The truth is, we live in a male dominated society where men enjoy a privilege of exercising certain rights that do not extend to women. This culture has transcended generations and centuries. And it is going to take longer than that to clean up.
Why did things come to be as they are? Are we genetically so sexist? In the early days, the men used to hunt for meat while the women-folk would tend to the young ones and managed the caves. If perhaps, the root cause for sexism started there, it should have changed when civilizations evolved, correct? Nothing much changed during the times of the great kings and kingdoms. Further, during the industrial revolution, there was an explosion of many new jobs – engineers, architects, soldiers – most of them were reserved for men because either they needed an increased physical exertion or the necessary training for the required skill set was never extended to women. This was amplified by the fact that education was considered a “luxury”. Only the ones who would “use” the skills they learned at school, were educated. This is the reason why there were considerably lesser number of women scientists during the 18th century. Over the years, the patriarchal society got itself established as only men had “knowledge” of how the world “functioned”.
Evolution in economies resulted in industries taking a background as the main money-making entities. People in industries were replaced by machines as a result of automation. Fields like science, technology, research, banking, took prominence. The jobs that are created for this generation of workforce are gender-neutral; they break the need for physical strength that the jobs during industrial revolution demanded.
So, now what?
Gradually, women began fending for themselves thus reducing their dependency upon men for basic needs. This “shift of power” was not welcomed by men and thus began the long struggle for women’s rights and freedom. This is yet an ongoing battle for equality not just limited to the under-developed or developing countries, but to the developed economies as well. Many organizations worldwide are doing a great job of making the world aware – like the UN.
UN Google search ads
The entire premise of this post was the “powerful” advertisements by the UN which used the Google auto-complete (a feature that suggests popular search terms as you type your search query) to show the widespread prevalence of sexism in our society.
Is the problem real? Yes. Equality between the sexes is something that is truly necessary for a society!
Are ads like these necessary? Yes, very much.
Are they doing a good job of raising awareness? They are doing great!
Are they truthful? No.
Here’s what’s wrong
Google uses a certain algorithm nicknamed Google Instant to get popular keywords related to the terms that you are typing in, using data collected from earlier searches by many other people, and displays it, in the assumption that you may also be searching for something similar. By the way that it works, what Google suggests is in no way connected to what you would be actually looking for. For instance, when you search for “save water”, the suggestions shown are hardly practical, are they?
This article may help understand how the Google Instant suggestions work. Further, going by the Google Trends, the term “woman should” was searched for the most number of times just about after the UN ads were posted.
Google suggestions can be easily misinterpreted
Sexism is a real issue. Everyday there is news about how crimes against women have increased drastically, and how women are denied even basic rights by many Governments around the world. Yes, women are suffering and something needs to be done! By writing about the technicality behind the UN ads, I do not undermine the need for the awareness for this issue; I only felt that Google search suggestions are not indicators of how far-reaching sexism is.
Someone (presumably a great person) once said, “Opinions are like wrist watches. Each shows a different time; and everyone believes that their time is accurate.” Having an opinion isn’t really a bad thing. A good conversationalist always has an opinion about everything.
Opinions are an individual’s perception of a fact or an event, while Oponionsare opinions that stink, and make you cry!
The reaction to the recent decision to star Ben Affleck as Batman in the upcoming movie has stirred quite an upheaval with die-hard fans opposing the move calling it bad for the movie franchise. One comment on this Forbes article read -
“… The truth is Affleck is a smug looking Boston frat boy, totally antithetical to the dark, tortured ‘Gotham’ nature of the character….Besides that, he’s one of the worst actors I (and a lot of other people, apparently) have ever seen in film
IMO the only role that suited Affleck was the self satisfied jerk-boy stockbroker in ‘Boiler Room’…Because that’s the kind of character his persona exudes …”
“… I don’t care about how much money this movie makes or how much success the actor playing Batman has had. All I care about is that the part is done right and I just don’t feel Affleck is the right person for it. Could I be wrong? Yes, but my opinion will be good enough for me until Ben proves me wrong …”
No points for guessing the oponionamong the above comments. The internet is full of such oponions.It has in fact, become very frustrating to read comments on popular websites – especially Youtube. There is also a twitter account (@AvoidComments) dedicated to discourage people from reading comments online.
It is easy to be misinformed now more than ever because of how information and access to it has grown in multitude over the last few decades. In my opinion, opinions are good to have. As long as you re-visit them often, put them to test with intellectual discussions, wring them off of falsity and you are willing to change them when the truth-brick is hurled at you! One quote by James Lowell springs to mind -
The foolish and the dead alone never change their opinion.
P.S.: Here’s an article that rightly sums up how silly the whole reaction to the “Ben Affleck as Batman” scenario is.
Blatant unethical marketing has become the norm of this society! Companies believe that using buzz words and catch phrases are often enough to pull in subscribers or customers – irrespective of the merit and honesty of the advertisement.
The most recent such ad that stirred up this new category of posts on my blog is from Airtel which describes its latest offering of “free” unlimited national roaming at Rs.5/day. My only question is – How can something you pay for, ever be ‘free’? An oxymoron at best that tries to make morons of its customers.
FREE – Notice how this word is capitalized? The first thing they teach you in business communication is to avoid capitalization of words – it signifies the act of shouting! After all, an advertisement is the most primary form of business communication, right?
How could this be better worded? How about – Enjoy unlimited incoming calls on national roaming for Rs.5/day. - now, was that so difficult?
Of late, I was contemplating upon how I seem to have no time for the things I want to do. While I’m guilty of whiling away time playing games or watching TV, these are things that eat up my time consciously. But, even these activities do not seem to add up to all the time lost doing things I don’t even consider productive. And so, I have begun a hunt to track down those certain activities which are stealing my time.
All this may sound ridiculous – that’s how I felt at the beginning too. I discovered a trend in the way I assimilated/operated on information (mostly restricted to information on the internet). There are many ways in which I obtain information from the vastness of the internet. Many of these are not the direct source of the information but they are aggregates such as Google ReaderFeedly, Twitter, Facebook, Google+, email newsletters, and the search giant Google itself.
In truth, my predicament is a direct result of the way in which I consumed information from these sources. Through Feedly, I found an effective way to subscribe to a website’s updates via RSS. This is perhaps the least distracting of all my methods. Because, here, I find just the content that I wish to read – no ads*, related articles, or “unwanted” links.
Email newsletters to an extent behave the same way. I receive regular updates from sources that I have subscribed to. And the new Gmail interface definitely helped reduce clutter in my inbox.
Google or any search engine, in general, is an opt-in method of looking for information. I go there only to find something I want to know more about. For instance, my most recent visit to Google was to find a solution to the annoying upgrade problem that Evernote has on windows!
Twitter is where I follow like-minded people and is where I get most of the information related to programming and technology. The good thing about twitter is if you followed the right people, you’ll get curated information that is worthy of reading. Not just the 140-character message, but also the links that are shared there.
Google+ hasn’t probably received the widespread adoption that Google has hoped for, but this has helped me in some way. Google+ is more like twitter. You add people to circles synonymous with following someone on twitter as opposed to adding a friend and being approved – like on Facebook. I mainly follow Android, Google related sources on G+.
And then there’s Facebook. Facebook is an unpaid, overly curious, seductive and yet unconcerned psychiatrist! It’s free. It accepts any bullshit you spew. It mesmerizes you to return to it often. And yet it remains distant to who you really are. In short, it is an extremely glorified shrink!
Honestly, I do not have a problem with it. Like I said before, it has more to do with the way I process information than how Facebook is to be perceived – It is probably doing exactly what it was designed to do. And so, much of what can be found on Facebook is more opinionated and less informative. And I’ve had it! Here’s to a hiatus from Facebook – “I’m sorry dear. It’s not you, it’s me.”