Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
Resource for Foreigners in Finland  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Join Ovi in Facebook
Ovi Language
Michael R. Czinkota: As I See It...
Stop violence against women
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
Stop human trafficking
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
Educate Men First Educate Men First
by Abdulhadi Hairan
2008-07-09 09:27:25
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon
Afghanistan and Pakistan, particularly tribal areas of these two countries, are the places where the whole world is involved these days. The war, the violence, the poverty, the backwardness, the ignorance and the abuses against women and children all are because of one main reason: The lack of education.

People cannot achieve anything without education. So we are a clear example of this. As long as our young generation is not educated, the situation will remain the same. There will be kingdoms of Mullah Omers, Baitullah Mehsuds, Maulana Fazlullahs and Mangal Baghs.

Female education is indeed an important part of this process. I believe that without women's participation, our world is incomplete and is not able to enter a civilization. So female education is very important, but the world should keep a key point in mind.

When in a male dominant, strict and narrow-minded society like ours men are uneducated; the idea of women's education seems gravely absurd because uneducated men can never release the importance of women's education and that is why we encounter problems in women's education.

So the International Community should first concentrate its efforts to educate the male population of these countries and when the male population is fully educated and civilized it will release the importance of education and will willingly educate the female population by itself.

   
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(8)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

Emanuel Paparella2008-07-09 10:33:18
The argument claims to be a virtuous circle but like the famed snake eating its own tail, it is rather circular. For millennia we have seen what happens when men get educated: they prepare most sophisticated weapons for war. To expect men to suddenly get enlightened by education and give up power to listen to women's alternatives seems rather naive. Konwledge is virtue says Socrates. That should give us confidence. But there is another view and it is that of Paul who says: I know the good but I see myself doing evil. Food for thought!


Alexandra Pereira2008-07-09 17:31:14
"So the International Community should first concentrate its efforts to educate the male population of these countries and when the male population is fully educated and civilized it will release the importance of education and will willingly educate the female population by itself."
Another hypothesis is that they would use such advantage (as they do, and have done - for a long time - when that was the case), that is, they could use the fact of having a higher level of formal education to perpetuate inequalities.
But I fully understand what you mean and very much agree WHEN and IF you SPECIFY: men/young boys should be socially educated to respect women as equal human beings and educated, for example, in terms of sexual behaviors, emotions and family planning. I FULLY agree with you on this, education of men on THESE topics would certainly help to foster development and help build more fair societies, and in Asia and Africa such efforts are BASIC and URGENT.
Generally, what has happened is that whenever men have more education opportunities, women tend, with time, to demand those for themselves as well - it hasn't been the case that men have "willingly educated the female population by themselves"(?), on the contrary, it has been always a female conquest demanding much struggle and sometimes demanding women to leave behind mother roles, for example, if they wanted to get the same level of education as men - which is, in itself, a violence towards their femininity and needs as women. This has happened, for example, with women of the generation of my mother and still happens with women of my generation in southern Europe - portuguese women are the ones, in Europe, who work more outside their homes in formal jobs and, by the end of the month, the ones who have more extra hours spent in domestic work too. Why? Because many men were not educated for shared tasks and these women become overloaded with work (just because they wanted the independence of having a formal job), which is a violence towards them. This job is sometimes a fictitious independence tool, as many times it doesn't allow them to be independent - low earnings -, nor do the social/motherhood policies allow them to have autonomy and independence - they can't afford daycares, they can't afford extra activities for their children in order to have compatible schedules and pick the kids when coming from work, their maternity leave is ridiculous, the rights of single mothers are not protected, etc. So this is a completely fictitious or pseudo-independence as a gender. At the same time, women are the majority coming out from universities but major leading and administration places are still dominated by men.
I would say that women HAVE to be educated in terms of demanding their civil rights/empowerment, and the formal education of women can't be delayed nor left behind at all - just as the one of men -, but men have to be educated with special care in other topics (the ones I mentioned above), and the education of men in THOSE topics can foster development quite much.


AP2008-07-09 18:01:16
When we talk about general education, one cannot defend that two or three generations more of Afghan women should be sacrificed and wasted while the men get educated IN THE HOPE that the men will do something for the women... because that's to put again women's destiny in the hands of men, and disempower them.


AP2008-07-09 18:17:46
BUT if we talk about FAMILY PLANNING, SEXUAL BEHAVIORS AND INTIMACY, oh boy, then there is an OBVIOUS and IMMENSE work to do with boys and men throughout the world, even more URGENT in crisis areas.


skatra2008-07-09 18:45:39
Civilized by whose standarts?
American standarts? European? Indian? Chinese? Middle Eastern ?

Just get the fuck out of their country and they will choose their own way, the only way you can really help is by giving them money which you wont since you are not really interested in their wellbeeing anyway


Alexandra Pereira2008-07-09 23:56:20
"the only way you can really help is by giving them money"
I don't agree with this at all.

"I believe that without women's participation, our world is incomplete and is not able to enter a civilization."
This is what in this article is meant with civilization, and it's a VERY GOOD starting point to assess civilization, I should say.

"Just get the fuck out of their country and they will choose their own way"
Well, troops can be taken out of many countries, if that's what you mean. But "take the fuck (completely) out of someone's country" is impossible: the world is global - for everyone. The world is our country, and pakistanis and afghans' country. More than the war between countries, this article is about the war between genders - which must be stopped.




AP2008-07-09 23:58:33
SO THE ANSWER IS:

Civilized by human standards.


Emanuel Paparella2008-07-10 00:18:27
If we analyze the above language we may perhaps get a better picture of the issue. A superficial analysis could be that since the individual who wrote the piece cannot spell (twice he misspells the word “standard,” and once "wellbeing" hence we suspect that it is not be a mere understandable typographical error), and he does not consider him/herself important enough to spell his name with capitals, he resorts to embellishing his language with the “f” word. Thus he looks more respectable and intimidating. But there is a deeper analysis: he/she is using language as a weapon to attack those who disagree with her/him. In other word he/she is fighting fire with fire. This is the language of intimidation and physical power which needs the backing of violence symbolized by the “f” word. To see a man of peace such as Archbishop Tutu dressed in a general’s uniform with a submachine gun on his knees, or Christ for that matter dressed as superman with a gun in his hand, is to use the language of physical power. But there is in fact another kind of power which does not resort to intimidation and does not conceive of frontiers and boundaries to be defended with weapons, and in fact it has nothing to do with artificial gender divisions. It is called “soul power” and it was taught to us by men such as Christ, Francis of Assisi,Thoreau, Ghandi Marthin Luther King and it is recommended for both men and women, especially macho men and women who willy nilly imitate their power style.


© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi