a "stay at home-mother" or a "career woman". In reality, women usually face a double burden: The need to balance job and child care deprives women of spare time. Whereas the majority of men with university educations have a career as well as a family, only 50 percent of academic women have children."

The situation (that women face the double burden) arises primarily because of our conditoning that women cannot balance career and family. No matter how educated we are, we (men and women) are heavily conditioned to think that balancing both is impossible. The situation will never arise if for a moment men start to think that they are equally responsible in family roles and the average woman is likely to have similar ambitions and aspirations of independence just like a man does. Agreed, it is the woman who has to get the melon out of the water hose, and feed the baby. But men can begin to assume a greater role in the family and give women the much needed time to pursue their interests.

The summary of a recent text book on this subject refutes many common arguments that are made to keep women to their traditional role. If you do click on the link above pay particular attention to the first two statments in the summary.

Women have demonstrated repeatedly that they are capable of many feats in fields that men have dominated. It is ultimately upto us (men) to keep an open mind and embrace the feats that our women are capable of. Instead of feeling threatened by their success I think we should laud their efforts and encourage them to pursue their interests. How fair is it to cage a bird and make it misearable so that we can see it everyday to satisfy our self-interests? How would a man feel if he was the bird who is in that cage?

Comments?

Do we shield our fears through aggression?

As Anar has politely reminded me in a comment to the previous blog, I have become quiet in my blog.

من تنبل نیستم. با کام و با شاپنگ برای انار من خیلی مشغول داشتم.

Anyways, I have been following the recent developments in the Middle East. One thing that seemed to be apparent to me was that the nation who is bullying is the one who is really scared and hence act disproportionately to protect their interest. Take the case of Israel. Israel is very worried about the attacks on their "homeland" from Lebanon. This has prompted them to wage many wars going well into their neighbours land under their self-proclaimed effort of "defending themselves". Another case in point, the United States, is "very worried" about Iran's nuclear policy and are therefore pushing the whole world to enforce severe sanctions on Iran at the very least to stop their effort. Do these acts of aggression suggest that the nations who are bullying the "weak" do indeed feel very insecure about themselves? Does this act of aggression help them feel more secure? Clearly, alienating your neighbor by reducing their land to rubble or curbing someone else’s development (if indeed it is a real peaceful development as Iran claim's) is only making you less secure rather than the other way around. But does the act of aggression, of being able to demonstrate your hegemony, appease your fear?

This fact also seems to manifest rather heavily at the individual level. Any person, by nature, seems to pursue some things in their life very aggressively. For example, suppose that I am really scared about a new colleague who seems to accomplish more and appears to be someone against whom I would have to compete in the future for perhaps getting a promotion. Then I am more likely to show some domination on issues where I can. I am more likely to pursue my work and that in the common area of interest between us very aggressively so that my position is secure. The question here is when I pursue something very aggressively, am I aware that I feel threatened, or do I try to escape my fear by focusing my energy on aggression? Is aggression really my only solution to overcome the fear? When I am inwardly very scared and insecure am I using aggression as an aegis?

The Fun of Learning a New Language

I am in many ways fortunate to have had the opportunity to learn more than one language. I have always taken to new languages with zest. I learnt hindi mainly by listening to hindi music and watching national TV in India as I grew up! I think learning a new language opens up a window to a new culture which we would otherwise not appreciate. Apart from my native language (Tamil) I speak English and Hindi. If you are curious about these languages here is some info on wikipedia: தமிழ் and हिन्दी. I am now trying to learn فارسی. Of course, Anar is my primary motivation here. Words of endearment seem much sweeter in Farsi than in English (زبان فارسی خیای شیرین است!). Having said that, I do have a genuine interest in learning new languages. At some point of time I want to learn Spanish, Arabic and Sanskrit.

In Europe and in the subcontinent speaking many languages is fairly common. But its not until I was in America that I realized that being multi-lingual may not seem so easy to the folks elsewhere. I put-together the following list of why we should learn a new language:
1. You explore a whole new culture through a language.
2. You get to see things from the viewpoint of others more easily.
3. It helps you tremendously when you travel.
4. Your time is much well spent in learning a new language than sitting and watching a re-reun of a sitcom.
5. It may help you professionaly if your job requires multi-lingual skills.
6. Above all its fun!

Is there anything else that you can think of?

What sets the pace of life?

I was in Canada recently. It appeared to me that life in Canada was laid back and it did not seem fast paced. I could be wrong about this ofcourse, given my very limited exposure. I was wondering what sets the pace of our life. What does a fast-paced life mean? It seems to me that that a fast-paced life should have the ability to keep our mind occupied with umpteen number of things to do (and we often run out of time to finish these things). When we label a place as "slow", we usually mean that this place does not offer enough things to keep us occupied. But who or what really sets the pace? Is it the society around us or do we ourselves set the pace of our life or is it a combination of both? Any thoughts?

Why do thoughts differ so much between the genders?

This post was motivated from a conversation with my girlfriend last night. About a year back I did not even know what a weblog was, even until about three or four months back I did not care much about weblogs. I started reading farsi blogs mainly because I will get some reading practice in farsi. But soon I got sucked into the the addicitve blog world. Anyways, I am digressing from the topic I have listed here. During our conversation last night my girlfriend noted that men predominantly tend to keep their blogs impersonal while women almost always make their blogs a whole lot more personal. I added to her point that men usually tend to talk more about generic things rather than about themselves unless a specific question is directed at them. I was wondering a few moments back why men and women think the way they do? Has evolution caused them to think in this manner? Or does the society impose upon the manner in which a man and a woman should think? Why do thoughts differ so much between the genders particulary when it comes to the manifestation of a personality?

Can understanding the mechanism of the mind lead to non-violence?

Arguably the human mind controls most of what is happening in and around us. So I think it is critical that we understand how it works and see it for what it is.

In this violent world where we constantly live under fear of war, non-violence is really the only way for lasting peace. Often the mind has a major role during any chain of events that ultimately causes someone to resort to extreme measures. To this extent understanding the mechanism of the mind is important.

Any thoughts?