Forgiveness: A Means for Survival

Thurs., July 26, 2007, New York. Yesterday, French television interviewed the 6 prisoners (5 Bulgarian nurses and 1 Lebanese physician) who were just released from Libya, after being held captive for accidently infecting over 400 Libyan children with the AIDS virus 8 years ago.
During one of the interviews, an intriguing feature emerged: Forgiveness is not only a samarital act, but a tool of self-survival.

The eldest of the 5 nurses, who is in her early 50s, was asked about being periodically tortured, a subject that was difficult for all of the ex-prisoners to broach. When asked how she felt, she replied that she held no feelings of revenge and that she had already forgiven her captors.

"I would not be here now if I had not forgiven them," she said, implying she would not have had the strength to survive had she spent what little energy she had left in bitterness or revenge.

What Women Can Do

7/25/07, New York. Cécilia Sarkozy, the wife of the recently elected French president Nicolas, played an essential part in the negotiations with Colonial Kaddafi for the release of 6 prisoners from Libya. In his interview with the press, President Sarkozy acknowledged that perhaps the role of the First Lady can be different as a modern woman.

She needed no titles, no political party, no entourage to accomplish what 8 years of conventional diplomacy failed to do. The 5 Bulgarian nurses and 1 Lebanese physician had been on death row 3 times for infecting over 400 children with the AIDS virus. We will soon find out what she did to accomplish her mission. She was part of a team, some presumably more expert than her at foreign affairs, also representing the European Union.

What qualities did she bring to the negotiation table that hitherto had been lacking?

Is this any indication of what women can do?

Photo: Jardin des Plantes, Paris, France. Dragon created with recycled materials. Dec. 2006.

Is America ready for a female president?

There was a time when American women yearned for the opportunity to see a female candidate stand for election in a presidential campaign. Now, with no legal barriers to speak of, even women seem ambivalent about putting an experienced one in the White House. “Women once advocated it was time for them to stand for elections and in turn have a voice in legislative issues that affect their lives, but do they have the qualities and skills needed to do that?” asks Natasha Thomsen, author of Global Issues: Women’s Rights (Facts on File, 2007).

Admittedly, three major superpowers—France, the United Kingdom, and the United States—are all holding presidential elections in 2007 and 2008 without incumbent candidates, a scenario that would challenge any candidate, male or female. Many even say our country is behind the times all ready, but when the Group of Eight summit met in June 2007, hostess German Chancellor Angela Merkel was pretty much on her own. Ségolène Royal had just been tested in the French elections and lost to her opponent Nicolas Sarkozy. This begs the questions: what will it take to put a female president in the White House and do American voters really want one there?

Women don’t seem so concerned now about gender but about the kind of person they might empower. Many women openly professed their disdain for Royal’s uppity manner and Hillary Clinton’s popularity is out-weighed by her calculating manner and husband’s razzle-dazzle (despite public disapproval of his adultery record). Nancy Pelosi is often characterized as being on a power trip.

Women today seem pretty bent on empowering a candidate who stands for what they believe in, or not vote at all. The fact that previous generations of women didn’t throw their weight behind a candidate such as Geraldine Ferraro, when she ran as Walter Mondale’s running mate in 1984, shows they are actually ambivalent about playing the gender card. “What kind of personal and professional development is this now calling for in women?” asks Thomsen.

If it’s anything like the Equal Rights Amendment, which has been awaiting ratification by Congress since 1923, the real worry centers around the use of power. This same argument might apply to the 1981 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which also awaits U.S. ratification. In short, the American Government—presumably composed of men and women—are concerned about the use and abuse of powerful words, more than the issues that gave rise to these political instruments in the first place.

So is this country ready for a female president? Probably as much as Germany was ready for Ms. Merkel, England for Margaret Thatcher, or India for Indira Ghandi. The question is if there a woman candidate who has the qualities, energy, and leadership skills that Americans—men and women—will appreciate and that can guide this country through the shark-infested waters of terrorism, war, and environmental casualties.

Future articles at Thomsen’s web site (http://users.bestweb.net/~nthomsen/clips.htm) and blog (http://natasha-place.blogspot.com/) will focus on what qualities voters are seeking in a president of the United States and how this might impact gender choice. (What exactly is the role of the role models of the 21st century? What do women have to do to not let politics put them into a power-steering mode?) How dress and age might also impact pubic opinion will also be discussed. Other articles will address women’s consciousness and how this is impacting their awareness about women’s status in society—physically, professionally, personally, and spiritually.

Natasha Thomsen is a freelance writer and entrepreneur. She can be reached at nmthomsen@aol.com or http://natasha-place.blogspot.com/. Global Issues Women’s Rights (Facts on File) is available online at http://www.factsonfile.com/newfacts/FactsDetail.asp?PageValue=Books&SIDText=0816068097&LeftID=0.