Penny Marquez

Despite the efforts by the US feminist movement over the last fifty years, violence against women in the US is currently on the rise.

Should we then thank Dominique Strauss-Khan for focusing attention on the problem of violence against women, on the ugliness of the powerful abusing the less powerful?

On May 14 Strauss-Kahn, a rich, powerful, white man and then director of the IMF, allegedly sexually assaulted a poor black hotel maid at the Hotel Sofitel in New York City. This can be viewed through the lens of sexism, racism or classism depending on whether you want to focus on violence against women, white against black, or rich against poor. But regardless of how it manifests, an imbalance of power between two individuals, two communities, or two identity groups, results in injustice and conflict.

Fortunately, in this case, there are third parties that serve to strengthen and empower the victim – the hotel management, union presence, and the rule of law –albeit after the fact. Unfortunately, other cases of abuse of hotel workers by guests go unreported in hotels that don’t want the trouble and have no union representation. The US has a relatively well-defined rule of law that now recognizes rape as a crime rather than something the woman ‘asked for.’

Strauss-Kahn has a reputation for imposing himself on women. A French journalist intends to sue him for trying to rape her in 2002. In 2007, he was barely chastised for an affair with an IMF economist. It seems many Europeans are overly tolerant of the failings of the powerful. It is time to become less tolerant of this abuse of power, whether it manifests as a physical attack, financial bribes, or the exploitation of workers.

Might does not make right. It is time that that we recover a code of ethics and individually and collectively decide to do what is right because it is the right thing to do. Until abuse by the powerful against the less powerful is eliminated, the world will not know peace, for peace and justice go hand in hand.

(http://centre4conflictstudies.org/wanderingthoughts/2011/06/another-strauss-khan-affair/)

What a time to be Egyptian! The world applauds them and is inspired by them. A courageous peaceful uprising. An example of the power of moral authority, says Barak Obama. A military dictatorship that chose restraint. Bless them. First Tunisia and now Egypt. But earlier there was Iran. There the courageous peaceful protestors encountered horrific brutality from government forces. al-Qaeda continues to use violence to gain its ends and there are the US forces fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. The recent events in Tunisia and Egypt, while know one knows how the events will unfold, would seem an anomaly in the prevailing model of armed struggle against the dictators. A brilliantly shinning diamond of an anomaly, but an anomaly nevertheless.

Or is it? Perhaps it is the continued unfolding of a paradigm shift that is being adopted unevenly, at different rates and times in different regions of the world – and that has gained a toehold, or more optimistically, a foothold in the Middle East.
What do I mean a paradigm shift? Wikipedia says, “The word has come to refer very often now to a thought pattern in any scientific discipline or other epistemological context. The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary defines this usage as “a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly: a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind. Dr. Maria Nemath, in her book, Energy of Money, refers to a “structure of knowing.” To dismantle one’s structure of knowing, that is to change the theoretical framework, or see a different pattern, would constitute a paradigm shift. It is a fundamental shift in the way one sees how some part (or all) of the world is interrelated.

Is it possible that the world’s view on how to deal with conflict is slowly and unevenly changing? Gandhi’s successful nonviolent campaign to secure India’s freedom from British rule was seen as an anomaly at the time. Since then, we have seen Europeans with their history of frequent and bloody warfare, expand their national identity from their country of origin to the more expansive identity of European and form a European Union with a framework to manage conflict using non-violent methods. And it’s working — over 60 (sixty) years without bloodshed between the members of the EU. We have seen Martin Luther King lead the non-violent civil rights movement in the US, the non-violent removal of Marco from the Philippines, and the dismantling of the Berlin Wall. It is true that the examples of violent conflict far out weigh the examples of peaceful resolution of conflict, but with each example of the power of peaceful resolution of conflict we see the paradigm shift spread.

Conflict between people is common — we often disagree on how things should be – that is we have conflicting or competing goals. It gives us a chance to make changes that work out well for all of us – to create additional value so that all gain. This requires some amount of good will, creativity, and a desire to preserve wealth. Another choice, when faced with conflicting goals, is resort to violence resulting in some amount of mutual pain, suffering and destruction before one side wins and the other side looses.

I vote for the maintenance of health and wealth – even if I have to share some with the other party. There is space in the garden for both of us!
In the meantime, I am headed out to an Egyptian restaurant for a celebration dinner.

Oh, and did I mention that I am taking a class in paradigm shifts?

I grew up angry, argumentative and defensive (I had a few other more positive qualities as well). I saw conflict as a battle or a war – someone would attack and the other would defend themselves or perhaps launch their own attack. There was a winner and a loser, although sometimes, so much damage was inflicted by both parties that there was no clear winner, perhaps only losers. This view of conflict didn’t serve me particularly well, but I held onto it through my working career — that ended abruptly with the dot.com bust, or tech wreck. I have come to believe that my view of conflict kept me from climbing as high and as fast on the ‘career ladder’ as I might have if I had viewed conflict from a more positive, collaborative perspective Unfortunately, viewing conflict as win or loose, offers just two alternatives, which doesn’t allow for creativity or productivity in conflict situations. I think, had I been a little more collaborative and creative and a little less confrontational when in conflict situations, life might have been a bit smoother. Hence my interest in the subject.
Recently, I came across the garden as a metaphor for conflict – which appeals to me, probably because ever since I was married to a landscape architect (and since divorced), I appreciate a well-tended garden. A garden allows for both creativity and productivity. It allows for collaboration and a variety of positive outcomes. Well-managed gardens are expressions of trust and respect. “There is no one flower that cancels the need for another. Each bloom has its unique and irreplaceable beauty. Each plant is given room to grow, just as in human relationships, we learn to give each other space. There is respect and recognition for the different requirements of the plants in our garden – some grow tall and may need staking, some need more sun or more shade, some require more water. Plants aren’t judged better or worse due to their different needs and different expressions. Collectively the different plants, growing together, create the beauty of the garden.
I just finished a workshop given by Denise Kaku, titled Name Your Year (www.KakuConsulting.com). The idea was to develop an individual vision or theme for 2011 through her process of creating a collage. The theme that emerged from my work was ‘tending Life’s gardens.” I guess that makes me the Gardener.
In her book, hand wash cold, Karen Maezen Miller says, “You are the garden, you are the gardener, and you reap what you sow.” So I am both the garden and the gardener. Is this a zen thing? The author is a Zen Buddhist priest and teacher. I believe she is telling me its my life and I am in charge of my life and I will either enjoy or suffer the consequences of my choices. So conflict is a garden and life is a garden. Does that mean that conflict is life?
I am off to buy some gardening tools, a heavy-duty rain-coat and hat, and some tall rubber boots. I suspect there will be the occasional storm in the gardens I am tending. I’m not sure how to protect against lightning strikes.