Gender satisfactions instead of gender wars
Parental and pedagogical satisfactions
Sexual and reproductive satisfaction
Peace and non-violence satisfactions
Freedom satisfactions
Ecological satisfaction
Economical and political satisfactions
Literature
Usefullness of economic analyses and quantitative methods is limited if we try to estimate the costs of gender-violence. I suggest though engagement in unrational gender use results in costs and rational gender use stimulates satisfactions. As there is a gender economy involved in everything we do as all aspects of human interaction are gendered, the tradition of public-private domain divide could be holding in the satisfactions members of our societies can achieve and causing enormous costs.
Men as the main force of the public domain and private sector are directing the laws and economics of gender stereotyped organizations and societies. The everyday face to face direct social gender training of us as offspring has been carried through mainly by the troops of women. Unimportantly which share of the responsibility women and men have to bear over our gender polarized realities, women are an active force in the creation of socially stereotyped women and men raising and training young humans for divided occupations of the public and private domains, private and public sectors. Both women and men have to re-examine their act for the achievement of gender satisfactions and elimination of gender wars.
Many problems of modern life can be attributed to a lack of control over our gender roles and lack of trust that other people, organizations, states would posses competence in the harmonisation of gender powers, traits, sexed division of labour etc. The costs, great mistakes in life – war, capital punishment, hatred of other gender-cultured peoples, not to speak of neurosis, suicide, crime, drunkenness – spring partially from a lack of gender balance and are to be looked upon as inferiority complexes, as attempts to deal with a situation in a way that is unsuitable. Thinking of the nuclear war possibilities, whole humankind could well be depending on the cooperative efforts to balance gender identities and activities of humanity.
The bases of violence based in gender polarization could be eliminated if we learn to create whole-gendered harmony within people, organizations and societies. A development of the individual, organization or society can only be counted worthy if it do not destroy but create values for eternity, for the higher development of the whole of humanity. A person, organization or society has to see the whole and have a contorled positive vision of how to play their particular part. People, organizations and societies who do not have the perspective and/or trust of/in the whole can become destructive.
“Gender-based violence includes physical, sexual, financial/economic, militarized, bodily/reproductive, medical/welfare, bodily/nutritional,verbal, emotional, psychological, cognitive, social/friendship, spatial, temporal, representational violence etc. It appears in gang rapes, group perpetrated homophobic attacks, football hooliganism, street gangs and riots etc. Gender-based violence includes and encompasses wars by states and non-states (terrorism etc.).” [1]
Utility of quantitative methods is limited when we try to assess human, social and economic costs of violence. Intangible costs such as human pain and suffering can not be included in the numbers. “Intangible costs and the long-term multiplier effects when societies and communities suffer from armed conflicts and other forms of violence are often the largest costs of all.” [2]
The cause of gender-based violence is gender inequality. In that sense, gender based violence is any form of violence used to establish, enforce or perpetuate gender inequality. “Although gender-based violence is found in virtually all societies and cuts across religion, ethnicity, culture, education, age and class, it varies dramatically in extent according to the level of gender inequality in society. Thus, any effort to reduce gender-based violence must adress the gender inequality that is its chief cause.” [3]
“Gender satisfactions instead of gender wars” could be the motto. Androgyny intends to empower individuals to make rational choices being able to use the traits from the whole spectrum of femininity-masculinity and to make the most out of any particular situation controling the weakness and strength of both genders, hence the whole spectrum of possiblilities. Metaphorical gender association could be usefull for direction of identity even on organizations, sciences and societies. Androgynous gender identity could offer individuals, corporate settings, sciences and societies enormous powers of satisfaction – economical/political, sexual/reproductive, parental/pedagogical, peace etc.
TopParenting and pedagogical satisfaction would probably be one of the most important gains of a whole-gendered training of our offspring and children of our societies. That because the complementary gender training of humans all defined by the little parts –genitals, is socially and psychologically handicapping people. Young people could be raised freely to be what they are, with all of their talents exposed to any kind of to the particular talent suitable education, not limited by the choices only available to their traditionally gender-cultured sex group.
Girls would not be trained to be exclusively princesses and mammies, boys would not play selectively to learn to become soldiers and technicians. All kids would dress in all colours and play all kinds of games. Boys and girls would play with each other. Children would have teachers who could guide their androgyn gender training to land into whatever sexual identity that blossoms. These schools could have Tibetan peace spirit (preferably non religious) and a disciplined body and mind empowerment training, as well as studies of art inspiring freedom and fantasy.
Governing institutions and their practices, corporate environments would have gender empowerment courses trying to reach all the levels of society and organizations on regular bases. Such education eventually would lead to de-feminization of by females overrepresented public sector (child day care, ground education, social and health care) and de-masculinization of the private sector (manufacturing industries) as well as whole-gendering empowerment of gender identities of indivuals, organizations and the state.
TopThe destructive forms of alienated sexuality can lead to all sorts of violence blocking the ways to gender satisfactions. They can appear as the whole range of conflicts from traditional forms of stereotyping and prejudices to violent crimes and wars in all sorts of environments. The private charachter of reproductive decisions makes this area difficult to picture statistically. Where the modern world is offering contraceptions and right for abortion most of the power of reproductive decision-making is usually in the hands of females. The power balance confusion in the reproductive area could be one important aspect of modern female power as a male has no possibility to reproduce without being chosen by a female.
Sexual lives of individuals are rarely discussed as influencing performance of corporate environments. As sexuality influences achievements of any individual, sexual satisfaction of it´s employees has great impact on any organization and it´s processes. Sexuality is a huge area influencing attitudes and moods of our surroundings, not at all necessarily involving sexual intercourse.
“Sexuality is one important element in the work place, not necessarily coerced or one-dimensional... Organisational sexualities are intrinsically ambiguous and ambivalent; flirting and humour can be used to alleviate the boredom, alienation, or depersonalization at work.” [4]
Tradition of taboos of discussion of sexuality in the organizations, keeps us separated from the possibility to develop harmony between and within sexes that are the sexed labour forces – women and men or others. The avoidance of the subject is even to be partially blamed for occurrence of sexual harassments. Social subjects that can not be discussed are impossible to develop.
“Sexuality is to feminism what work is to Marxism: that which is most one´s own, yet most taken away. [5] Striking though this insight is, the exact nature of the contrast of the “base” of sexuality with work is not straightforward. For example, sexuality is itself still a form of work, sometimes publicly paid, often indirectly paid, and more generally a form of labour.” [6] Sexuality is a kind of labour, either bringing emotional, spiritual and/or physical satisfaction or disappointments and complexes. It can be all between a powerful source of energy to a destructive force.
An androgynous person is usually much more flexible than the sex-typical person. In situations that involve decision-making and solving of conflicts and problems an androgynous person will be more situation oriented. The sex-typical person is always checking him-/herself to act in the symbiosis with the gender role he or she is playing. The base of the flexibility of the androgynous person is that he or she can easier switch from being masculine to feminine and visa versa depending on what suites best the actual situation.
“There are twice as many sexual problems in the traditionally gendered families than in relationships between two androgynous persons. Androgynous relationships are more healthy (...) To have feminine traits is not the same as being female-like. Feminine traits are perfect for a mans father-role and his romantic side or friendships both with males and females. The masculine stands for energy and drive and embodies self-reliance and confidence. The feminine establishes comfort. To function in a socially competent way you need both (...) Androgynous women are much more satisfied with their sexual lives. They have bigger sexual experience than feminine women as they take initiatives because of their stronger confidence. A man can be a masculine man although he is androgynous as he can be both a soft and a hard man whatever the situation demands. Women are much more attracted to androgynous men. Women want to have a man who is strong and masculine as well as sensitive and caring. That´s what androgyny is all about.” [7]
During the last decades the modern world has had a sexual revolution that metaphorically can be described as a female feminine sexual behaviour changing into female androgyn behaviour. As the dust from sexual revolution is settling what emerges in unmistakably finer detail is that it´s been more women than men who are our era´s real sexual winners. The sexual revolution with its promises of more access to more partners, with less emotional commitment, was tailor-made for male sexuality´s fullest flowering. But in fact, it´s been women´s sexuality that´s changed in the past decades, not men´s. Women of the new modern world feel entitled to sexual pleasure. They have learned to say yes to their own desires, claiming their own sexual agency.
Pornography would probably be much less needed to act substitute to real sexual events if individuals had androgynous gender, hence, more satisfied sexual lives.
“If one makes a distinction between personal and institutional male power, differentiating the levels of power one should more accurately say that pornography is not so much an expression of male power as it is an expression of their lack of power. Pornography image of male sexuality works to the detriment of men personally even as its image of female sexuality enhances the powers of patriarchy. It expresses the power of alienated sexuality.” [8]
Reproductive policies are among those areas of public policy that span the gap between the private and public spheres of life. Reproductive decisions are obviously among the most private decisions men and women make. “At the same time the choices individuals and couples make regarding the number of children they will have and when and the kinds of contraception, if any, they will use are influenced in important ways in all societies by political, social and economic factors.” [9] These choices are the way to the reproductive satisfactions that partialy are the base of the complementary gender contract between sexes and therefore even the base of gender economy. The private charachter of reproductive decisions makes this area difficult to picture statistically. A logical assumption is that the modern world is now offering all kinds of contraceptions and right for abortion, leaving most of the power of reproductive decision-making in the hands of females. The power balance confusion in the reproductive area could be one important aspect of female power as a male has no possibility to reproduce without being chosen by a female.
Issues associated with procreation and women´s reproductive rights, particularly the permissibility of abortion, belongs to a set of concerns that remain historically and comparatively vital often becoming topics of impassioned public debate at times of crisis or societal transformation. Throughout history the liberalization of abortion laws has reflected a popular sentiment that the prohibition of abortion is opressive, discriminatory, and in violation of women´s control of their own fertility. Even as fare such arguments are the other side of truth, about the female responsibility to involve males in the reproductive decisions as much as possible, is fare as well. What about the violation of men´s controle of their firtility? There are still no birth controle pills for men. The possibilities of men to have planed children are much more limited than for women. These possibilities are always dependent on the will of a woman wich is not necessarily the case for females. Reproductive satisfactions rely on the capacity to manage these issues for maximization of fullfilling lives of both parents and the child.
Public policies that determine access to childcare, maternity benefits and broader social welfare policies are of importance for reproductivity choices. Economic factors, including those that have an impact on the standard of living and availability of employment as well as impact of the broader social and intellectual climate matter. Terms in which citizens and political leaders conceptualize reproductive rights and choices as well as popular conceptions of women´s and men´s roles and the gender division of labour within the home are all a part of gender economy.
TopThe price paid for belief in the male masculine role is shorter male life expectancy and lower life quality of both sexes. The male gender will become less dangerous to health of its users and their environment only insofar as male identity ceases to be defined as opposite to the female identity. The polarized gender roles are the base for androcentrism (male-centeredness) in the societies. “Gender polarization enables religion, science, law, the media, and so on, to rationalize the sexual status quo in a way that automatically renders the lens of androcentrism invisible.” [10] Religious assumptions and conflicts are often in the core of most of the military conflicts and wars.
Much violence is gender-based, both because it is perpetrated in the name of gender and the gender order [11], and because its targets are selected because of their gender. Gender-based violence is most visible as the traditionally noticeable men´s violence towards women and children, or other men. Men are primarily the ones who use violence and men are also most often implicated in other types of violence as well – both as victims and as perpetrators. The fact that men are the perpetrators of most gender-based violence does not mean that the violence is caused by male biology or some predetermined personality constellation. The causes of gender-based violence are believed to be social. There are cultures in which males are far less violent and some in which females are far more violent. If violence appears we must search for the social origins of such violence. Men who feel powerless, marginalized and excluded, must constantly confront survival issues before they can take responsibility for violence.“ He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man. [12]
If young people see that violence can be regarded as a legitimate way of resolving conflicts, male children and adolescents often grow up to use violence themselves and the intergenerational transmission of violent behaviour is perpetuated as“... highly polarized masculine values so emphasize making war over keeping the peace, taking risks over giving the care, and even mastering nature over harmonizing with nature that when allowed to dominate the societal and even global decision making, they create the danger that humans will destroy not just each other in massive numbers but the planet.” [13]
The costs of violence is damage done to people´s lives, health, minds and values society´s public and social institutions in a broad sense. Viewed from this perspective violence emerges as the major obstacle to sustainable development. That of course if we don´t go beyond the limits of theorizing the bounded potential of one-dimensional economies. If we philosophyse as in the concept of non efficent general economy, even “waste, excess and sacrifice within a general economy of gender” [14] can be included in our understanding of economy as a process. Even if such theory can give an alternative explanation of our wild history I hope it will not continue to be a part of our future. Chinese experience of lawfull reducing of demographical overheating of the planet seems as one of the more acceptable solutions if it would not be enough with the lower birth statistics of the androgynous life style of the modern world.
“Socio-cultural factors play a very important role. Gender roles lead to different health risks, behaviours when ill, and levels of care. Male behaviour leads to higher mortality, through the way males live their lives, particularly as younger adults when male mortality tends to peak. Men have a greater ability to self-destruct, by warfare, conflicts and accidents of all types, by not looking after their health as well as women do, and by being much more prone to obesity and to common addictions such as smoking, drinking, alcoholism and drugs, all facilitated by their great access to disposable income. Even male suicide rates are higher at all ages, but especially among younger adults, although obviously the numerical effect of suicides on general mortality rates is small, despite the rapid rise in suicides in some countries, notably Japan and Russia.” [15]
These are a few of the themes that antropologists have isolated as historically contributing to both interpersonal violence and inter-societal violence: “The ideal of manhood is the fierce and handsome warrior; Public leadership is associated with male dominance, both of men over other men and of men over women; Women are prohibited from public and political participation; Most public interaction is between men, not between men and women or among women; Boys and girls are systematically separated from an early age; Initiation of boys is focused on lengthy constraint of boys, during which time the boys are taught male solidarity, bellicosity and endurance and trained to accept the dominance of older groups of men; Emotional displays of male virility, ferocity and sexuality are highly elaborated; Male economic activities and the products of male labor are prized over female.” [16]
Taken together these items provide series of traps and a source of policy-oriented avoidance-goals towards which we might look if we are to reduce the amount of gender based violence in society. It seems clear that the less gender differentiation between women and men, the less likely there will be gendered violence. This means the more men are nurturing and caring and the more women are seen as capable, rational and competent in the public sphere, the more likely that aggression will find other peacefull solutions besides gender-based violence. “To diminish violence we must confront the separation of symbolic and structural spheres. Women´s involvement in public life is equally important as men´s involvement in domestic life. The definition of masculinity must be able to acknowledge a far wider range of emotions, including fear, without having that identity as a man threatened”. [17]
The prevalence of violent crime differs greatly between different countries. For people in many countries, state authorities – not least the police and military forces – are often regarded as institutions representing threat rather than protection. [18] The state itself is many times responsible for criminal and violent acts – either sanctioned at the highest level or through the actions of law inforcement agencies and public institutions.
The best hope for both men and women is overcoming a view of development that turns maturation into a polarized sex-typed achievement. [19] Education system of humans until their puberty is dominated by females and the highest influential hierarchies of power are dominated by men. Therefore responsibility of training humans to become polarized feminine females and masculine males can be considered to lay on both sexes and I assume gender-based violence to be created by both sexes as well.
TopFreedom is basic for the maximization of satisfactions within Gender Economy. Amartya Sen distinguishes two reasons why freedom is central to the process of development:
1) the evaluation reason: assessment of progress has to be done primarily in terms of whether the freedoms that people have are enhanced;
2) the effectiveness reason: achievement of development is thoroughly dependent on the free agency of people.
“What people can positively achieve is influenced by economic opportunities, political liberties, social powers, and the enabling conditions of good health, basic education, and the encouragement and cultivation of initiatives.” [20]
From the birth of the broadcasting industry, the radio airwaves were regarded as regulated as a public trust, a communal resource, like the air and water. The news today is far more about the business of journalism than the journalism business. If you own a newspaper or a printing press you can lie your heart’s content. The corporate bias infects nearly every major news outlet.
Reporters usually balance the views of politically correct scientists against the opinion of an industry-paid huckster – often without disclosing the bias of both parties – and then call it a day. But a reporter’s professional obligation should be to uncover the truth, disclose the whole bouquet of conflicting interests and convey it to the people.
For example “thanks to corporate broadcasters who, in pursuit of greater profits, and bombarding the public with gossip, pseudo porn and terror, and on the other hand by right-wing fanatics who deliberately distort the news to advance their agenda, the American people are now the best entertained and the least-informed people in the world.”[21] Such freedom is more a corporate anarchy than a free market objectively competent to reach maximization of prosperity of the society.
Pulitzer Prize winning author Ross-Gelbspan in his book Boiling Point shows how the right-wing fanatics and coal and oil industry operatives have teamed up to hoodwink the public about the most critical issue in human history – ecology – and how only a gullible, lazy, venal, and negligent press has permitted this farce to succeed.
The troops of journalists provide industry and politicians with the rhetorical cover they need to pretend that there is a genuine debate over the objectives of the environmental, democratic and equality issues.
TopA million years of evolution are nowadays being sacrificed to ignorance and greed in the blink of an eye.
United Nations chief weapons inspector Hans Blix, in January 2005, declared that global warming dwarfs both war and terror as international security risk. January 2004 collaborative study by top British scientists predicted that “global warming will exterminate upwards of 37 percent of the world’s species within our generation.” [22]
The following generations are at risk to be impoverished by the industrial and energy industries and other big polluters that are creating global instability, depleting national coffers, and increasing vulnerability to oil market price shocks. They will also pay with reduced prosperity and quality of life at home. Carbon dioxide emissions will aggregate global warming. Acid rain and mercury will continue to sterilize our lakes, poison our fish, and sicken our people.
Environmentally incompetent, short sighted and greedy corporations covered by corrupted bureaucracies and institutions in immature political systems are cashing in our air, water, aquifers, wildlife, and public lands all around the world.
Free-market capitalism is the best thing that could happen to our environment, our economy and country. Simply put, true free market capitalism, in which businesses pay all their costs of bringing their products to market, is the most efficient and democratic way of distributing the goods of the land - and the surest way to eliminate pollution. Free markets when allowed to function, properly value raw materials and encourage producers to eliminate waste – pollution – by reducing, reusing and recycling. (..) In a real free market economy, when you make yourself rich, you enrich your community. But polluters make themselves rich by making everybody else poor. They raise the standards of living for themselves by lowering the quality of life for everyone else. And they do that by escaping the discipline of the free market. (…) You show me a polluter and I´ll show you a subsidy. I´ll show you a fat cat using political clout to escape the discipline of the free market and load his production costs onto the backs of the public. [23]
TopA tradition of patriarchal gender inequality in the economical and political aspects of our reality is obvious all over the world. Such inequality is easy to measure and count. Modern women have transformed the public arena and made a dramatic entry into the labour force in for the human history recently unprecedented numbers. Almost half the labour force of the modern world is female. The great progress has evolved from the fact that this type of inequality is picturesque and countable due to plain evidence.
That boy´s club of public domains, traditionally a homosocial arena, has been penetrated by women. The 90-s newcommer science, concept of governing and industrial ideology – masculism - will help to scan better the structures of governing institutions and their practices, corporate environments. Specifying masculism´s dimensions as in the public domain governing ideology will enable us to know more about the daily practices of masculist operation in organizational, political/governing institutions and processes. Such knowledge will advance the capacity to study organizations, government policy formation for aspects of masculist influence. The succesfull efforts of progressive forces of feminism eventually could allow women´s full access to sources of economical and political power.
The negative impact on men caused by the strictly masculine gender opportunities would fade out in the androgynously whole-gendering society. The privilege and emotional development that may come from increased emotionaly intimate work with children would be shared with males. This would lead to improved health, the reduction of certain illnesses, and the extension of life for both sexes but men particularly. Men would be awarded custody of their children almost as often as women in divorce cases, prostate cancer research would get as much funding as breast cancer research, men would not get longer prison terms than women for similar offenses. Their activism would reache beyond the technical and agressive. Men would not feel expendable, as a mere extra paycheck to women, as the incoms of both sexes would be similar.
Modern democracy is too sturdy to be destroyed by a foreign enemy, but it could easily be destroyed by malefactors of great wealth who would subvert our political institutions from within.
The free market has been all but eliminated in the industrial and energy sectors dominated by cartels and monopolies and usually distorted by obscene subsidies to the filthiest polluters and imperialists. The corrosive effect of corporate cronyism on wealth-market trade and democracy has to be studied in all its dimensions.
Media consolidation is transforming journalism from a forum of ideas into a marketplace exclusively for commerce and ideological propaganda.
Corporate capitalists don’t want free markets, they want dependable profits, and their surest route is to crush the competition by controlling the government. The domination of governments by large corporations leads to the elimination of markets and ultimately, to the loss of democracy. [24]
“The trade unions continue to weaken throughout the imperialist countries. The labour movement remains hobbled by the decades-long class-collaborationist course of an officialdom focused on its own routines, its own daily creature comforts, and its own retirement benefits, as well as mergers solely designed to bolster the latter two, at least for the union tops. (…) Workers searching for effective tools with which to fight find themselves swaddled in bourgeois ideas advanced by union officials – reinforced by schools, churches, and the media – and often overlaid with the flotsam and jetsam of dead-end leftism picked up by labour leaders willy-nilly over the years from petty-bourgeois radicals.” [25]
Top[1] Ferguson H., Hearn J., Gullvåg Holter Q., Jalmert L., Kimmel M., Lang J., Morrel R., 2004.
[2] de Vylder, S., 2004. Costs of Male Violence, (summary of ) Furgeson H., Hearn J.,... Ending Gender Based Violence: A Call for Global Action to Involve Men, Sida Sweden, Edita Västra Aros.
[3] Ferguson H., Hearn J., Gullvåg Holter Q., Jalmert L., Kimmel M., Lang J., Morrel R., 2004.
[4] citation of Gherardi (1995:60) and Wajcman (1998) in Aaltio I., Kovalainen A., 2003. Using Gender in Exploring Organizations, Management, and Change. In (eds) Charniawska B., Sévon G. The Northern Lights.
[5] Mac Kinnon C. A., 1982. Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State.
[6] Hearn, “Critique of Marxism”.
[7] Schioldborg P., 1986. My brief translation from norvegian from intervju in Ledelse, 6/7.
[8] Soble A.,1986. Pornography: Marxism, Feminism, and the Future of Sexuality.
[9] Wolchik S. L., Reproductive Policies, (eds) Gal S., Kligman G. Reproducing Gender,
[10] Bem S. L., 1993. The Lenses of Gender. pp.195
[11] Ferguson H., Hearn J., Gullvåg Holter Q., Jalmert L., Kimmel M., Lang J., Morrel R., 2004.
[12] Dr. Johnson in Boswell J., The life of Samuel Johnson, ed. by Hill G. B. , 1965, vol 2, pp. 435.
[13] Bem S. L., 1993. The Lenses of Gender. pp.195
[14] Borgeson J., Rehn A., 2004. General Economy and Productive Dualisms.
[15] Clarke J. I., 2000. The Human Dichotomy.
[16] Ferguson H., Hearn J., Gullvåg Holter Q., Jalmert L., Kimmel M., Lang J., Morrel R., 2004.
[17] Ferguson H., Hearn J., Gullvåg Holter Q., Jalmert L., Kimmel M., Lang J., Morrel R., 2004.
[18] the World Bank, Voices of the Poor. Can Anyone Hear US? 2000
[19] Harrison J., Chin J., Ficarrotto T., 1994. Warning: Masculinity May be Dangerous to Your Health.
[20] A. Sen, 2000. Development as freedom”, Anchor Books, New York.
[21] R. F. Kennedy, 2005. Crimes Against Nature. Penguin Books, U.K. p. 219.
[22] Extinction Risk from Climate Change, Nature, Jan 8, 2004, pp. 145-8.
[23] R. F. Kennedy, 2005. Crimes Against Nature. Penguin Books, U.K, pp. 190.
[24] R. F. Kennedy, 2005. Crimes Against Nature. Penguin Books, U.K.
[25] Eds. M-A Waters, S. Clark, J. Barnes, 2005. Capitalisms’s Long Hot Winter Has Begun, New International, nr. 12-2005, Canada, pp. 77.