Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Mahsa Shekarloo: Well, I don’t know exactly what you mean by feminine values. I think we have to be careful here not to essentialize femininity or women or feminine values. I’m not so sure there is such a thing. I think there are certain values that are minimized in all areas that are not necessarily feminine, again, values like, based on values such as social justice, equality, sovereignty, self-determination. These are values that if they’re not implemented, if they don’t become the dominant, driving forces, then society will remain unbalanced and disharmonious as it stands right now. When there are so few women in positions of power, what that tells us is that 50 percent of the human population is being largely excluded from positions of power. But I don’t think that there are feminine values that are inherently good and more peaceful. I think women’s experiences can certainly be an added value to the discourses and negotiations that are happening in human society today in all aspects. But I think values of social justice, equality, responsibility, rights, sovereignty, self-determination, resistance are minimized in all areas. And I think that these values need to be reordered and reprioritized. And I think that women’s input can be very valuable, and women’s experiences and their responsibilities can be very valuable.

by Mahsa Shekarloo

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Mark Benecke: I do not see that feminine values are minimized in all areas. I do not see that. I work in a lot of countries and in most of the countries I see that feminine values are maybe on a level of male "blah-blah" talk, are not very important. But if you look behind the scene, backstage, you see that female values are as important as any other value. I mean, I don't know what the female value would be, but maybe a female value would be to allow things that seem to be on the opposite to happen at the same time, simultaneously or to find a better compromise. Maybe that's what the question is about. But if you look in international diplomatic structures, you will find a lot of female values. Or if you look into economical structures on the level of who trades with whom what, then in many cases, you do find female values. Maybe many people think that just because there are some imperialistic structures going on and dominating a lot of trade and diplomatics, sometimes everything is dominated like that in a kind of male and rough way. But maybe it's not. So I see a lot of softer values, if that is what female values are. I see them all around. So, society will be in balance and harmony if there is an evolutionary need. And since it is an evolutionary need, it is as balanced and as harmonic as it gets right now.

by Mark Benecke

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Martin Almada: No, an unequal representation of citizens cannot create balance and harmony in a human society. The power should be equally distributed, especially as women can contribute a lot by seing global problems from a different perspective. Nevertheless, in my opinion, power is not a question of gender, man or woman, but it´s much more a problem of social compromise of being in favor or against the poor. For example, Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, the ex-prime minister of England, and Ronald Reagan, supported the driving forces of the current economic model. This model makes huge profits possible, that are concentrated in the hands of very few ones and make those people more and more powerful. the wealth in the hands of very few ones, which become more and more powerful.

by Martin Almada

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Masami Saionji: The role of women in society is very precious although for a long time the function of women had been thought just bringing the children into the world. Women are equally vested with the same human dignity as men and there are many wonderful roles that only women can do. There has been no chance for women to present their abilities for a long time. The position/status of women was ignored by societies, countries and companies. However, once they gain their footing, they display their intelligence, abilities and possibilities and demonstrate their wonderful way of living. In the 21st century, women make their way in the former male-dominated society (i.e., in the high position of companies or the political world) and show their power. Since women have their feet on the ground, they can give selfless devotion to others. They can give others their love with nothing in return. Moreover, they have enormous　endurance, which is necessary to bring up a child. Now women can return these abilities to society and corporations. I think we can build a new wonderful world, where men and woman work in harmony with each other.

by Masami Saionji

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Masuma Bibi Russel:

by Masuma Bibi Russel

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Mayank Mehta: So we have to start from the first part, yes, there are very few women in power and that’s not that I think, and we have to figure out how can we change that? How can we change things? So that women have into really in the highest levels of equal powers. And I think, once again I spoke about this in the previous section, why aren’t women treated? Why don’t women reach there and that lies which many sub-minimal, perhaps not so sub-minimal messages that [inaudible] can make to each other and worst to children. When we look at any ways in third world or first world, invariably, if not always in the movies, the woman’s role is secondary at best. The woman is not the first person who is going to solve the big problems of the world and save the world, invariably, it’s the man. If they look in the same kind of stuff goes on in the little high school when we expect little girls to be pretty where as we expect little boys to be smart, especially in math. As long as this style of reasoning in this kind of messages are going to get conveyed, they will continue to see this stage, we will continue to see that if we see in the movie that woman is playing a secondary role. They will be more reluctant to see them being primary lead in daily life. And hence, the way out of this is to really to think deeply and careful when we convey this messages without really knowing at least let’s believe that this message is shared with the world and unknowingly minimize the law when we portray girls and women as capable in leadership roles or problem solving roles as men. And such portrayal improves, you take invasion of truth to sink-in to the peoples mind and accept them more readily in high position of power.

by Mayank Mehta

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Michael E. Tigar: David, I'm going to answer this question based upon the third and fourth and fifth centuries of the Common Era. [Origine Perneau], of the Centre Jeanne d'Arc, The Center of Joan of Arc in France, has written a book called "La Femme au tourne des Cathedrales," “Women in the Time of the Cathedrals” and has pointed to the crucial role of women in the early church. Now this is not going to be sort of a religious homily or try to make us all become the good Roman Catholic, not at all. But that book and the study of the Joan of Arc Institute contains powerful, powerful insights about the role of women and of feminist ideology in important social struggles, to the extent where the church “fathers” had to suppress these women's movements in those succeeding centuries. So my first observation is that that really is a hell of a question and an extremely important one. And my second answer is that now the struggle must begin. It must begin in your country and in my country, where despite the fact that women have the vote, and their numbers have increased in the professions, they are confronting the glass ceiling that prevents them from rising into positions of true power. That is an issue that we must address in the context of our own societies and to the extent we have power to do it. We as white men of a certain age probably ought to set an example by making sure that we are mentoring and encouraging and working with powerful and articulate women so that they are with us and take their place in wielding whatever power you and I in our lives are able to wield; and for others, to deal with these issues of gender discrimination in our workplaces, in our educational system, in all aspects of our lives. We need to be conscious of the ways in which we have internalized certain attitudes about male dominance and address those issues.

by Michael E. Tigar

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Michael Laitman: The correlation between men and women in governing human society does not have to be equal. We think this way, because from our point of view this appears to be truth and justice. But in reality, this is completely not so. We are tearing women out of their natural sphere: out of the family, bringing up children, the household, building a home, and building a family. Precisely this is bringing us to the disintegration of families, to divorces and to all the negative phenomena that are so widespread today in modern society. As the result of all these phenomena, precisely women turn out to be miserable and feel unhappy. This fictitiousness, this lie that a man and a woman can be equal according to our arbitrary measures, without any consideration of their gender and the natural position of each one in their niche—precisely this makes the world so unbalanced, in spite of the laws of nature. The boundary between the sexes must be preserved, and we must always take the nature of each sex into consideration. We have to understand that we must take into consideration the characteristics of the female psychology, the role of a woman in giving birth to and developing the generations. What we are seeing today is precisely the result of our desire to pull or tear a woman out of her natural setting, out of the family and the home, and to bring her to govern human society, to participate against her natural desire in the functioning of various social systems. This is completely not her place. The equality lies in that we must attribute equal significance and give equal opportunities to each sex, but not level them out completely, as if they do not differ in any way.

by Michael Laitman

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Michael P. Totten: Well, we certainly have to. That’s a general broad question, and when we move to specifics, perhaps a common ground for universal human rights that certainly can and should be vigorously pursued. There may be some areas that come into conflict and that requires much more of a deliberative process of discussion and conversation, to find common ground there. But to respect the human being and the rights of everyone to have a minimum of social rights and well-being, it’s something that has a universal meaning to us across all religions and cultures. Where the conflicts may arise because we have had religious conflicts, and cultural conflicts forever, dialogues and multi-logues are absolutely vital. Since, when people share lots of common threads in other ways that helps to nurture discussions in those more painful areas where there may be sharp distinction. But the fact that we have families that come from extremely different religious and cultural background and yet show the love that is possible in bringing up children to lead a positive life is an existence proof that solutions are found. So, we need to bring that kind of consciousness to the community and the national and the global level. Certainly, where conflict is inevitable, we need to find I think an early warning process that prevents us from flaring up into the types of conflagration what we have seen in past century. My brother, Dr. Sam Totten has been involved for the past quarter century of--[audio ends].

by Michael P. Totten

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Mohammed Arkoun: We make always the experience of the inequality of women and of the nearly impossible challenge to change the mentality vis-à-vis the role of the woman in society and of their contribution to change the mentality themselves concerning the construction of a more harmonic society which is more open minded concerning equality in general. The traditional and archaic societes sattle the women with rules which are quiet alarming concerning the future of women in these societes which is equal with the future of the whole societes. Because if a societe doesn't considere the situation of the women all problems of inequality will consist. You have to consider first of all the musselman societes which are numerous all around the world and where exists a large number of citizens who are in favour of a maintenance of the islamic law system and who want the women to stay in a situation completely unsustainable vis-a-vis the position which women should have and vis-à-vis the voting rights women should benefit from in a modern society. I'm talking about the islamic example because of my own large knowledge about this religion but there are also other societys where women smart under a considerable backwandness in equality and we are inclined to forget that even in Europe and in this way in the countries of the Occident, women have to continue fighting for a larger equality.

by Mohammed Arkoun

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Mohau Pheko: I think that this is a very important question that how can society move ahead without women's full participation at the table. It's an extremely challenging table. I think, first of all, we have got to change what we mean and confront what manhood is and confront what womanhood is because I think that there are tremendous distortions about what a man is and what a woman is, but especially what a man is. And the definitions that we have today create a situation where manhood becomes defined with dominance, defined with more power, defined with more privilege, defined with more supremacy and I think that we have got to transform and deconstruct our world in such a way that we are defining our society and the roles that women and men play in a way that brings a balance to the world. How do we do this? We do this by ensuring that both women and men's wisdoms are valued in the same way. The intellect that both women and men bring to the table is valued in the same way that women's creative spirits, women's innovative spirit is valued in the same way. And I think that I would almost advance the notion that we need a feminine principle in the way that we look at power in the world today that we are not looking at questions of power, questions of decision making, questions of economic planning through the eyes of women. And I think that by missing out on that aspect of life, we miss out on such tremendous values that women can and do bring to the table. So, I think that fundamentally, we have to bring these wisdoms and value them and authenticate them and legitimize them in the same way and begin to I think deconstruct and subjugate the source of powers that bring dominance [audio ends].

by Mohau Pheko

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Monira Rahman: Obviously this is the question of women in positions of taking decisions, the political power of women. Otherwise, how it is possible to establish a balance and harmony between an equal rights between men and women? And as I said earlier, it is again the political empowerment of women. Obviously, as few women are in a position of power, and therefore it is difficult for establishing this policy structure and system laws in accordance for women empowerment and equality and equity. The education, economy, politics, everywhere in social development aspects, it is very much important that women are in a position that can take decisions, can lead and in that way the society has a balance and harmony. And obviously it is not just the number of women in power; it is important that values that sanctions equality and equity. It is not a question about even men in power. It is important that the men are owning the values of the gender equity, but obviously it is not possible for men to realize the concerns for women development and gender equality. So it is very important that women are in positions of taking decisions can make the laws, policies and system for this world and can lead the education system…

by Monira Rahman

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Nadja Halilbegovich: I absolutely agree it’s true that women are still at a disadvantage and that we have an imbalance and that they are not equal participants in all areas of society. However, I do think that we are on the right track as women. I think that we’ve have had in the past and currently in the present have women who are strong role models, women who are proving their intelligence, their courage, their capability in all areas that we excel. So, I think we just need to constantly work on creating this balance, men and women working together, working equally, being paid equally and fairly. I think that it also lies in us, women. I think that we need to feel sisterhood amongst each other and amongst ourselves; we need to encourage one another and empower one another. And I certainly have had dozens of role models, women who’ve inspired me in my life and I hope someday that I can be that someone for someone else, my child some day. And I think that is the way to go; just keep walking in our common dream of achieving fairness and equality in the world.

by Nadja Halilbegovich

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Neela Marikkar: Well, the reality is it is very much a man’s world. It is a boy’s club in many, many areas. But, I think it's a challenge that women have to address, and I think that women, ourselves, we have been very silent on this. We have not been out there changing the way that our men folk think of us, and look at us, and value us. I think the challenge is we can influence this, because after all we are mothers, we are wives, we are sisters, we are daughters. So, we should be the ones out there changing this, women, we -- we are the ones who actually perpetuate the myth, by the way we bring up our sons, by the way that we act with our own -- within our families. We accept this role, we don’t want to change it. So, I think that the challenge is with us. We need to go out there, we need to lobby, we need to insist on greater participation in governance, in policy making, in Board rooms, in corporate sector. I think that if we don’t go out there and speak for ourselves, and we don’t do it starting in our own homes, and try to change our views, with our own sons and our own husbands, and others, we are never going to change it. I think the change begins with us. We have to start thinking differently, and with that difference is what we raise our families with, and hopefully they will go out and change the way that they think, and that’s how we start the change.

by Neela Marikkar

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Oliviero Toscani: Social harmony. If we talk about power again, being in power. Yes, probably they are not really in power in corporation. In those positions where – but they lost the power probably in place where actually they have to be powerful actually as a mother in a family. Women lost their power there and probably this is the reason why we are losing in harmony. I don’t think that this is the major reason of the lack of social harmony. Probably we don’t have to put everything on work. But on education, where are those mother that use to educate? Those kids are missing; I mean the role of women in the world education got lost. I guess lost its power. And I think women should take that role, take that role back and do educate their children and educating their children means educating the society. I think this is a very important basic role that women should play. We are missing those mothers.

by Oliviero Toscani

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Oscar Olivera: This is....basically thought from a western, capitalistic perspective, institutional form, that excludes women from any possibility to conduct their lives. A chauvinistic, racist, exclusionary, discriminating society. However, i think that the only alternative is to regain our values, our culture []. I think, if we are able to regain conditions, where the participation of all the members of the comunity isn’t strictly not to question the male sex, the superior, but where also women, children, adolescents are part of this construct of life, well, then we won’t be in a position to ask questions like this one.

by Oscar Olivera

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Paul Knight: Feminine values have been so minimized within our communities. This question, I think, is really goes down to looking at how our society is constructed. One could argue that why saying women’s values or women’s input is minimized within our societies on one hand because they’re not represented in a lot of positions of power. On the other hand in many of these positions of power there’s women involved behind the scenes and so they can get their point across, can get their values into the debate. It’s just a matter of how they’re portrayed. And I think in that respect the issue is the profile and the perception of those that women aren’t having a say when the reality is they quite well may be. They quite well could be getting their voice and their opinions across it’s just done because the scenes. So to say that there’s no balance here I think could be a bit of an issue with our understanding what’s really happening. I’m not saying it doesn’t, that women’s input isn’t minimized within our societies, but I think it’s one of those issues where we really need to focus on what are the interactions around our societies? How can work with insuring that input of people around us is all being put into the mixing bowl, if you like, regardless of agenda, regardless of racial background. It’s that mixing point that needs to be focused on and how you get that voice in there. And I think it really matters whether you’re the one actually saying it. But it’s having the opportunity to have that voice and to throw your hat in the ring, if you like, into a debate. And so I don’t think it’s a matter of the perceived balance that could create greater--

by Paul Knight

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Pauline Tangiora: That is a great question, David, and it’s a challenging question. From my perspective, I find that it is a bit hard to answer. Not having your background in Canada, I can say, I know three wonderful group of women, the 13 Indigenous Grandmothers For Peace, whose 13 of them whose ages add up to over 850 years, a powerful, powerful group of women. There is the Women’s International Meet for Peace and Freedom. They created this organization in 1915 as a protest against war. It is nearly a 100 years since it was inspired, and it is still going strong. In my own country, of the Maori Women’s Welfare League, we have wonderful women leaders who have been going since 1952. Now, when you look from my local base to a world base, I find that we do have women in the world who are in positions of power, who have feminine values, but they are not minimized for those. Yes, we have also women in power who do not have a balance and a harmony in their lives. But that’s in all things in life. And I would not like to say that we have only a few women in power who do not have balance and harmony.

by Pauline Tangiora

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Pico Iyer: I am afraid I take issue with the question. I think feminine values are everywhere, not least in masculine people. Most of us I think have a balance between feminine and masculine. I think The Economist, just two weeks ago, ran an article about how feminine qualities, however you choose to define them, are more and more evident in the workplace. In my own part of the world, South Asia, there have been many feminine leaders, not always with wonderful results. Indira Gandhi brought India to what’s known as the emergency in the country. Whereas born in England, Margaret Thatcher came to power, and I think many of us feel that she introduced one of the harshest and most heartless societies that Britain has known in recent decades. When Benazir Bhutto came to power in Pakistan or Mrs. Bandaranaike in Sri Lanka, I don't think it’s necessarily evident that they brought a compassion or empathy or sensitivity that their male counterparts and successors didn’t. So, I think that’s not totally in terms of men or women. Let’s talk about individuals. When Nelson Mandela or the Dalai Lama comes to power, I don't think we have to say that they are masculine or feminine leaders. I think we just see that they are humans who have developed their capacities to a greater or to lesser extent. And I think as long as we are remaining fixed in these dualities, that male against female or black against white, or Eastern against Western, we have perpetuated the system. And we are limiting it, and we are encouraging the assumption that males are excluded from certain virtues and that women are excluded from certain decisions. And I think we can usefully free ourselves from such categories and see that women have a larger part of men and then men of women.

by Pico Iyer