The first male chauvinists

Women’s history has been a long catalogue of suffering, oppression and injustice. From time immemorial she suffered like a slave of man who utilized her for sexual gratification and  work.  Children came as a byproduct and he handled her as it pleased him. She is equal to him in every way: studies show that she has a better EQ and is better equipped to handle emotional issues. She understands people better and she can be a better leader than him.

But man has been unfair to her: Aristotle viewed women as deformed men. In the feudal Japan, she was marred from climbing the holy mount Fiji because she would pollute it! Unhappy married women were expected to commit suicide. Buddhist texts see her as an emissary of hell. In the ancient Greece, women were not allowed to have 36 teeth like men! Their philosophers had fixed the number at 32. The Chinese used to keep women in steel slippers to make them lame throughout their lives!  In the middle ages only women were termed as witches. In 1595 in the Wittenberg University of Germany a number of thesis were submitted to prove that women were not humans! When the English warriors went for the crusades they chained up their women lest they find out new lovers. It is reported that a Muslim ruler called Afsal Khan killed all his 700 or so wives so that if he never returned, they should not go after other men.
Oppression of women is universal. It had been more severe in some religions like Islam and Hinduism. In many of the Islamic states she is still a virtual slave. Women are in a ‘purdah’ from head to foot and move around like ghosts. Even today, in nations like India, she is burnt alive, beaten up and persecuted for inadequate dowry. In the developing countries she rears up children, does the household work and earns the bread of the family. It is also more pronounced in the poor societies where women remain largely illiterate having no say in deciding her fate. She is a stooge of man and her life is largely decided by the norms of the society framed up by men.
The discrimination begins in the Bible. God did not create woman equal to man. He first created man and he was put in the Garden of Eden with all conceivable pleasures. But after some time God felt Adam was companionless and his life was boring. So He sent a sleep unto him and he created Eve out of one of his ribs. Woman was meant to be a pleasure object of man. What a stupid thinking! Obviously those who wrote the Bible were the first male chauvinists. There is a story in the Bible as to how Eve, beguiled by the serpent, went against the commandments of God.  He then cursed her to bring forth children under great pain. Women were seen inferior to men when the Old Testament books were written and the authors made the stories of creation to suit their thinking.
Well, all His prophets were men. The leaders of his chosen race, the Israelites, were men too like Moses. Later, when Jesus came, he chose only men as his disciples. Magdalena Mariam was his girl-friend and sex companion as per the Da Vinci code. But she was not a disciple or an anointed one.
Later his disciples followed his example and appointed only men as priests, bishops and popes. Although most of the latter used women for their pleasure and some popes even went to the extent of anointing their illegitimate sons as bishops and popes. Women were not even allowed to preach the gospel.  She had to come to the church after covering her head and in subjection and she could not speak out to any congregation. Men as priests, bishops, cardinals and popes have always ruled women. It is only in the 20th century that the Anglican Church started anointing women-priests and gospel preachers. At last God has become sensible and just. As men and women are equal children of God, the discrimination could only be the handiwork of men.

How a family betrayed a great nation!

India had been one of the richest nations since the Indus valley civilization when we had a well-developed economy.  The scenario continued for millennia until the subjugation by foreigners. Nehru, ‘the architect of modern India’, was our PM (a wrong choice of Gandhiji?). Later his daughter and grandson became PMs. The ‘great.’ great grandson is now waiting on the wings. With the family’s rule, many think Indians have become poorer and the family immensely richer with billions abroad in secret foreign accounts,  if some foreign magazine accounts  are true.
After independence, Nehru developed his policies in the fashion of the communist Russia (he used to be accorded red-carpet welcome in the then communist states as he was fighting ‘capitalists and  imperialists’). The royal treatment by the ‘dictatorships of the proletariat’ unavailable in the developed nations, touched his heart. He failed to make an independent assessment of the regressive, retrograde nature or their economic and political philosophy. He followed his heart (and not head) which later proved to be suicidal for this great nation and its people. He closed our borders and made India isolated from the world like the iron curtain that existed in USSR.. He invested the nation’s entire resources in the public sector industries most of which became ‘white elephants’ or total failures. He tried to prop them up with heavy subsidies from the tax payer’s money. Private enterprise was dissuaded nationally in the name of socialism. Nehru, like his friends in Russia, took away the initiative and the competitive nature of the great people. He introduced state controls which led to red tapism and bureaucracy. He created a large number of government employees who devoured the GDP.  Organized Unions disrupted work and production in every sector but their pay and perks were increased without ensuring productivity. Large scale corruption became the order of the day. The ever increasing government officials with the ever increasing laws and restrictions further stifled industrial growth. Nehru made the Indian media echo what the Russians wanted us to know and sing their praises keeping the country in the dark about the developments taking place in the west. He tried his best to take money from the rich by way of high taxation and dole the same out to the poor. In the process, he made both the sections poorer and India one of the poorest nations of the world. Everything was subsidized for the advantage of the weaker sections and they naturally did not want to take responsibility for their future and became lazy. The poor proliferated triggering a population explosion.

Nehru’s policies, followed later by Indira, sealed India’s fate. She had some miraculous solutions to get rid of poverty and bringing in prosperity. She coined catchy slogans like ‘the nation is on the move,’ ‘garibi hatao’ (throw off poverty) and wrote them all over the country but India remained poor and undeveloped; the money spent for the bills was a waste.  Rajiv, a good pilot, was dragged into politics and the throne of PM offered to him. He never enjoyed his work, made blunders and is alleged to have made a few billions in the Bofors deal (a defense contract for the purchase of the Swedish guns).  He knew nothing about steering the state nor the intricacies of the political game. He was assassinated and the Congress came to power again. Rajiv’s wife was offered the throne by the loyal sycophants (thrice?) and the ‘humble lady’ rejected it thrice as the good old great Caesar. Now the sons of the sycophants are offering the same throne to the Amul baby, Rahul.  Long live the dynasty!
It was Narasimha Rao who opened up the Indian Economy by following the Free Market principles (nowadays the credit of this is given to the simple Rajiv who could not even comprehend the idea).  India reluctantly adopted free market principles and liberalized its economy to international trade under the guidance of Rao and his finance minister.  Following these strong economic reforms, the country's growth progressed at a rapid pace. Again the reins of power went to the Nehru family (money can do wonders in a poor country) and the nation started retrograding with rampant corruption and poverty. The ruling family and their courtiers are fattening their purses so that they can control the Indian elections at any point of time.  But the downtrodden masses who vote for them are becoming the poorest in the world unable to earn even 12 rupees (a quarter of a dollar) a day. We have more than 300 million people below the poverty line and about 40% of our children are malnourished, stunted and wasted!

India, a spectre of poverty!

India is a nation fantastically wealthy and desperately poor.  The Indian economy has grown steadily over the last two decades, but 25%  Of Indians earn less than the government-specified poverty threshold of 12 rupees per day (approximately US$ 0.25). A recent report by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative states that 8 Indian states have more poor people than 26 poorest African nations combined! (410 million).  Rural Orissa has 43% extreme poverty rate and Bihar 41%! They are among the world’s poorest. As per the international poverty line standards, ($1.25 a day) more than 50% of Indians live below poverty line! The 2011 Global Hunger Index (GHI) Report ranked India amongst the three countries where the GHI goes up while 78 out of the 81 developing countries studied, including India’s neighbors, improve it!  42.5% of the children in India suffer from malnutrition. WHO estimates 49% of the world's underweight, 34% of the world's stunted and 46% of the world's wasted children live in India!"

Is this not a grim picture?  5 year plans and poverty  alleviation programs are launched by the government. If one rupee is earmarked for the poor, not even 20% of it reaches them. The whole money is eaten up by the bureaucrats mid-way. They become richer and fatter and the poor thinner and poorer. Recently in a telecom scam the CAG of India had mentioned of the loss of 2 lakh crore ($2billion) to the exchequer through the graft of the Minister and the officials!

Wrong priorities of the government impede progress too. Andrew Mitchell, the UK secretary for international development asks why UK should aid India which is the 11th largest economy in the world spending $31.5bn on its defense and $1.25bn on space program! The defense budget mostly goes for buying weapons, aircrafts and vessels where graft is reported to be rampant. Is the Space program a priority in a poor country like India where people are dying daily of hunger, diseases and poverty? Should the defense expenditure be so much? Why not India reduce the number of government employees, who eat away a major chunk of the GDP, and introduce efficiency? The amount of black money flowing abroad amounts to more $27 billion (more one lakh crores) every year! Petty officers, high bureaucrats, the ministers and those at the top- most of them are corrupt.  More than 20% of the ruling MPs has amassed immense wealth and hold foreign bank accounts. The common people are aware of this but they are helpless. Time is ripe for a 2nd freedom struggle. There is a mass uprising initiated by social crusader, Anna Hazare. When the foreigners left, the new rulers, leaders and their deputies have begun to loot the wealth of the nation in right earnest. The Indians have gone poorer after independence and the latter become richer and fatter. 

Life in the 22nd century!

‘How will be life, its culture and values in the 22nd century?’ What will all be the innovative technologies? Whether a new life would be created down here different from the present one? No one can certainly predict them. However, we can create a vague picture in our imagination tracing the present-day technologies and the developments in the cultural, social, and moral standards and beliefs.

According to the UN Population Bureau, life expectancy in 2200 will be around 100 for developed countries and the world population will be about 22.8 billion. In the advanced nations, emphasize will probably be on super-intelligent and disease free kids. Genetic engineering would remove all traits of a host of genetically transmitted afflictions.  Will man succeed in conquering the ageing process?  Will he be at the brink of conquering death? In another century, perhaps, man will decide when he will die. The gods can take rest and heaven and hell will be less thickly populated.  

Organized tours will be frequent to the space and moon and the tourism industry will be more vertical than horizontal.  Computer will have a far-reaching influence in our lives. The “computer-modified organism” or robots will probably be used to meet our luxuries and everyday needs 

Imaginative people predict the invention of water-fuelled engines, one of the biggest inventions of all times.  It means that the price of water will probably rise and it will contribute to the development of high-technology machines and stronger satellite 

Creating effective immune drugs will be a great leap in the medical field.  We are already on the verge of synthesizing successful anti-cancer drugs. Fitness and nutrition will be of the fad of the time. A revolution can be expected in the food habits and food production methods. Ready-made foods that will tickle the taste buds of man will replace the traditionally cooked meals. 

Little spoken languages and linguistic communities will disappear. English will predominate in the world. Each one of us living then will have the opportunity to speak, write, read, listen to and use English as a means of massive communication. All the other languages will be sidelined.

 Family structure will erode and very few women will opt for permanent marriage or child bearing.  More will rent wombs or resort to artificial insemination. This is already in vogue and  cloning mayl replace it. But the chances for the latter are less. Nobody wants exact replicas. Diversity will be more attractive.  The population will dwindle further in all the advanced countries and those of the poor increase.  Marriages of convenience will be more sought after. The strong ties of family are bound to erode and there will be professional homes to bring up children like we have ‘old age homes’ now. The gender discrimination is bound to close even in the backward regions.  

Will religions have the mad sway which they enjoy now in the less developed nations? There will be a total transformation. More than half of humanity will deliver themselves from the clutches of the organized religions. But as the religious roots can be traced to the very beginning of man’s evolution, and as human brains are fully programmed into a belief in gods it will take a few more centuries for their total eclipse. But the moment man conquers death, the death of god is certain. 

Can you become Lincoln, Einstein, Gandhi, Shakespeare, Picasso or Brad Pitt?

"Anyone can reach anywhere."  Thousands of books on the racks (‘millions of copies of which are sold’ every year) are there simply to state this. They talk about those who succeeded from the worst.  Lincoln was poor, he could not attend school and he started working from 9; his entire life was one of failures. But he became the President of USA and one of the greatest men ever lived. They cite  uneducated  Edison who became a great inventor, Ford (illiterate) who became a great industrialist, Andrew Carnegie who rose up from poverty to  riches, and the deaf, mute and blind Helen Keller who became a great lady.  They even talk about a few Negroes who, against all odds, educated themselves and achieved success.       

They say aloud: ‘You are the captain of your soul; you are the master of your destiny.’ But are we the makers of our destiny?  Are we truly responsible for the heights or pits we find ourselves later in life?  Do heredity, environment and experiences influence the way life unravels?

 They have studied only those who tried and won. The vast majority of those who failed or continue to fail go unnoticed. They made rules (generalizations of success) from the lives of those who succeeded. But their study limits itself to the attempts they made, the setbacks and failures they had to face and the sweating they did. No attempt was made to ascertain the IQ, structure of the grey matter, their biology; childhood environment, parental interaction and experiences from infancy. Are these factors not influencing one’s life? And without an in-depth of study of them are the generalizations valid?  

Theoretically it may be possible to say any one can become great or rich irrespective of one’s heredity and environment.  There will be so many among you readers who feel that you had faced a number of adversities and came up irrespective of them. Millions of factors influence us from the moment of conception till we die. Some of the permutations and combinations are more positive than others. Without a deep analysis we cannot say whether we succeeded because of them or in spite of them.  

Prince Charles is a great philanthropist and the future king of UK. He simply inherited billions and a throne was dangling over his head when he was born. Napoleon, Hitler, Lincoln, Nelson Mandela are all highly will-powered. How many living today can match that sort of a will? Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Father Damien, Florence Nightingale and Helen Keller lived to serve others. How many of us can be like them?  Not even one in a million can become like the great US presidents or other world leaders. How many will have the tenacity and patience to go on experimenting until they invent something like the great scientists? How many among us have the physique and looks of Brad Pitt, john Travolta, Britney, Aiswarya or Madonna? There has been none with the IQ of Einstein or Charles Darwin ever since nor another Picasso, Michael Angelo or Leonardo da Vinci.

Everyone cannot become Shakespeare, Goethe, Tolstoy or Maxim Gorky. The genius or the great are more born than made. They sweated it out to the top, yes, but without the innate spark and the inborn tenacity of purpose, they would not have made it to the top. If you are persistent enough you can succeed in anything. But can you be persistent enough? A Mother Teresa or a Helen Keller is the outcome of a rare combination of genetic and environmental factors and experiences.    

The children of the rich and famous are always at an advantage.  Those emaciated, hungry, naked, kids of slums and famine affected regions die an ignoble death along with many of their parents. There are millions who are blind, crippled, and deaf. The mentally retarded, the feeble minded and the mad cannot go up in life at all. A Bill Gates can only be duplicated with the same structure of the grey matter, biology and identical environment and experiences. Out of the millions of possible permutations and combinations in the hereditary and environmental factors, a stray combination becomes a gem. And the rest tread on the beaten, murky paths with, not even with an occasional ray.  

Giving is living

Life has taught me a great lesson: the beauty in giving. The greatest souls that have grazed this planet are those who gave themselves up for others fully and unconditionally. Let it be Mother Teresa, Father Damien, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. or Abraham Lincoln……they surpassed all living souls with their selfless service to the needy.  As Winston Churchill once said,   “We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give”   Our lives will be very much less fruitful if we are not giving what we have to others. It can be motivation, knowledge riches, time, comforting words; it can be anything that alleviates others’ pain or something that make others’ life richer and more meaningful. It  is this realization that motivates the rich philanthropists to give significant portions of their wealth to the poor.     

I have noted that all great leaders and thinkers of history have opted for selfless lives.   I also remember very often the ancient Chinese saying, ‘a little fragrance always clings to the hand that gives roses.’ Those who have the attitude, ‘May I serve you,’ enjoy life far better than those who are constantly after material possessions, power or professional advancement.  

Giving can be its own reward.  But there is another aspect that a lot of us have failed to recognize. Giving is a form of energy that not only helps the recipient but it bounces back in a greater measure to the giver. The backward journey of this energy is often shrouded in mysterious labyrinths such that the giver is not aware of it instantly nor is it immediately perceptible to the world at large. The giver receives more than what he gave out if he did so without any personal motivation whatsoever. This is a great natural law. 

'The hand that gives is the hand that gathers.’ Many of our ancient as well as modern philosophers maintain that the secret to wealth is giving. When you spend money it goes out and touches so many and depending on your mental attitude it may bring back abundance. No wonder a famous Arab author, Al Koran advises people to bless the bills before you part with them so that it blesses all those they touch. He wants us to command the money to go out, feed the hungry, clothe naked and come back a million fold.  

During my seminars I often ask the participants, ‘will you get something if you work more than what you are paid for?’ At other times I ask them: ‘if you go the extra mile in your work, who is going to be benefitted?’

Most of them would answer thus: ‘the employer will get the benefit.’

Then I would pose the question: ‘Won’t you be benefitted in any way?’

After quite a bit of reflection someone would say, ‘we will develop too and our self esteem will go up.’

Well, you will be much more benefitted than the owner.   You will be rewarded hundredfold by the universe who is a just employer. When you give out selflessly the great universal Watchdog is going to reward you. It is certain that you will add tons of self esteem and you will increase your confidence levels. Further, you have invested in yourself and you have already become more valuable at the market place. When you go out for an interview the added self respect and esteem will make you ask for more pay as you know you are willing to give more than he is going to pay back to you.

The Bible mentions that whenever anyone feeds or clothes a destitute he does so to God himself.  Well I think there is no good in the world which can come anywhere near the act of giving, selfless giving in particular.

When I train youngsters the art of developing self confidence, I always emphasize selfless giving as the shortcut to the development of this crucial quality. In fact I tell them to check before they sleep every day whether they did some help to someone without expecting anything in return.                    

 It can be helping a blind person to cross the road.

It can be feeding a beggar who is hungry.

It can be offering a soothing smile to a stranger who is in tension.

It can be offering a dollar bill to someone who is dire need and whom you do not know.

It can be removing a stone from a foot path so that others are not hurt.

It can be picking up plastic bags and bottles from around a public place to make it tidier.

It can be pardoning a motorist who has splashed mud on your dress as he sped by.

It can be a great act of giving if:

You keep a radiant smile as you crisscross the pathways of life ……….

You spare some time to take an injured stranger to a hospital ……………

You give out a certain portion of your wealth to an unknown poor man or woman. .. …

You help your employer earn through your extra work, vigilance and care……..

You spend some time with the old to brighten their day…….

You give your seat for an invalid in a crowded bus……………

 Let me state a great secret to become richer: start giving a portion of what you earn or what you posses. What goes out comes back. Selfless giving ensures manifold return.  All the rich people of this planet are inclined to help others.  And that could be one of the reasons why they become richer. They get back what was given out, in true charity, hundredfold.  Giving is a sure way to receive more.    

Blessed are those who can give without remembering. That could be why our present world is getting filled with those who want to give without any string attached. They are quick to part with a part of what they have earned as they know giving has a superior value when one does so quickly and not waiting for to be asked.                                                                                                                                                                                   

The best way you can evaluate a person is by how much he gives and by how much he feels for others in his wallet. Giving is always a thermometer of one’s love towards others. When it comes to giving some people stop at nothing. ‘Give all you can,’ is an excellent formula for a successful life.                                                      

Living for others is the best way to live. That could be why Henry Drummond once said, ‘there is true happiness only in giving.’ Before we conclude let me remind you  Arthur Schweitzer’s words: “ There is no higher religion than human service. To work for the common good is the greatest creed.”

Why Brilliant guys fail at the workplace?

Having a brilliant academic background is great but it may not be helpful if one plans to work in the real world with real people with all their foibles and faults. You need the ability to work in a team to succeed.   If a brilliant guy has poor social relations skills and cannot cope with stress, he fails.

They are highly qualified but not competent. They may mechanically execute a task but lack that something needed to work in a team. Or, they may be technically sound but are not able to neither control their emotions nor understand their team members properly.

Their work output may be superlative too. But they are not easy to get along with and they keep upsetting others. They may fail to solve problems and understand others’ thinking patterns. They may not easily adapt to situations nor change behavior as and when required. They may not be optimistic in the face of adversity.

This is a classic case of IQ vs EQ.. With the challenges of today, I feel being a good EI person will only take you further.  

Is the Academic world designed, almost everywhere, to remove imagination, and creativity from the students? Why aren’t they exposed to different social settings and taught ways to cope with stress?   

Communication and attitude affect the performance of high IQ people in the corporate world. They are poor communicators and they have a poor attitude, often arrogant. In the corporate world we need to work as a team and communicate effectively our views and hear alternative views; we need to be open. Bookish knowledge is not practical knowledge. This is one of the main drawbacks for those who come from countries like India and they often fail in the organizational or corporate environment. One small project work in the end of the year is all that they do to get practical knowledge and it is highly insufficient.   

 A good percentage of students learn for the sake of learning and they put very little effort into a course. They study to get high grades; once the exams are over they forget everything. They have not appropriated the knowledge imparted.  

When we are dealing with people let us remember we are not dealing with creatures of logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotion. The universities do not equip students to tackle emotions. Brilliance measured by tests alone may not succeed in the workplace.