Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Esther Mwaura-Muiru: I think the world has shown us unless people, all sectors of this society participate in defining their own destiny then we are not going to make it. We are not going to achieve what we collectively think. There are very very few people in decision-making powers. And it’s not because women are not able to be in these positions of power. But the inherent reason, why people, why women find their own niche in positions of power. How they use their power is the mannerism that makes them pushed out of this power. Women use their power that they do have for the collective gain of everyone. And so the power that they get is distributed among many. What happens when it is distributed by many? Most people who would want to have it is centralized power, and which unfortunately is the nature of men, who find it possible to throw away the people who would have some de-centralized power. And I think it’s really unfortunate. So, it is true, unless we sincerely bring the largest population of the world into the decision making power, it’s not just women. We must bring poor women because women are there. We are not many, I agree, but poor women, grassroots women are invisible; and they may be making decision. Many people have been saying women are the largest number of votes. Yes, they do vote. But, sometimes they are thrown out of their platform to compete for higher levels because they don’t have combative politics. They don’t do combative competition. They engage in dialogues, and in a world like this where everybody is competing and getting their position at any costs, we have seen a lot of women move and shy away from competing for political positions and for economic positions, for strategic positions in the world. I seriously believe that if half of the world’s rulers and leaders are women, we will see a difference in the way the world goes. I think women would demonstrate that the resources that we have can be distributed across the board among those who have and those ones who have not and we are going to bridge the ineq(uity).

by Esther Mwaura-Muiru

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Fernando Solanas: Well. This is true, but I would say that there are [] in the positions of power for the sexes and there also have to be positions of power for the arrival of the adolescence. And we have to make it possible that all sectors of society can get positions of power. We are living in societies that have millions of marginalized people that are limited concerning their social and basic human rights. It is not a problem of men or women, it is a problem of men, women and the adolescence because each generation brings a different view with it or should bring us a different view of the actual reality because that is what assures a progress. I am not talking about a society that is led only by the adolescence or by women or men. I am for the equality of sexes but we have to search for a balance between ourselves and the adolescence which is our future. A sharing society between men and women and adults and adolescents.

by Fernando Solanas

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Fred Matser: I think that's a question to my heart. As I mentioned before, there is indeed a big imbalance in female representation in the world and the levels where decisions are taken. And as I mentioned before as well, we have to sit together as man and woman to see how we can rebalance, not only representation of man and woman, but also how we can within ourselves rebalance the feminine and male qualities. For male quality stands, in my way of seeing, the physical power and a power of the mental, and for the female qualities stand the power to feel, to be vulnerable and the power of the heart. And in so many men, we see an over-development of the physical power and over-development of the mental power, and by the way also in many women now. And we see, I mean, in many women, we see those mental powers highly developed. And what is not well developed, especially, in the males is the power to feel, the power to be vulnerable, the power to say I don't know, the power to say I made a mistake. There is nothing wrong in being vulnerable or making mistakes. And I would really love to see that we bring back into the arena these qualities, those functional female qualities in man and that we indeed in a woman respect these qualities because there is no life possible without the existence of both qualities. Let's not forget, at birth of our life, the power of vulnerability is present and there is no life possible without this quality of being vulnerable with the quality to feel. We only have to think about music, about other expressions of ours, how they can move us and how important they play a role in our experience.

by Fred Matser

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Galsan Tschinag: That is really the case, David. In the world, women don't really get a look-in. But that is one side of the story. The other side would be that a woman who takes power shouldn’t abuse it like men do. If you look at the predators or birds of prey you can see that females are much more aggressive and quick-witted than males. A whole lot of women make me think of it.

by Galsan Tschinag

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Geert Lovink: I'm very much in favor of old style equal opportunity policies. Time and again we see how even under progressive governments, in liberal societies in fact the position of women are declining, not improving. This is a great worry, for instance, in country that I'm based in, in the Netherlands. It is really about child care and about other forms of organizing work force career planning and this cannot be established as a culture. It needs very, very strict rules set from above; let's say even enforced by police if you like, by the law, because the system itself, the global capitalist system as it functions right now, will not enable women to have more access to resources, to power. So there's very little hope here that empowerment or feminism, the feminist movement alone will do the job and even a man of good will with good intentions cannot achieve very much at this level. So, I would just be quite brutal in that sense and demand equal opportunity on all levels, in particularly board levels, at CEO level, because even in my school I see that at the moment that women start to become ambitious. They become a threat and they’re moved out and they’re also willing…

by Geert Lovink

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Giora Feidman: Well, in the question we have the answer. It’s not balanced in the society because the women, the family women don’t have -- are not involved in the position. They describe in total function the destiny of our planet of humanity. It is not a question to say, “ Okay, the masculine world is responsible,” to point the finger of some society. “They are not allowed; don’t give the woman to go to this position.” They are until today, with all my respect with religions that don’t allow the woman to grow, is something that this kind of system will need, will have the need to come to realization, to the reality that passé, passé that the women are not able to go to the university or to drive the car even. There were countries that would not allow the women to drive a car. And, of course, this will give the natural balance of life. Yin and Yang, call what you want. The women as soon as possible should come to drive us, to make the leaders of human society-- will be very, very healthy for all of us.

by Giora Feidman

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Gladman Chibememe: There is need to have a paradigm shifting the way we look at the world. There is need to embrace the issue of holism and there is also a need to embrace their right to – the concept of their right to be different. The effect of that women does not mean that they are inferior, it means that they can all – they are only different from men. But, being different from something or some people, does not mean that you are inferior. In this case, the balance of power can be meaningfully addressed if we make sure that women are put in places of decision making. They are part of the planning, the policy planning and decision making processes at all level, national and international level. We also need to move away from this patriarchal and exclusionary approach, where people think that the only reality is the patriarchal way of looking at things and trying to differentiate between the superior and the inferior, the feminine and the masculine. I think we are all the same. When god created the people, he created them the same as equal people, we have got equal rights. So, we need to respect each other, give each other an important role to play and opportunity to play in development, in leadership. We have got very popular and very important female leaders. We have distinguished themselves in various areas, for example, in my country, Zimbabwe, we have got [Umbia Uanda] is one of the icons for liberation of the Zimbabwe. So, we have such people, like women we’ve been so pivotal in the development, in the liberation of my people, then why not having them in the decision making, they are just as good as men. So, the bottom line is that there need to be a paradigm ship for upholding particular and exclusion of values and systems into and of course, where we have got diversity we [audio ends]

by Gladman Chibememe

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Govindaswamy Hariramamurthi: It is possible to work at it. The balance or harmony is something that we can see happening now, it has begun. If the society does not provide a balance and opportunity to more women, women will demand it and acquire it. We can’t keep on denying forever. If it doesn’t happen today, I am sure it can happen tomorrow. It has to, and it will get balanced. They are becoming more aware of their abilities. They acquire their abilities, and they acquire their strengths in a moment of mutually benefiting relationship. Power and values will be optimized, I believe, in the years to come. It is not possible to keep them in the way they are. It is beginning to happen. It will happen. I feel that these values are getting accepted.

by Govindaswamy Hariramamurthi

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Hans-Peter Dürr: I would rather prefer to see women not in positions of power. Power is a patriarchal element, but the increasing importance of female values is something, which should be stressed. Female values mainly lie in the recognition of the primary importance of personal advantages, which are connected to advantages of others, playing a game with a positive result. Everyone profits from a development instead of the creation of imbalances by the selection of certain features, which lead to a reduction of flexibility and diversity. Life is an increase of plurality, but not a plurality, which is separated but one which is able to cooperate in a way which leads to a new form of integration where the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Only this cooperative integration of different things can lead to a higher level of development, not the aggressive clash of differences, which will finally lead to winners and losers. The integration of all new qualities into a common concept would be a real victory. This doesn't rule out that some things will have no future because they appear not integrable in this cooperation. But this has to become clear and it will become clear. Everything, which is not supportive of cooperation is going to have no chance for survival in the future. Therefore we need the female element. It is a very essential basis for life not only to invent new things, not only to be creative and not only to open up new possibilities but to integrate them into society in a constructive way.

by Hans-Peter Dürr

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Harry Wu: The person who presented this question wants to emphasize that famales should attain the status due to them in the society, which is supposed to be so. But females have their own features, because they play a particular role in the society, history and culture, which differs from others. This point should be clear, thereby it is worth discussing how feminine values should be maximized or minimized.

by Harry Wu

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Helena Norberg-Hodge: I think there is no doubt that we need to empower women with feminine values to have more of a voice and to regain more power. Fundamentally, this imbalance lies behind many of the crises we face. However, it is not wise, I believe, to look only at the imbalance between male and female. We need to understand again the structures that have led to a male-dominated system becoming ever more out of balance, ever more anti-feminine values. As we know, there are now women in power, and there have been women in power, who have become more male than the men themselves. So the emphasis on feminine values I believe is key. And the feminine values as I see it have to do with understanding the spiritual interconnectedness of all that lives. The need for love and nurturance. The need for compassion. The need to be able to put ourselves in the place of others. And also, the humility to understand that each and every individual is different. That each and every situation is different. And we need the feminine values to be linked to the structural changes that will enable people to live in accordance with those values. So as I see it, those feminine values are the recognition of the inextricable interdependence of all that lives. Our dependance on other human beings and on the natural world and the way of living in that way has to do with the restoration of community. Of rebuilding a fundamental building block, that human beings need both for a positive sense of identity and for a sense of being nurtured as they grow up and being able to nurture as adults. This community fabric has been lost through modernization, through pressures of mobility, speed, competition - archetypical male values are now dominating every culture. Restoring feminine values from my point of view has to do with rebuilding community, which in turn will happen through the rebuilding of the local economic fabric. Localization can help rebuild.

by Helena Norberg-Hodge

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Homero Aridjis:

by Homero Aridjis

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Irina Yasina: In the modern world there is no necessity to hunt, fence, make physical efforts to provide food and therefore the role of s physically stronger man is reduced. We understand that. We just have a transitional stage but it appears to us that everything is already different while governmental systems are still the same. I cannot say that I believe in patriarchy. I don’t really think about it much. But the role of women will gain in importance and then there will be of course more harmony because responsibility is more typical of women than of men just because it is an instinctive sense. No woman could be irresponsible if she sees her own children and realizes that she could do harm to them. So I think that changes will happen mostly in the next decades. Therefore there is no reason to trouble much about it.

by Irina Yasina

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Jerry Mander: Answertext will be available soon.

by Jerry Mander

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Jesper Green: Who says that human society should be in harmony and in balance, if there is a 50-50 solution between men and women? I don’t know. I don’t know if there should be 80 to 20%, or 50-50. I really don’t know. But who says that to have harmony and happiness in the society then it would be 50-50 men and women? I don’t know. Maybe it’s not necessary. And who is not feeling harmony? Is that the society’s fault or is it your own personal fault? Do you give room in yourself to the female side and the male side? Otherwise you’re not in harmony. That sounds a little bit like bullshit, right? I don’t know. Maybe it’s good for you. Maybe it’s good for everybody. Maybe it’s good for society. Maybe 50-50 is the solution. I don’t know.

by Jesper Green

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Jodie Evans: So it can't be in balance without women of positions of power. I think it's bigger than women in positions of power. I think it's bigger than women in positions of power. It's entire power shift, a value shift of what power actually is. Because power has become something that's created to be over, to be through fear, through force, through fundamentalism. And so it depends on, it's like the whole idea of what that power is needs to shift. And yes, getting women in positions of power can add to that, but it's actually getting the values of the feminine to be understood by both men and women all over. You know women can be bought into masculine ideas of power, and so you could have a lot of women in positions of power like Margaret Thatcher, and you're not creating a balance. So I think the balance needs to happen with the value shift of even what power is, because we have the idea it's power over instead of power together, the power that exists if we empower each other, where we create win-win situations where our own personal power, our own sense of ourselves that is in relationship to everything creates the power of creating freedom and creating fulfillment and creating nurturing societies. That's a power in itself, but it's not a power over. I'm definitely for women being in more positions of power, but if you just make that the goal, you lose sight of what actually has to happen and that's a whole shift in the value. It's like when we're trying to stop a war and they say well, war is inevitable, but you know war isn't inevitable. War has to be planned, it has to be funded, it has to be kind of forced on us and so what we've done is we've lost the power of the feminine values. [AUDIO WAS CUT OFF]

by Jodie Evans

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

John Gage: Human society is not in balance and harmony, and there is no guarantee that the presence of women in positions of power would guarantee balance and harmony. I think only of the examples in Rwanda where the most capable women developing businesses in Rwanda, at the time of the genocide, turned their incredible business knowledge, their newly acquired skills to the efficient process of killing people. Now, that example contrasts a Rwanda of 15 years ago with the Rwanda of today. That example contrasts the Rwanda of pre-genocide times with the Rwanda of today where the largest single concentration of women in any government in the world, in positions of responsibility, in elected positions, is in Rwanda. The shift in Rwanda, the fundamental transformation of what it means to be a participant in a society, and in Rwanda’s case, an agrarian society, a rural society, a society based on differentials between men and women that are of long-standing basis. This transformation is taking place now. And when we watch around the world, the advances of women into positions of power, bringing a sense, the women’s values, you can call them, a sense of balance and harmony of maternal responsibility, of a feeling, of a sense of community, of a sharing sensibility, that’s how I would characterize your question with reference to women’s values. That capability strengthens every government and strengthens every business. That capability, difficult to measure, but palpable for those experiencing it, is I think at the base of transformation of governments as we know it, at the base of transformations of corporations. Corporations are forced by a very narrow accounting system to measure success in limited ways. And your question points out that, if we alter the presence of sharing values in a corporation, it may alter the methods that corporation itself uses to evaluate its behavior. And in that, we may [audio ends].

by John Gage

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Jonathan Granoff: Women are in positions of power within the lives of every infant that comes into the world. Women are not in positions of power in our major economic, legal, and military institutions. The question that I have is, are these places in which so much power should be centralized. Should we not be questioning this synthesis of power in those particular institutions. And would the values that we associate with women - nurturing and caring, if we mean these to be feminine values, would they be successful in changing these institutions. I'm not sure. I would hope so. I think in the modern world where the strength of intellect is in many ways more important than the brute strength of the body, that women certainly can play a major role in every major institution. But it seems to me that men need to develop those qualities that are associated with women. Caring, and loving, and nurturing. Why are these just the property of women? And the capacity of self-expression and confidence and strength and assertiveness, why are these associated with men? I don't think anybody is truly a human being if they're not able to confidently express their heart, and I don't think they're fully human if our heart doesn't have nurturing and love and compassion as its central tuning fork. So, yeah there needs to be balance of these different principles that we see embodied in men and women. Without them it's like a bird trying to fly with one wing. But our point of reference should be those qualities and values, not just the institutions as we see them today, but the inner architecture of what is it to be human, what is it to be a man, what is it to be a woman, what is it to be a human being.

by Jonathan Granoff

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Jonathan Meese: Why should a human society be in balance and harmony? Who decides that this is good? What is a position of power? Should one take such a position at all? Isn't power anti-power? What is the female value? This question is connected to the mental state. This question only can and will be answered by the questioner. But it will not matter anything, neither the question nor the answer can effect anything. Is a diamant harmonic? Is light balanced? Is everything clear? What is reflection? Do we know the speed of things? Do we know what a value is? What is underrated? Is perhaps the underrated the best? Wouldn't this be the best chance? Is it possbile that the softest material absorbs everything? Or is it the density? What is the few? What is the baby? What is the national baby? Is the national baby Lord? Is arch-nation the baby of a new age? Or is the baby even the new Lord? Who is it? What positions of power has art to take in? In us, to us, by us? Where is the secret skin? Are we absorbed? Are we perforated? Does art go through us totally? Does art reflect us? Do we reflect art? Where are we? What is our point of view? Why does existential orientation reigns the world? Is the ocean balanced? Is a shark harmonic? Is the muck harmonic? Is a volcanic eruption harmonic? Does a vulcan have any position of power? Is a vulcan female? Is a Vulcan a baby? Is Richard Wagner a Baby? Is Richard Wagner a rock? We do not know anything.

by Jonathan Meese