Is there any woman that hasn’t dared? the sheer fact taht she is a female means that she fought for something, somewhere. The fact that some women despite the need to struggle for even the basice do and have the stamina and vision to fight an even more strenuous battle. Notwithstanding, however, that it all must be reflected within a specific context.  

The first thing I think of when first wake up is that it’s a beautiful day. I insist, despite anythin and everything!

Science is the number one platform that indicates where and what the human race has evolved to. Any limitation on scientific research means that there was a mistake when the first scientist in history made his/her breakthrough, and that we should be where we were at that point in time. Science and art are the tributes of accrediting what we as human beings are capable of and should be doing. The negative possibilities, however, should be monitored and maintained through international norms that safeguard from any possible abuses. Oppenheimer was magnificant in his finding, but, I am most sure that he did not intend for the bomb to be created as a result and be used the way it was. Inventions are one thing and intent is another. Science is what built most of the West’s reputation as a basic indication of its development path, and should be considered as an example in that respect for most of the developing countries, otherwise what a waste of existence, let alone a waste of creation. 

Both Berri and Bissette are beautiful women/actresses, but that is not the point, there is a specific characteristic about the First Lady that is in neither. It’s in her strength and manifested in her mannerism. She, to me, actually seems to struggle at times with trying not to be that strong, and that is a very rare element because mixed with her femininity it comes through as what it should be "A woman of substance." A more intellectual choice would be more appropriate.

There is usually something so easy when othering the other gender. It takes us, the human race, backwards instead of the evolutionary social development path we should be attempting to continue to pursue. In other words if women just women ruled the world does that include all un-educated, ill-mannered, badly behaving, uncouth, vulgar woman as well, and disregard the refined, educated, genuine gentle-men that support the decent woman? Just food for thought. I’m all for more women in decision making positions, but not just any woman.

This is totally unfair, because the despair was not this president’s doing, and change is a lifelong thing, so what is this question or comment about?

To get everything I don’t wish for, particularly when that’s how wishes work! As for men, I got every single man in one! Never a surprise, never a dissappointment, he only shows up exactly when I tell him to. Always works, never fails. As for expectations, the easiest way to have them is to think small, because that’s how petty matters become ambition, and ambition is interpreted as feminism. Boring, yet again. So I can’t really say that I wish something when I got everything I wanted and a drop more!

I don’t believe women are more romantic than men, because women have historically been more needy of men’s protection and caregiving attributes has made them through time, more capable of thinking about what would please “her man” more. It’s part of the social behaviour norms. I think if S. De Beauvoir were alive today she would have written a second version of the Second Sex. Let’s admit that romance has many definitions today, luckily, and it is not unified. To me romance is when I know I’m the one that decides what is and what isn’t romantic, my time, my moment, and not anybody else’s property, a moment I created alone. At times I literally felt that I had to make up and apologize, to myself first, for trying to keep up with Valentine day’s run of the mill performances…I do hope someone disagrees enough with me to hold a debate on this issue. The moment any of us are taken for granted is the moment where” not even God can help you, let alone Valentine!” the moment we don’t recognize ourselves in the mirror anymore, is a moment in that direction. My smile when I wake up in the morning is what decides whether there is room to be in a genuine moment or not. The thoughts that enter my head first thing in the morning pre-determines my Valentine’s Day. It’s an accumulation that leads to that moment, which could very well fall on July 77th for insatnce instead of Feb. something or other, simply because that’s just the way we are…I love having a fight and not giving a card if the fight was on Valentine’s! That’s my best way of saying I hat you so much that I love you enough not to fool you. A normal response would be “Woman are from Venus and Men are from MArs.” Boring!

Why, why is age the issue? O.K. I’ll go along, just for the fun of it. First because time is a fact, and when one goes through a term or two of presidential duties, is bound to look older! Isn’t that how everyone looks after a bit of time. If the insinuation is that politics has anything to do with it, then I disagree, at least in the States, because politicaians seem to know how to avoid stress and let things sort themselves out! No offense. In any case, the political aspect in the States requries a lot of image preservation, hence the manicures, the suits, the Botox, and so on and so forth are statements how one ages less while in office. Washington follows Hollywodd and not vice versa. So no, I don’t think that while being in office makes you look older, had the individuals not been in office they would have relished on hamburgers and fremch fires, watched more footbal and exercised less. Again no offense. I think Pres. Bush looked much better when he left office than when he did entering it. He had a more embellished look about him, and more learned one as well!

I may not listen to Pres. Obama’s speeches regularly, but I will say that keeping track with int. affairs my heart goes out to most of the Presidents’ in the world that are struggling to put some shred of decency in the word politics. I don’t know how hard it might be to do business with those that try to pull the world backwards? In other words recognizing where those that are trying so hard to do the right thing, regardless of nationality, religion, or class, is the only feasible manner in which some order may be established, and serious conflicts may be resolved. A difficult task for very many, Pres. Obama and all others. I, as an individual that looks on with a smile on my face every now and then when I hear of progress, success, and solutions being achieved, find solace in all the difficulties that each and every moment of difficulty we travel through. At times it is difficult not to respond, and not otherwise, and it is very difficult not to follow all that is happening. We are all internationally living through very interesting times.

I would sincerely like to have a debate with author Azar Nafisi, maybe one day. However, till that happens if it ever does, I would like to post a few comments. It seems that Middle-Eastern women are always in battle with their homes of origin, or at least constantly posed as being so. I read about women from other regions and find that the issues are taken in a completely different perspective, they are more individualistic, but when the matter comes to us Middle Easterners the issue is constantly put within one perspective “Sharia,” I understand that when it comes to specific legal aspects there are some countries that may abide by the rigorous interpretations and do not ahve a parallel civil code. However, the women in the Middle East are not in conflict, the declared coding has evolved to an “unspoken social agreement” whereby most women live according to their choice. My point being if there is a problem whereby the Sharia is taken litereally and is considered the only tool by which societies abide by otherwise face death by the sword, is a completely erroneous one, and actually quite an insult to the region, and in that case would mean that not only the women would suffer from those circumstances but, the men as well. I agree that the region has various forms of interpretations, and does not have a unified interpretation of Sharia, or a parallel modern civil coding, which leads to confusion. My other point on the matter is that the various socio-political problems that the region suffers from are more due to the multiple conflicts and the civil strife emanating therefrom. The issues that are related to this aspect is more political than religious. I for one am an Arab woman that definitely agrees on the need for continuous reform, but cannot understand why when a woman establishes her stance on a view is put into one category only: against Sharia otherwise does not have a case! I have always been a believer in secular govt. but that is not always the one and only answer, and does not mean that that is the only option, otherwise we are stripping nations, some nations, of their right to exist. The problem is nothe Sharia, the problem is with who is interpreting it and to what end, that is the problem in the East, in the West it is taking the Sharia as an excuse for the multiple political failures the West made that led to the socio-political complications in the Middle East. Ms. Nafisis’s thesis in “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” was not with the Sharia, because there is nothing in the Sharia that forbids reading and knowledge, the Prophet said “No shame in Science” , Ms. Nafisi’s’s problem was with whoever had the authority to prevent her from picking up any text book.

Nothing is impossible. The problem is, unfortunately the operation in Afghanistan was not met with the adequate no. of boots needed. May I also add that the Us has only had four success stories when it comes to nation building, hmmmmm… food for thought. I am however, oprtimistic, because the Afghani people are the ones that have the most significant interest in re-building their own country, and given the sovereignty and political dignity required, as well as the logistics and technical support, it will only be a matter of time. I’m intentionally overlooking the other external factors.

I have not watched many superbowls per say, but I have and do try to watch sports in general as much as I can, because they remind us, we as human beings, of what we are capable when we set goals, but most of all reminds us of what sportsmanship means.

I intend to continue to wish that the right people in power continue to do their best for those that deserve it, and to put some decency back in the term “politics,” since words can go along way, I hope the whole world watches and marks the day with their endless support for everything this world needs, in every which way they can. Somehow, a sense of dramatic mode has been given to this new presidency in the U.S. I wonder what I will have to say when it hands over it’s work to the next president? In the meantime, too much has occured that has proven the need for a shift in the business as usual affairs. I for one would very much like to see a smile on very many faces that have lost theirs because of bad politics and politicians. All the best.

WHen I grow up I want to be a grown up. There are so many that carry the physical age, but so few that actually do know how to be one, it is even more scary when those inadequate “grown ups” have a say over matters that rule our lives. The magic word and my favourite in this regard is not will I be a grrown up, because every one does, but will be wise?