Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Simon Retallack: It’s absolutely true to say that our societies cannot be in balance if women are not given the chance to have an equal role in decision making, whether it’s in politics or actually in the commercial or civil society world. I think, I mean -- I think I said this earlier, too. There are an increasing number of women that are breaking through to positions of leadership and influence but far too few. Look at the number of women who do run countries; who are prime ministers or presidents. There aren’t enough of them and look at the number of women in parliaments; there are more than there were before but there still aren’t enough. And I’m not sure that human society benefits from this status quo. I think it’s often said that if there were more women in positions of power and influence there would be fewer wars. Women, I think, maybe it’s a cliché and a simplistic conclusion to draw but maybe it’s -- there’s some truth in this. Women’s roles as mothers, nurturers of life may make them think harder before committing troops to war if they’re in positions of leadership. I don’t know. I suspect that there may be some truth in that. Of course, it’s not always true. I know in Britain Margaret Thatcher was the Prime Minister who sent our troops off to fight in the Falklands and supported military interventions elsewhere, too. So, it’s complex but generally speaking we collectively need to do far more to insure that there are more women in positions of power and influence, and that feminine values have a greater place in the ethos of organizations whether it is companies, nonprofits, the media. I think an exclusive focus on traditionally male values; aggressive macho-male values isn’t necessarily… [audio ends]

by Simon Retallack

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Sohrab Mahdavi: Feminine values, if there’s such a thing, because I’m not sure if there are feminine or masculine values. There are values, human values but then there are perspectives. I think, again, we always tend to underestimate the power of women in various areas of our lives and focus on masculine or male power. In an individual’s life, balance and harmony is an ideal. We are always thriving for balance and we're always trying to strike harmony. The same is true with human society. There are always forces that want to balance things out, and there are always forces that benefit from an imbalance and inequality. A challenge within each individual and society in general is to check excesses. To check greed. To balance it with compassion, and to balance it with collective thinking. This is a challenge for individuals as well as for cultural and social formations.

by Sohrab Mahdavi

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Song Kosal: Gender issues should be more socialized.

by Song Kosal

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Stephanie Robinson: Thank you, David for that question. I think that it can not. The simple answer is that when you have more than half of your population that is not being fully engaged and fully realized then there is going to ultimately be an imbalance there is not an expectation of balance. Balance implies equilibrium and when you have a population that is controlled so much by power structures that are male dominated and men and women don’t work together to be able to advance all humanity you have an imbalance. I’d also like to the part of the question, David, that you ask which has to do with the feminine values and the goals of what is valued by what I refer to often times as not just feminine values, but values of mothering and values of nurturing. Values of the head and the heart and many people see it that way and the way in which women communicate and the way in which they internalize and the way in which they process information is profoundly different form that in which the way men do. Unless we have a connection of both of these world views and both of these ways of processing as well as taking into consideration the ideas, the issues, the values that women hold deeply which are not always different than that of men but unless we are actually able to bring women to the proverbial table and the table to of power and to institutions and into structures that actually dictate what our agendas are going to be and how our decisions are going to be made I would argue that we will always have sort of this imbalance, this lopsided way of dealing. So I thank you very much for the question and I think it’s one that we need to take seriously and not merely invite women to tables and I mean this would also go to people of color to tables but they actually become intricate parts of the power structure and making decisions as to how we think about doing things as well as what it is we plan to do. And that is essential and crucial if in fact we are going to be able to address some of the other questions that have been asked here today that even have to do with why women are always continuously at a disadvantage. If in fact men in men dominated positions and men dominated institutions that are really systemic in to the culture in which we live that they allow the continuing exploitation and the devaluing of women at some real level you will never really be able to reach true equality and equilibrium.

by Stephanie Robinson

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Steve Earle: It can't.

by Steve Earle

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Sulak Sivaraksa: You are quite right. I think we should have more women in responsibility. But, we must not push this violently. We must not also promote the Western kind of feminism. I think we should work in harmony. The men must realize that they need more women. Indeed, even those of the [third] sex should also have a role, for balance and harmony together. Men and women, young and old, people of different ethnic groups particularly the marginalized, the poor. I think if these people could listen to each other, listen more than to talk, [breathing] properly more than thinking, silence is also essential, then I think bilateral harmony will be possible. To put it in a religious term, we need to be guided by God or by [Damma], by [Bodhisatva], and not by human egos. Whether it is female egos or male egos, ego should become less and less important. That’s why -- then wisdom will prevail together with compassion.

by Sulak Sivaraksa

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Susan George: Well, I don't know. I think once women get into positions of power, the result is very often a disaster. And, of course, the example of Margaret Thatcher is the one that immediately comes to mind. I wonder, if we don't have to ask, if it's not power that is more important than gender in this question because women who are ruthless enough to play the power game and to arrive at the top of corporate or political structures are not going to be doing that on the basis of what the questioner calls feminine values. And, I don't believe in making universals out of feminine or masculine values. I know plenty of men who are sensitive and who are caring; I know plenty of women who are ruthless and totally without scruples. So, I think that it's dangerous to make sort of huge generalizations, which are very culturally dependent, class dependent, depends on what position you occupy in society and what it is that, what you really want. But I would say that countries and societies that refuse to make use of the contributions that women could make are cheating themselves. They are going to be failed societies and particularly those that cloister their women and discriminate against them deserve what they will get. But unfortunately, the whole world is going to suffer from putting women at such a disadvantage. Perhaps, the fact that they haven't freed themselves shows that there are feminine values. I don't know. Is submission of feminine value? Is subservience a feminine value? I hope not, but some societies seem to exemplify that. But, let's not reify women and say that they have -- they are unaffected by power, unaffected by ambition, or sometimes unscrupulousness, because this is making -- This is demeaning, I think, for women and what it is saying is that they are not fully human if they don't participate in all the possible traits [audio ends]

by Susan George

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Swami Pragyapad: Answertext will be available soon.

by Swami Pragyapad

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Sydney Possuelo: Well, David...It makes part of imbalance. We must correct ourselves. We, who are the other half of mankind, have to correct ourselves. I don’t know how we could do it. The fact is that women, terribly underestimated along history, have climbed up and conquered some spaces by themselves. Women themselves have produced this space. It wasn’t due to our solidarity, except for homes and spaces like yours, David. But I believe our consciousness grows everyday and calls us to be more solidary, more comprehensive, more lovely and more respectful towards our other half, which are women, and who have given birth to us and divide with us this world, and divide with us our loves, our anguishes, our sadnesses and our joys. They need to be respected in their dignity, in their spaces in their physical differences. In short, we need to respect women more. That’s it. Or, that’s all and more than that.

by Sydney Possuelo

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Takashi Kiuchi: We should not undervalue women's power or current women's power. I think we have a tendency to overvalue all those men's activities because they are more visible; but behind the scenes, there are tremendous amounts of women's activities which should be properly evaluated. Current society depends so much on each individual and each individual is here because women's power. You call it feminism, but it is mother's role that I'm talking about.

by Takashi Kiuchi

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Tamas St. Auby: Neither women nor man should be in power because power is rising from the mental disease of oniomania and pleonexia. This axiom is based on feminine values since Eve is repressed by Adam following the crime of their mythical over-consumption of the superfluous.

by Tamas St. Auby

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Tania Bruguera:

by Tania Bruguera

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Tavis Smiley: Well, I’m not sure that human society can be in balance and harmony when you have the entire female population to this day still disregarded, disrespected, and disenfranchised. And so we have to understand that the values of women are really the values of all of us, values that can empower us, values that can enlighten us, values that can empower us, values that can enhance us. Those values are the values that each of us share. I don’t subscribe to this notion that somehow the values of women are different than, or less than the values of all of us as human beings. I mean in a very frank and forthright way, we would not be here as human beings were it not for the female species, the female race that makes obviously all life possible. So to not value their values devalues all the rest of us. Thank you.

by Tavis Smiley

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Tegla Loroupe: Answertext will be available soon.

by Tegla Loroupe

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Thenmozhi Soundararajan: This question to me is really a question about how do we approach society as whole people and whole communities and what is that vision for wholeness we have? Because I think there’s multiple marginalities and multiple values that come from marginal communities that aren’t reflected in the way that polices get set. I think as a woman of color I always look at the intersection between gender, race, class and heterosexism as all communities that I am a part of, but also that have intrinsic values of justice that I don’t see reflected in the world around me. That said, I really I am also very concerned about trying to set up a binary and I think around the issue of women’s rights. I think when we talk about women’s rights we want to talk about people that are marginal, vis-à-vis White patriarchy, but I don’t think that we want to send up a gender binary either. I think it’s really important that we talk about gender equity and gender justice and allow for a whole spectrum of gender identification and access. Because regardless of whether I am a transgender person or a final woman, I am still impacted by White patriarchy in multiple ways. I think, once again, like I talked about earlier, I think when we look at trying to integrate whole values into our systems we want to look at the way that the systems of oppression really have been, and look at their internal, individual and institutional manifestations. So at some level, I feel like it’s about us gaining political power, and political power that’s accountable to the basis that got us there can help change some of the systems that we’re dealing with. I also think in terms of particularly in the context of looking at spiritual values, I think there’s a lot that we need to do to reclaim our religions from orthodoxy, and from the places of power that actually don’t empower us as women and transgender folks and other folks impacted by gender inequity. But I think that if we can look at holistic models for spiritual development that can do some of the healing, I think that’s another way that we can also approach the way that we may have internalized patriarchy and sexism. Fundamentally, when I look at interpersonal relationships, I think that’s another place where we can do a lot of work and where I think each of us really need to look at the way that we grapple with these systems and the power that we exert and the privilege that we exert; but also ways that we want to open and create dialogue like in the Table today. Finally, I think that one of the things that - I think one of the best ways to really take back and create not just a more feminine culture, but a whole culture, I think is to create dialogue and really see and hear multiple perspectives. I think one of the privileges [audio ends]

by Thenmozhi Soundararajan

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Tu Weiming: It is important to recognize that some of the values that have contributed very powerfully to the vibrancy of the modern society such as liberty, rationality, rights, due process of law and dignity of individual are not comprehensive enough to help human beings to flourish comprehensively. Part of the reason is the absence of the values, important values that are being advocated by some of the most vocal and brilliant feminists or people who are dedicated to woman’s movement. In this sense, the lack of active participation of women in the process of developing a culture of peace, harmonious society is extremely serious matter. What are some of these values that are absolutely critical for women? I am not saying that women are not interested in human rights, rationality, freedom, to due process of law and dignity of individual. Of course they are - they are part of the modern human community, but in addition they also cherish values such as justice, such as sympathy, compassion, empathy, such as senility, such as the well being of the future generations, therefore responsibility and of course the idea of social harmony. And of course, we believe that many of these values are also Buddhist, Confucian, Dowist, Hindu values. If you want to have a society that is not only equitable but harmonious that we are able to continuously practice the culture of peace. We need both genders, more than half of humanity to be involved in this process. Otherwise, what we do is not only impoverished, it is also unjust, it’s not sympathetic, it’s not civil, it’s not responsible, it is not socially viable.

by Tu Weiming

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Udi Aloni: Sometimes I'm not answering a question not because I don't really think they're important, but sometimes I think they are too important to answer in three minutes. And the situation of women in this structure, not only in power, but in all weaving of life, it's a very complex one. And it's interesting how, like in my left, there is a woman from Afghanistan that speak how when it's really women has no power there in the Taliban society. But it's also interesting in the West where there is appearance of power and yet there is no power. That the result the possibility for big part, equal part of the society, but they are not. And I'm not here to blame. I think we have to understand the structure and that it's much deeper. How we can weave in those. And it's also not only women and men, like we can use some queer theory to understand really different kind of genders that has to live in the same society somehow, sometime through conflict, sometime through harmony. Harmony it's not the best place to be always. Sometimes a conflict is a place that creates something new. So when we speak about gender question, I would like to raise queerness as a way of thinking about alternative gender relationship in society and not only the dualistic concept of male and female. Not because it's not the main gender debate, but [audio ends]

by Udi Aloni

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Valentina Melnikova: Women still traditionally agree to play a subordinate role. And it is impossible to constrain her to take the reins of power. Women have to realize themselves that the normal development of humanity is impossible without their participation in decision-making. It does no good to invent any quotes for women in government because these reins of might fly then to the hands either of week women or to the hands of women who still play under the men's rules. In Russia our organisation “Soldiers' Mothers” have the function to educate women, to give them self-confidence, to make them understand that their point of view is the right one and break-through their fear and unwillingness to interfere in politics. Maybe the example of “Soldier’s Mothers” in Russia, our wish to be engaged in politics and to get power will be a good one for women in other countries. Soldier’s mothers come to politics through our work of right protection and this is the natural way to include women into political life. Women can enter into politics helping people, through understanding people’s problems. And they can still be women and search for non-violent solutions of problems. We are inspired by examples of Scandinavian leaders, or of the German chancellor Angela Merkel, “Iron Lady” Margaret Thatcher and of female politician in the United States. These are good, successful women and their story is instructive.

by Valentina Melnikova

Sep 9, 2006 11:20:00 AM cite

Vesna Pesic: Answertext will be available soon.

by Vesna Pesic