Male Role in Female Empowerment

Male Role in Female Empowerment This paper looks at the issue of womens empowerment, the role of men in empowering women, women and feminist reaction to their involvement, their own reaction as men, how they can be efficiently and effectively involved and the way forward. Until the 19th century, women accepted their mediocre status in society as they lacked the educational and economic resources that would enable them challenge the prevailing social order. Attempts to right the inequalities between men and women necessitate the empowerment of women economically, socially, politically and culturally. Women must be given the educational and economic resources that will free them from mens domination, patriarch, oppression, violence and servitude. Like the case of vaccines where weakened or dead microbes of the kind that cause a disease is administered to stimulate immune system to produce antibodies against that disease, if men are seen as the perpetrators and the cause of women problems, then it is simply wise to effectively and efficiently involve them in solving societal inequalities that exist between men and women. Once feminists, advocates, activists and women in general view men everywhere as inherently part of the problem, efforts at empowering women must involve and engage men, hence the proliferation of an interest in men and masculinities in recent years. The lives of men and women are interdependent and any benefit from women empowerment will go a long way to benefit both. Hence, there was a call on countries in 1994 at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) to promote mens support in the struggle for gender equality and encourage their involvement and shared responsibility in all areas of family life and reproductive health. Research has shown that, partnering with men is an important strategy for advancing womens empowerment. Again, the need for the involvement of men has been precipitated by a series of global processes such as the 48th session of the United Nations Commission on the status of Women (CSW), which discussed the role of boys and men in achieving womens empowerment and gender equality. This need for mens involvement is underscored by the fact that mens power over women in many contexts necessitates working with men to change the conditions of womens life; for mens power in society is exercis ed from personal decision regarding family size to the policy and programme decisions taken at all levels of government. Again, men as perpetrators arouses the need for their involvement, that is in treating the disease of womens disempowerment, ignoring the cause will only make the fight, a back and forth unprogressive agenda and as such to remedy the situation , the real cause-men, must be involved in the whole process. Also empowering women, calls for the pulling together of many resources for its accomplishment and these resources unfortunately are largely controlled by men who determines its distribution, beneficiaries and accessibility and hence it makes greater sense to pull them along on the pathway of womens empowerment to be able to assess and enjoy the resources needed in the process. Last but not the least, it is important to involve men due to the fact that, they are largely the leaders in society serving predominantly as decision makers, opinion makers as well as publi c figures who the younger generation both male and female emulate as part of their socialization and as such for womens empowerment to be achieved, men as leaders must be reached, encouraged and mobilized to become committed to gender equality in all aspects of human interactions and relationships to serve as good examples to the younger generation to acquire a wholesome socialization that view both men and women as equal and not as one being superior and the other inferior. It is worth noting that the exemplary life of men as leaders in the socialization of boys and girls is very vital in achieving and ensuring gender equity on the backdrop that they (boys and girls) are more susceptible to change and mental restructuring. It is therefore against these backgrounds that mens involvement in womens empowerment is deemed as very crucial and influential. On the assumption that humans in general are resistant to change, particularly to their norms values and belief systems, it is not surprising that some men have and are still fighting against the notion of womens empowerment based on the hidden reason of trying to defend their privileges and power because of fear of the loss of authority and economic benefits that they perceive womens empowerment would involve and also their resentment of what they see as attention and resources being given disproportionately to women. For some other men, the blame-game strategy of some feminists and seeing them as so evil deters them from changing their personal masculinities and also join in the struggle for women empowerment. On the other divide, the attention being paid to men on their involvement in addressing their superiority ideologies, over-emphasized masculinities, violent and abusive behavior in stimulating changes in their relationships with girls and women has been met with the feminist ideology of on our terms/conditions indicating a limited space for mens involvement and tangible participation. Although male involvement in womens empowerment has been of recent concern, many women working in the field remain unconfident, uncertain, antagonistic and very hostile to the idea that men might be or are partners in the fight for gender equality. Thus the emergence of men as advocates for womens empowerment has been received with a lot of suspicion, within some feminist circles; they are viewed as competitors for the limited funds available for womens rights and not as a supporting initiative. Some argue that men were coming to take over with the aim of wiping out feminist movement whilst others see men as competitors in empowering women rather than complimentary to their efforts and advocacy. Interestingly, in the mens fraternity, men working as aids to womens empowerment are seen as betraying their fellow men and sometimes referred to as men who are sat on by women in their communities. Mens role in the promotion of womens empowerment has therefore become topical and yet contested in various quarters among feminist and women who work in the field. Many feminist have viewed the involvement of men in womens empowerment with so much suspicion emanating from the distrust for men and their fear that men will try to use subtle and deceptive means to defend and maintain their privileges and power because of fear of the loss of authority and economic benefits thereby undermining the fight for womens empowerment. Men have been seen as the cause and perpetrators of the down trodden image of women and therefore it is quite uncomfortable for some feminist at involving them in their fight. Perhaps questions like why these men should be involved in the first place, how are they to be involved, whether they are willingly and will be truly committed to the fight, why on earth will men be interested in empowering women considering the superiority, power and autonomy they enjoy, and what solutions, measures and prescriptions do they have to offer in empowering them as women repeatedly clouds the minds of many feminist. This suspicion also arise s from the issue of whether men will really welcome the idea and state of women being equal to them in terms of status, power, and leadership and decision-making, are men really determined to work with women without setting or prescribing boundaries and limitation to how, which form and the extent to which women can be empowered. It is therefore against this background that many if not all women view mens involvement in their empowerment with much suspicion, hostility and hesitations. For some their hostility arises from the fear that the involvement of men in their empowerment would overshadow their efforts with them selling out to a watered down agenda. Again, in working with men to empower women, most development institutions lack the needed determination and focus of working towards a more equal world where men will not be seen as superior to women. Certainly the way in which work with men has been taken up by development institutions has often been lacking in ambition and devoi d of political intent, preoccupied with creating more equitable men, rather that galvanizing mens activism for a more equal world.( Cornwall et al, Dialogues on womens empowerment). Gender equality work with men cannot expect to participate in efforts to secure gender justice simply on the basis of men being the other half of gender but an interdependent part. Personally, for the empowerment of women to be achieved, the role of men can never be overemphasized due to the fact that the lives of men and women are intertwined such that whatever affects one directly or indirectly affects the other. It is worth noting that men even in the most traditional and patriarchal societies believe and support womens empowerment and would want to see their mothers, sisters, daughters and wives live in a society where equity and justice is paramount. Many more men in our view are ready to lace with their women folk in their empowerment- this can clearly be seen around us with the increase in the number of feminist men who have joined in the battle. However if women and feminist want men to be truly committed and involved in their empowerment, then these men should be seen as allies and not competitors, thus men should be seen as complimentary to their efforts rather their challengers or rivals. Again, the tagging men as evil and destructive must stop; othe rwise men will continue to be defensive and resistant to the changes that women desire in them for their empowerment. If we want to reach out to men to influence change, we cannot portray men as evil, since no man identifies himself as such Instead, non-judgmental messages which can provoke thinking and reflection among men for change must be employed. Also, feminist suspicion of men on their involvement in the fight for womens empowerment must give way to trust through restructuring of their thought pattern and channeling their energies in reaching, encouraging, empowering and mobilizing men to become part of the movement which is committed to womens empowerment. Furthermore it is important to educate and sensitize boys in their formative years through both formal educational system and in informal setting through peer programmes and also efforts must be made to incorporate attention of men and boys in legislation, policies and programmes on womens empowerment and to develop ways t o ensure active participation. Last but not the least, many more men can be brought on board if they are encouraged, expose and educated on the need to empower women by their peers. It will be an easier effort if men speak to men on womens empowerment because men feel more comfortable discussing such issues with their peers and are more convince when their peers informs them on issues. Despite all the drawbacks and challenges outlined above, no responsible man would love to see the children and wife become paupers or marginalized. Considering the important role women play in the development agenda, it is only proper men get involved irrespective of how some women activist view it. Women have the primary task of child rearing and therefore need all the resources to execute this task in other to break the cyclical transmission of poverty from generation to generation. Women transmit values to the next generation therefore, to make the biggest impact on development; society must empower and invest in its women. The lives of men and women are interdependent and any benefit from women empowerment will go a long way to benefit both. Hence, it is no wonder that when the call was made on countries in 1994 at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) to promote mens support in the struggle for gender equality and encourage their involvement and share d responsibility in all areas of family life and reproductive health many men accepted. With mens power in public and private life, their cooperation is indispensable in the domestic and community spheres, national politics, finance and governance. Consequently, the empowerment of women is very crucial for the development of any society considering the roles they play in society and the fact they form more than half of the human resource of a nation but their empowerment cannot materialize without men being involved. Men have been at the centre stage of the issue of societal inequalities and hence remedying the situation requires their involvement. However, some feminist have met this development with much suspicion, hostility and distrust for these men. On the other hand, some feminist are advocating for the involvement of men as a way of addressing gender inequalities and mobilizing resource for womens empowerment. Accordingly, there is the need for those who work in the field to reach, encourage, empower, and mobilize men to become part of the fight to achieve greater success.

Abrahamic Religion Essay

Religion is the one element of life that has connected the races and societies of the world for hundreds of years. It has given meaning to lives that may seem otherwise hopeless. Out of the 5 religions I have looked at, I think 3 of the religions are the most alike. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all very closely unified as Abrahamic religions because they share tons of common beliefs and thoughts. My investigation is on some of the similarities and differences of these three religions. All three religions believe in one God and the same God, the God of Abraham. So how do they differ? The Abrahamic faiths are strictly monotheistic. Even though Christians believe the Holy Triune (God as the Father, the Son and the Hoy Spirit.) they still consider God as one. Despite the many similarities between the Abrahamic faiths, there are some differences. For instance, Judaism denies that Jesus was a prophet while Christians and Islam acknowledge Jesus as a prophet. Also, the three religions all have their own special worship days. The Muslims worship on Fridays, the Jews have their worship on Saturdays and the Christian one is on Sundays. See more: The Issues Concerning Identity Theft Essay The Jews, the Muslims and the Christians all worship in different places and have different religious texts. The Jews worship in a place called the synagogue. In some synagogues, men and women have to sit separately. The Jews study the Torah. Torah is part of the Tanakh (Hebrew scriptures), which is compromised, with the five books of Moses. (From the Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.) The Muslims on the other hand worship in a building called the mosque. Like the Jews, Muslim men and women are not allowed to worship and pray in the same place. The Muslims’ religious text is called the Qur’an. The Qur’an is written 600 years after the books of the bible. It entails several dozen pestles, greatly differing in length. They have ostensibly dictated by Muhammad (The man who claimed to be a prophet.). And lastly, the Christians worship in the church. The church is often recognized as God’s body on earth. Unlike the Jews and the Muslims, the Christians come together in a group but they are allowed to worship God on their own in any place. The Christians study the Holy Bible. The Bible is the Tanakh that’s reordered and now called the Old Testament, complemented with the New Testament which consists mainly of the Gospels and a bunch of letters written by the followers of Jesus to other followers of Jesus. The Abrahamic religions believe that there will be a Day of Judgment where God or a prophet will come down to Earth and judge everyone. Even though the three religions have the same basic view on it there are some differences in what they believe will happen on that day. The Christians believe that on this day, God will judge all people. They believe there will be two judgments, the first one is the entry to heaven based on faith and the second one is the position in heaven based on deeds. Like the Christians, Muslims believe that the present life is only a trail preparation for the next realm of existence; this life is a test of each individual for the life after death. The Jews on the other hand has a totally different view on this day. They believe that Muhammad will come to judge them instead of God. They also believe that the people will be categorized into 3 groups. The first group will be immediately inscribed for everlasting life they are the thoroughly righteous people; the second group will be doomed in hell, they are the thoroughly wicked people and the third group will go down to Hell and squeal and rise again, these are the people in between bad and good. In my opinion it is so interesting to see how three different religions can be so similar but also at the same time.

What can the public sector procurement learn from the private organisation procurement teams?

Simply viewed, purchasing is ultimately purchasing. Procurement specialists in the two sectors and even from the third sector of charitable, non-profit, and volunteer groups order their purchases from the same suppliers. Both the private and the public sectors pursue value for money. Towards this end, they plan responsible efficient and flexible procurement systems. However, few differences draw the distinction between the two sectors. This is reflected in the radically different dynamics in the two sectors’ operations. As the paper unfolds, it emerges that there is a lot which the public sector can learn from the private sector if it is to achieve the same level of success enjoyed by the former (Barrett and Hill, 2004). The volume or size reflects on one of the commonly touted differences in the procurement sectors (Braczyk, Cooke and Heidenreich, 1998). However, it is inevitable to examine differences in reporting, competition, trade agreements, accountability, corporate culture, tendering processing, awarding tenders, and performance. It is also important to look into professionalism across the two sectors. The commonality or difference in skills is critical also. Ethical considerations across the two sectors are equalled examined with a view to raising valuable information whether the public sector has something to learn from the private sector or not. The public sector management environment is heavily regulated by policy, legislation, and specific processes while on the other hand, the private sector remains more receptive to enterprising and entrepreneurial dynamics as exhibited by their differences in corporate culture (Braczyk, Cooke and Heidenreich, 1998). It is true that the private sector is also subject to certain rules and regulations but the difference rests on the nature of the regulations. The entrepreneurial dynamics are apparently an absent phenomenon in the public sector apart from few instances. This entrepreneurial focus is an area where the public procurement sector needs to learn and improve on based on the private procurement sector model. However, the sector may be impeded by the political influence, as the partisan nature of political processes is influential. The professionals who work in the public sector procurement need significantly more than the regular amount of diplomacy, patience, communication skills, and political intelligence if it is to prevail (Barrett and Hill, 2004). On the other hand, private sector procurement operates in more advanced challenges in the form of bigger risks, more recognition, among other issues. It is on this premise that the view that private sector pays more recognition to competence as key towards success in comparison to the public sector is held. The public procurement sector should minimise the diplomacy and political leanings and focus on competency just as the private procurement sector. Such focus should ensure bigger and attractive returns. Accountability and transparency present other areas of concern in reference to procurement (Barrett and Hill, 2004). This is influenced by the fact that the stakeholders in the public sector procurement come from diverse circles and do not stand a meaningful chance in influencing it. The stakeholders largely composed of taxpayers, clients, elected officials, and in other instances; vendors, underscore this realization. On the converse, the private procurement sector employs up-to date mechanisms to ensure accountability ad transparency in engagements. Most private procurement entities also focus on specific markets, an aspect that the public procurement sector can only attain through the establishment of specialised separate units to address the various aspects of procurement demands. It is thus not surprising that before procurement decisions are made, it is preferred that consensus is struck. Public organizations thus focus on consensus building rather than working competitively (Braczyk, Cooke and Heidenreich, 1998). Public procurement officers are as a result under an obligation to work cooperatively as opposed to doing so competitively. This is further under-lied by the idea that public enterprises engage in the sharing of some information, as it is a requirement in most public organisations. Ontario Public Buyers Association offers an example of organisations, which operate under these conditions. Consensus building is desirable towards appeasing contending stakeholders but this holds limited economic sense. This holds true since consensus building does not factor in the essence of time and other factors, which influence business in a positive manner. As proposed earlier, public procurement should be split into specialised units to deal with specific issues in procurement as it happens in the private sector. The freedom and flexibility to conduct business is absent in the public sector (Earl, 2002). On the converse, the private sector enjoys the presence of these attributes, which constitute the dream pursuits of every buyer. Flexibility is examined in reference to the kind of red tape associated with the public sector procurement. The procedural rules negatively influence the procurement process as the lengthening of the exercise proves an unattractive proposition. The red tape as a result puts constraints and unnecessary demands on the process of procurement. Red tape was intended to ensure observance of set rules ad regulations, but this s no longer congruent with emerging trends in business. As a result, doing away with the unnecessary procedural demands is desirable if the public procurement sector is to make progress. The absence of purposeful negotiations, discussions, leniency measures further compounds the shortcomings associated with public sector procurement. It is notable that public enterprises do not take their time in responding to issues like requests for proposals. Precision and detail must be presented to every relevant department before a decision is arrived at. On the converse, in the private sector procurement, the clients’ issues are keenly attended to as required. In the entrepreneurship spirit, private sector procurement allows for the negotiation of deals on the basis of fees and terms of work which appeal to both parties, as a result, growth in private procurement in tandem with quality of work (Earl, 2004). The focus is on building a good and long lasting working relationship between customers and private organizations. In the private sector procurement, if a company or client secures a satisfactory engagement, when similar projects emerge, the need to go through the same sieving exercises are not considered. The basis upon which tenders are given rests o the previous records of accomplishment. The solid ethical and moral aspects, which governmental organizations lean on, account for some unnecessary engagements. Public sector procurement demands that adherence to rules and procedures are unquestionable (Edquist, 1997). The formal protocol on responsibility, liability, accountability, and the need to protect government information constrains public procurement. On the other hand, the private sector procurement extends freedom on contractual engagements. The private sector clients focus on the market share, competitiveness, and visibility, fees, and contracts act as a measure towards achieving these goals. The moment corporate professionalism is established with a private sector client, the credibility set is useful in determining fruitful future engagements. Of late, governments are embracing e-Procurement; this embracement is based on the realization made concerning the beneficial attributes arising from both administrative and cost reductions associated with such in the private sector (Malerba, 2002). Tendering platforms, desktop purchasing systems, and e-marketplaces, features common in private sector procurement have been adopted in the public sector procurement. This is a positive step, which should pave way for similar improvements towards the promotion of efficiency and effectiveness. The nature of public sector procurement goes through rigorous bureaucratic procedures based on institutional demands (Miles, 2004). The regulation process of public procurement, which witnesses different roles played by international, national, and regional authorities, implies that this type of procurement faces a number of hurdles to overcome. This regulation is meant to ensure competition and transparency in the procurement exercise. To cite an example, public procurement in the UK has to be consistent wit the European Union procurement guidelines, which offer a framework of rules on the issue. These rules and regulations deter EU member countries from distorting competition in public procurement on the basis of geographical or national basis. The creation of the European market provides an avenue for getting value for money in the procurement sector. Apart from adhering to the European Union policy on public procurement, the public institutions must also comply with the requirements imposed by the government as reflected by the Value for Money policy. This policy demands that procurement choices should be premised on whole life cost assessment as opposed to lowest price only. On the basis of this synopsis, it is clear that government procurement is diverse in respect to what it has to cover. This extension and complexity implies that achieving efficiency and lower costs is hard to make operational. Reducing the complexity characterising public sector procurement is thus a challenge. The tendering process is designed in a way that ensures that work done by the government is given out fairy. The government considers the pricing and the nature of the entity offering the required services. The aim is to ensure that tender processing is fairly done based on governmental policies. Though important, pricing is not the major focus in public procurement (Malone, 2001). On the other hand, private sector tendering focuses on fairness and effectiveness in reference to competition. This is based on the drive towards achieving the most cost-effective outcomes in the tendering process. The primary focus is the cost effect, an attribute the government needs to learn from the private sector tendering (Malone, 2001). The political elite holds a lot of power when it comes to public tendering. This is partly due to the fact that the political class hold executive powers in country leaderships. On the other hand, in the private sector, key officials of companies who hold the required expertise holds the power of making decisions on the tendering processes (Malone, 2001). The public sector should learn from the private sector by fully authorising the bureaucratic experts to control the tendering process. If the public sector is to be in a position to operate competitively, it needs to posses buyer power. As in the case of the private buyer power, the public purchasing power may rise from the size of demand in reference to the public sector against the total market demand or due to strategic importance (Cohen and Levinthal, 2006). The size of the market however big, it may be affected by the uncoordinated and fragmented approach by the public procurement sector. This uncoordinated approach lowers the purchasing power of the public procurement sector. This presents one area the public sector needs to learn from the private sector. Towards this end, the public procurement sector should learn how to coordinate its activities properly in order to take advantage of its aces to big markets. The public procurement sector is fraught with unnecessary restrictions on participation (Cohen and Levinthal, 2006). The sector is also characterised with cost escalation. This especially affects small bidders. Such represent the level of discrimination in the sector. Large firms who are at a sound financial standing are thus the ones favoured in the public procurement sector. Towards reducing the chances of participation from the procurement process, the nature of restricted communication as reflected in the limited publication of contracting opportunities, this coupled with the narrow based qualification criteria place too much focus on firm size and experience. There are both benefits associated with increasing the number of bidders. However, the question of whether the government attains the balance between increased costs due to the higher number of participants and the expected drop in the prices as a result of the fierce competition both within the short term and the long-term. The pursuit of value for money should ensure the correct trade off is made, however, this may never be the case. This is attributable to the fact that the administrative costs are more visible as compared to the cost savings obtained from intense competition. Further, afield, risk aversion may lead to favouritism in which case, well-established companies and incumbents take the opportunities ahead of new entrants. Incumbency may limit participation. This is possible if minor suppliers believe that the public procurement sector is friendly to senior suppliers. This implies that some suppliers may boycott the bidding exercises, as they fear their success chances are limited. Such boycotts may in turn trigger price increases due to lowered competition (Cohen and Levinthal, 2006). Openness and publicness pass as challenges on the public procurement sector. Everything, which is done by public procurement, is subject to scrutiny from the public. The public purchases are normally orchestrated through invitations for bids. This opens the process to public bidding. In public procurement, public bid tabulations, which are posted on government websites. This implies that everybody understands what is going on. Overall, the private sector procurement focuses on profit, which is achievable through fierce competition. In practice, there is great variation in the way in which private managers go about establishing links with the customers. This is captured by the pursuit of firms’ attempts to lock opponents out of the market (Malone, 2001). Some firms operate in unstable environments, others like do like monopolies, while others operate in relatively protected niches where entrants find it difficult to make inroads, this under-lies the kind of challenges facing private businesses. Some sectors and businesses adopt methods, which are technologically advanced than others, further compounding the challenges (Egeberg, 1995). On the other hand, the public sector passes as a more homogeneous entity operating in a placid environment. Bureaucratic organisations are in most cases long establishments, which act, as monopolistic suppliers. The supply is to the society as opposed to the market, further to this, the pursuit of profits do not take precedence ahead of the provision of services to the citizens. The assumption that the public sector has been lacking in innovation is often advanced. However, Tan, (2004) notes that the spur of competition lacks in public procurement, a stark contrast with the private sector procurement. The public procurement sector should embrace new technological innovations like e-Procurement if it is to gain from benefits associated with such advancements, as is the case in private procurement (Fagerberg, Mowery and Nelson, 2000). Conclusion The drive towards introducing private-like procurement style into the public procurement sector is a plausible effort as this in the end translates into a number of benefits desirable to the needs of the clients its serves. Such adoption is bound to increase efficiency thorough cost reductions and improvement on service provision. The social responsibility is the major bottleneck affecting the public sector procurement. The public institutions remain accused of being irresponsive to the needs of the people they serve. However, all public organisations exist in a global setting, which heavily bears on how operations are conducted. This co-existence; between public and the other sectors imply that there is a lot to be passed or transferred through learning. The continued nature of existence of the public sector also indicates that learning through experience is a possibility since the various governments institutions are in a position to determine what works and the others which fail. The role of competition however desirable it is may prove inapplicable to the public sector procurement. This is the case in reference to when the public institutions are bidding for example, weaponry and other sensitive products. The public sector is also charged with diverse responsibilities, which are not based on economic terms but rather on the social responsibility aspect. Despite this, the public sector should learn from the public sector on how to become competitive on various fronts. On the basis of the above realisation, it is hypothetically presented that adopting measures to delink the public procurement sector from the diplomatic and political machinations presents a way out in the area. The sector should also encourage more competition in terms of recruiting skilful personnel and in allowing a level playground when it comes to the tendering process. The sector is equally expected to alter the procedural requirements, which mire the biding and tendering exercises. Such a move should lead to a flexible system, which paves way for the achievement of efficiency and effectiveness in the sector.

Angular Momentum Quantum Number Definition

The angular momentum quantum number, ℓ, is the quantum number associated with the angular momentum of an atomic electron. The angular momentum quantum number determines the shape of the electrons orbital. Also Known As: azimuthal quantum number, second quantum number Example: A p orbital is associated with an angular momentum quantum number equal to 1. History The angular momentum quantum number came from the Bohr model of the atom, as proposed by Arnold Sommerfeld. The lowest quantum number from spectroscopic analysis had an angular momentum quantum number of zero. The orbit was considered to be an oscillating charge, which appeared as a sphere in three dimensions. Source Eisberg, Robert (1974). Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei and Particles. New York: John Wiley Sons Inc. pp. 114–117. ISBN 978-0-471-23464-7.