Originally part of an interview of Wired

Thirty-five years ago this summer, the golfer Chi Chi Rodriguez was competing in his seventh US Open, played that year at Hazeltine Country Club outside Minneapolis City. Tied for second place after the opening round, Rodriguez eventually finished 27th, a few strokes ahead of such golf legends as Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, and Gary Player. His caddy for the tournament was a 17-year-old local named Tommy Friedman.

Rodriguez retired from golf several years later. But his caddy - now known as Thomas L. Friedman, foreign affairs columnist for The New York Times and author of the new book The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century - has spent his career deploying the skills he used on the golf course: describing the terrain, shouting warnings and encouragement, and whispering in the ears of big players. After 10 years of writing his twice-weekly foreign affairs column, Friedman has become the most influential American newspaper columnist since Walter Lippmann.

One reason for Friedman's influence is that, in the mid-'90s, he staked out the territory at the intersection of technology, financial markets, and world trade, which the foreign policy establishment, still focused on cruise missiles and throw weights, had largely ignored. "This thing called globalization," he says, "can explain more things in more ways than anything else."

Friedman's 1999 book, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization, provided much of the intellectual framework for the debate. "The first big book on globalization that anybody actually read," as Friedman describes it, helped make him a fixture on the Davos-Allen Conference-Renaissance Weekend circuit. But it also made him a lightning rod. He's been accused of "rhetorical hyperventilation" and dismissed as an "apologist" for global capital. The columnist Molly Ivins even dubbed top-tier society's lack of concern for the downsides of globalization "the Tom Friedman Problem."

After 9/11, Friedman says, he paid less attention to globalization. He spent the next three years traveling to the Arab and Muslim world trying to get at the roots of the attack on the US. His columns on the subject earned him his third Pulitzer Prize. But Friedman realized that while he was writing about terrorism, he missed an even bigger story: Globalization had gone into overdrive. So in a three-month burst last year, he wrote The World Is Flat to explain his updated thinking on the subject.

Friedman enlisted some impressive editorial assistance. Bill Gates spent a day with him to critique the theory. Friedman presented sections of the book to the strategic planning unit at IBM and to Michael Dell. But his most important tutors were two Indians: Nandan Nilekani, CEO of Infosys, and Vivek Paul, a top executive at Wipro. "They were the guys who really cracked the code for me."

Wired sat down with Friedman in his office at the Times'Washington bureau to discuss the flattening of the world.

WIRED: What do you mean the world is flat?

FRIEDMAN: I was in interviewing Nandan Nilekani at Infosys. And he said to me, "Tom, the playing field is being leveled." Indians and Chinese were going to compete for work like never before, and Americans weren't ready. I kept chewing over that phrase - the playing field is being leveled - and then it hit me: Holy mackerel, the world is becoming flat. Several technological and political forces have converged, and that has produced a global, Web-enabled playing field that allows for multiple forms of collaboration without regard to geography or distance - or soon, even language.

So, we're talking about globalization enhanced by things like the rise of open source?

This is Globalization 3.0. In Globalization 1.0, which began around 1492, the world went from size large to size medium. In Globalization 2.0, the era that introduced us to multinational companies, it went from size medium to size small. And then around 2000 came Globalization 3.0, in which the world went from being small to tiny. There's a difference between being able to make long distance phone calls cheaper on the Internet and walking around Riyadh with a PDA where you can have all of Google in your pocket. It's a difference in degree that's so enormous it becomes a difference in kind.

Is that why the Netscape IPO is one of your "10 flatteners"? Explain.

Three reasons. Netscape brought the Internet alive with the browser. They made the Internet so that Grandma could use it and her grandchildren could use it. The second thing that Netscape did was commercialize a set of open transmission protocols so that no company could own the Net. And the third is that Netscape triggered the dotcom boom, which triggered the dotcom bubble, which triggered the overinvestment of a trillion dollars in fiber-optic cables.

Are you saying telecommunications trumps terrorism? What about September 11? Isn't that as important?

There's no question flattening is more important. I don't think you can understand 9/11 without understanding flattening. This is probably the first book by a major foreign affairs thinker that talks about the world-changing effects of … supply chains. [Laughs.]

Why are supply chains so important?

They're incredible flatteners. For UPS to work, they've got to create systems with customs offices around the world. They've got to design supply chain algorithms so when you take that box to the UPS Store, it gets from that store to its hub and then out. Everything they are doing is taking fat out of the system at every joint. I was in India after the nuclear alert of 2002. I was interviewing Vivek Paul at Wipro shortly after he'd gotten an email from one of their big American clients saying, "We're now looking for an alternative to you. We don't want to be looking for an alternative to you. You don't want us to be looking for an alternative to you. Do something about this!" So I saw the effect that India's being part of this global supply chain had on the behavior of the Indian business community, which eventually filtered up to New Delhi.

And that's how you went from your McDonald's Theory of Conflict Prevention - two countries that have a McDonald's will never go to war with each other - to the Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention.

Yes. No two countries that are both part of a major global supply chain like Dell's will fight against each other as long as they are both part of that supply chain. When I'm managing your back room, when I'm managing your HR, when I'm doing your accounting - that's way beyond selling you burgers. We are intimately in bed with each other. And that has got to affect my behavior.

In some sense, then, the world is a gigantic supply chain. And you don't want to be the one who brings the whole thing down.

Absolutely.

Unless your goal is to bring the whole thing down. Supply chains work for al Qaeda, too, don't they?

Al Qaeda is nothing more than a mutant supply chain. They're playing off the same platform as Wal-Mart and Dell. They're just not restrained by it. What is al Qaeda? It's an open source religious political movement that works off the global supply chain. That's what we're up against in Iraq. We're up against a suicide supply chain. You take one bomber and deploy him in Baghdad, and another is manufactured in Riyadh the next day. It's exactly like when you take the toy off the shelf at Wal-Mart and another is made in Shen Zhen the next day.

The book is almost dizzily optimistic about India and China, about what flattening will bring to these parts of the world. I firmly believe that the next great breakthrough in bioscience could come from a 15-year-old who downloads the human genome in Egypt. Bill Gates has a nice line: He says, 20 years ago, would you rather have been a B-student in Poughkeepsie or a genius in Shanghai? Twenty years ago you'd rather be a B-student in Poughkeepsie. Today? Not even close. Not even close. You'd much prefer to be the genius in Shanghai because you can now export your talents anywhere in the world.

As optimistic as you are about that kid in Shanghai, you're not particularly optimistic about the US.

I'm worried about my country. I love America. I think it's the best country in the world. But I also think we're not tending to our sauce. I believe that we are in what Shirley Ann Jackson [president of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute] calls a "quiet crisis." If we don't change course now and buckle down in a flat world, the kind of competition our kids will face will be intense and the social implications of not repairing things will be enormous.

You quote a CEO who says that Americans have grown addicted to their high salaries, and now they're going to have to earn them. Are Americans suffering from an undue sense of entitlement? Somebody said to me the other day that - I wish I had this for the book, but it's going to be in the paperback - the entitlement we need to get rid of is our sense of entitlement.

Let's talk about the critics of globalization. You say that you don't want the antiglobalization movement to go away. Why? I've been a critic of the antiglobalization movement, and they've been a critic of me, but the one thing I respect about the movement is their authentic energy. These are not people who don't care about the world. But if you want to direct your energy toward helping the poor, I believe the best way is not throwing a stone through a McDonald's window or protesting World Bank meetings. It's through local governance. When you start to improve local governance, you improve education, women's rights, transportation.

It's possible to go through your book and conclude it was written by a US senator who wants to run for president. There's a political agenda in this book.

Yes, absolutely.

You call for portable benefits, lifelong learning, free trade, greater investment in science, government funding for tertiary education, a system of wage insurance. Uh, Mr. Friedman, are you running for president?

No, I am not running for president!

Would you accept the vice presidential nomination?

I just want to get my Thursday column done!

But you are outlining an explicit agenda.

You can't be a citizen of this country and not be in a hair-pulling rage at the fact that we're at this inflection moment and nobody seems to be talking about the kind of policies we need to get through this flattening of the world, to get the most out of it and cushion the worst. We need to have as focused, as serious, as energetic, as sacrificing a strategy for dealing with flatism as we did for communism. This is the challenge of our day.

Short of Washington fully embracing the Friedman doctrine, what should we be doing? For instance, what advice should we give to our kids?

When I was growing up, my parents told me, "Finish your dinner. People in China and
India are starving." I tell my daughters, "Finish your homework. People in India and China are starving for your job."

Think about your own childhood for a moment. If a teenage Tommy Friedman could somehow have been transported to 2005, what do you think he would have found most surprising? That you could go to PGA.com and get the scores of your favorite golfer in real time. That would have been amazing.

A Summery of the 10 flatteners of the 21st century:

1. Fall of the Berlin Wall
The events of November 9, 1989, tilted the worldwide balance of power toward democracies and free markets.

2. Netscape IPO
The August 9, 1995, offering sparked massive investment in fiber-optic cables.

3. Work flow software
The rise of apps from PayPal to VPNs enabled faster, closer coordination among far-flung employees.

4. Open-sourcing
Self-organizing communities, à la Linux, [Firefox, Moodle] launched a collaborative revolution.

5. Outsourcing
Migrating business functions to India saved money and a third world economy.

6. Offshoring
Contract manufacturing elevated China to economic prominence.

7. Supply-chaining
Robust networks of suppliers, retailers, and customers increased business efficiency. See Wal-Mart.


8. Insourcing
Logistics giants took control of customer supply chains, helping mom-and-pop shops go global. See UPS and FedEx.

9. In-forming
Power searching allowed everyone to use the Internet as a "personal" supply chain of knowledge." See Google.

10. Wireless
Like "steroids," wireless technologies pumped up collaboration, making it mobile and personal.

Finals

A rope of 3 chords is hard to break.

March 10 is International Woman's Day. That week, the Women and Media class, together with script writing and broadcast management class shall produce a fem-film-fest. These shall also be considered for ACTV's You Rock My World for a woman's day special.

Objective: To create 3 different projects with the woman perspective, therby putting into practice feminist methods & theories.

Instructions: In groups of 5 (7 groups in all)

• create a woman issue advocacy
• create a documentary highlighting contemporary woman issues
• create a short film about "Herstory"

Sites on Feminism & Feminist Media Theories

Journal of Feminist Construction: http://www.feminista.com/
Feminism Collection of facts/files: http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem.htm
Documents of the Women's Liberation Movement: http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/wlm/
Feminist theories: http://www.cddc.vt.edu/feminism/
Women Studies Resources: http://bailiwick.lib.uiowa.edu/wstudies/theory.html
Feminist Media Theories: http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/Speech/rccs/portal4.htm

Philstar 01/17/06 PEOPLE By J. M. Ramirez

I read this from Star today and I'd like to share it with you... what do you think about this article? Do you agree...disagree? Why?

I am woman, hear me purr
(with apologies to Helen Reddy)
PEOPLE By Joanne Rae M. Ramirez
The Philippine STAR 01/17/2006

Last Christmas, my nieces Linny and Trixie Lareza gave me a book entitled Let Me Be A Woman by Elisabeth Elliot, a book for Christian women (including Catholics like me). In its back cover blurb, the book promised that, "Whether you are young or not so young, single, engaged, married or widowed, you will better understand how you fit into God’s plan, and you will come away with a wonderful sense of peace about who you really are as a Christian woman."

In their dedication to me, Linny and Trixie wrote, "Thanks for being an example of being a graceful woman to us."

Of course, that dedication made me read the book (published in the Philippines by OMF Literature Inc.) faster than you could say "graceful!"

* * *

In the book’s 175 pages (actually, they are a compilation of the letters Elliot wrote to her daughter Valerie 11 months before the latter’s wedding) are several thought pebbles that will generate ripples in your mind. You will think, question, understand, believe and ultimately, as in my case, gain knowledge from Elliot’s words.

Heavy on Scriptures – this is no Oprah book, I must warn you – it nevertheless puts many things in perspective and makes you understand yourself and in the case of married women and women in relationships, it helps you understand men. (If you read advice columns in glossies, 99 percent of women’s problems have to do with their relationships with men – how to understand them, how to live with them, how to live without them.)

Elliot puts a Christian perspective to it. You may or may not agree with her, but she will make you ponder on many things.

And so it must be with an open mind and an open heart that you must read this book. Elliot, by the way is "a serious student of Scripture" and a professor at Gordon Conwell Seminary.

I say "open mind" because her book (written at the height of the strong feminist movement in the ’70s and ’80s) is unequivocally anchored on the belief, based on the Scriptures, that woman was created for man, to be a helpmate to man and to submit to him. She says the Bible is ambiguous on some things, but not on that. Still, submission for Elliot is not some form of slavery. It is just a limitation that defines women, just like bearing children is a unique edge women have over men. In other words, birds are birds, cats are cats, men are men, women are women. Some are meant to fly; others purr; others are meant to be providers; others, homemakers (although not necessarily 100 percent homemakers). This delineation of roles is what brings order into the world. "Woman can and ought to be judged by the criteria of femininity, for it is in their femininity that they participate in the human race. And femininity has its limitations. So has masculinity. To be a woman is not to be a man."

Elliot cites this female pilot who got ahead in life by looking at her male colleagues as fellow pilots. She was out to prove she was the better pilot; she was not out to prove she belonged to the better sex. "Betty had made up her mind that if she was going to make her way in a man’s world, she had to be a lady. She would have to compete with men in being a pilot, but she would not compete with men in being a man. She refused to try in any way to act like a man."

Come to think of it, men never really try to prove that they can do what women do, the way women make a big thing of proving that they can do what men can. Why bother, indeed? Life is not a thesis project that we have to defend.

* * *

"In order to learn what it means to be a woman, we must start with the One who made her," Elliot writes.

Elliot believes in a strong, all-powerful, take-control God ("We are creatures of a great master Designer.") No question there. She believes nothing in the world happens by chance, and that if God can control the big things (like creation), he can control the "little things" (like twisting an ankle, perhaps?)

"The life of faith is lived one day at a time, and it has to be lived – not always looked forward to as though the "real" living were around the next corner, it is for today for which we are responsible. God still owns tomorrow," she writes. These lines are a soothing balm to those who keep worrying about tomorrow, when all that is real is today, and tomorrow is still a gift from God waiting to be unwrapped.

* * *

Now about men. Ah, men. Elliot says that when you marry, you must remember: 1. You marry a sinner; 2. You marry a man; 3. You marry a husband; and 4. You marry a person.

You marry a sinner – there’s "no one else to marry." We are all sinners. But you forget he is a sinner because of your love and when he does something that reminds you that he is indeed a sinner, you ask yourself, "where did things go wrong?"

"The prize package we think we’ve found is likely to contain surprises, not all of them welcome," points out Elliot. So, learn to forgive.

You marry a man, not a woman, and he obviously won’t have the same bathroom habits as you do. "He is likely to be bigger and louder and tougher and hungrier and dirtier than a woman expects." She learns that what makes her cry may make him laugh. When a woman is fed up with this creature she can’t fathom, she’ll say, "Just like a man!" Elliot thinks it should be a reason to thank God that, "It is a man she married, after all, and she is lucky if he acts like a man."

You marry a husband, so let him "husband you." Husband, according to Elliot, connotes "conserving, caring for, managing or protecting" and a wife "needs to allow herself to be cherished."

Finally, you marry a person, so you must learn to accept the mystery of his personhood. He is fully known and completely understood only by God, not even his mother. "Ultimately he is God’s man. He is free and you must always reverence his freedom. There are questions you have no right to ask, matters into which you must not probe and secrets you must be content never to know."

* * *

So, what is a Christian woman? She is Christian, and therefore God is in the center of her life and helping others is a major goal. And she is a woman. She can sometimes think like a man and do the work associated with men.

But when she purrs instead of roars, it isn’t a downgrade. She probably will rule the world with a single purr.

(P.S. Helen Reddy is the voice behind the national anthem of the feminist movement, I Am Woman, some lines of which go, "I am woman hear me roar, in numbers too big to ignore. If I have to, I can do anything. I am strong. I am invincible. I am woman!")

* * *

You may e-mail me at joanneraeramirez@yahoo.com

Midterm Project: MEDIA MAKING WOMAN

Create a video montage of how media has created woman using the theories discussed in class. Be able to show different media that exemplify the ideas behind epistmological, ideological and sociological critiques of how media makes [or creates] woman.

You will be rated by how critical your work or analysis is vis-a-vis the media images you have gathered.

Dalit ng Paslit by: Belinda S. Santos

'Tay, sa isip ko lang 'to sinusulat Sinulat ko na 'to kahaponPero isusulat ko uli ngayon kasiTalagang-Talaga nangNahihirapan na 'koMula nung mamatay kaNang lumubog 'yungBarkong sinakyan mo At si Nanay sumama sa Traysikel drayber D'yan sa kanto Naiwan ako ke Tiyo'Di n'ya ako pinapapasok sa iskul Sa bahay na lang daw Kaya pala, Dadalhin niya ¡®Yung mga kaibigan niya dito.Sa gabi Alam mo Maingay silaAt lasingSabi nila, 'nung unang gabiBa, pwede na¡®Tong alaga mo, LazaroTiningnan nila ako, 'taySabi, laro lang ha, H'wag kang matatakotTapos tawa sila ng tawaLahat kami humigaTapos, madilim Tapos, umaga naHoy, sabi ni TiyoTayo ay pupunta Ngayon sa MaynilaMagbalot ka na Ng mga damit moPero di ako makabangon Tumingala lamang ako sa kisameNagbilang ng pakoMe kalawang ang lahatSa Maynila, Marami pang pinapasokSi Tiyong mga lalakiMalakas tumawaMaraming pera sa bulsaMe mabaho, Meron namang mabangoMerong mataba, me payat, Me malinis, me katulad ni Tiyong Sumisinga sa sahigLalu nang dumalasAng pagtingala ko Sa kisame pero ¡®di na ¡®Ko makapagbilang ng pakoKasi 'yung kisameNaging isang salaminKita ko d'un lahatAng ginagawa namin sa sahig'Tay, magsusumbong Na 'ko, talaga, Kasi dal'wang taon na At saka lumalaki ang salaminDumaraming nakikitaT'saka baka ¡®Di na ¡®ko makabangon Mabigat na mabigat na ¡®Yung puson ko, Itay Pabigat nang pabigat 'Tay, Parang buong Maynila Nasa loob ng puson ko! Alam mo? Alam mo? Alam mo? A CHILD¡¯S SONGPa, am writing this all in my head, wrote this yesterday but writing it again‘Cause am really, really having it bad since you died, since that boat you were in sank And Mama took off with that tricycle driver down the corner, been left with UncleHe didn't put me in school, kept me home, turned out, he was bringing his friends hereAt night, y‘ know, they're noisy, drunk. They said that first night, "Hey, your little girl here will do, Lazaro." They looked at me, Pa. Said "Its just play, okay? Just play, don't be scared" Then, they laughed and laughed. We all lay down, then it was dark, then it was morning "Hey," Uncle said, "We're going to Manila, okay? Pack your clothes." But I couldn't get up, I just looked up at the ceiling, counted the nails, there's rust in all of them. In Manila, Uncle let in so many more, y‘ know, who laugh loud, with lots of money in their pockets, there were smelly ones, nice-smelling ones, fat ones, thin ones and clean ones. There were those who snort their buggers down on the floor, like Uncle. More and more I'd stared at the ceiling, Pa. But I can't count the nails no more, ‘cause the ceiling became this big, big, big mirror. Can see everything that we do on the floor. More and more I can't sleep, Pa, am going to tell now. Really, really will. ‘Cause, been two years now, and that mirror's getting bigger. Am seeing more and more And, what if I can't get up no more, my belly's getting so heavy. Heavier and heavier, Pa. Like I got all of Manila in my belly, Y‘ know?

Sociological Critique

From Epistemological Critique (KNOWING) CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY
To Ideological Critique (BELIEVING) PATRIARCHY
To Sociological Critique (LEARNING/TEACHING) SOCIALIZATION


SOCIOLOGICAL CRITIQUE

• Ideologies are a body of meanings that enable the group holding power to have the maximum control with the minimum of conflict; basis for all other systems!
• Ideologies maintain and control
• Ideologies become "natural", "reality"

Patriarchy and capitalism are systemic structures that enable power holders to control and maintain media making woman.

WHERE DO WE GET PATRIARCHY?

INFORMAL:

• Culture
• Family
  

FORMAL:

• Education
• Religion
• MEDIA

HOW DO WE GET IT?

SOCIALIZATION

- the general process by which we acquire our views and values from others is known as socialization

The way a culture [ideology] is transmitted

The way an individual [ woman] is fitted [in roles] into an organized [patriarchy] way of life.

AIMS TO TRANSMIT & STRIVES FOR ITS CONTINUITY.

How does Socialization occur?

Participation: by playing roles in groups, organizations by playing roles in groups, organizations
Internalization: group norms become personal standards Group norms become personal standards
Compliance: in hope of gaining benefits in hope of gaining benefits
Identification: See self as part of groups to which belong

If in history the stage was set for the systematic domestication &
oppression of women, socializing factors until today, perpetuate this
patriarchal condition & situation of women.

Socializing Factors

"Gendering"

sex - biological

• male
• female

gender - culture bound

• masculine
• feminine
  

Socializing Factors IN THE FAMILY

Child rearing

a. Manipulation & handling

• boys-blue crib; girls-pink crib
• b-rough; g-careful

b. Canalization: objects we use which give direction to the kind of attitude / character children have: TOYS

Boys: guns, cars

Girls: dolls, tea sets

Institutions of mass socialization
Mass Media

Women as sex object , dumb-blonde, witch-bitch, weak damsel in distress, senseless woman, homemaker, super model

Barbie & Marlboro Man

Education

• Access - family attitude’s toward women’s education
• Exclusive language:
  man > human
  he > for abstract pronoun
  Mr. & Mrs. Juan dela Cruz
  policeman, brotherhood
  curses à son of a bitch, bustard

Religion (ALL RELIGIONS)

Greek dualistic view of self:

Soul : higher, logic, holy, spirit, superior- associated with man
Body : lower, emotional, evil, flesh, inferior- associated with woman

Women in the Bible:

• EVE - temptress, seducer, derived from, secondary
• Lilith - first wife of Adam in Jewish literature
• Whore, adultress or not much said

Women in the Church:

• Hierarchy - all-male leadership, law-makers, interpreters
• DO THEY FULLY KNOW WHAT WOMEN THINK/FEEL???
• Tertullian, Augustine, etc.

Auxiliary Roles of Women

secretary to boss
nurse to doctor
model to painter
stewardess to pilot
passenger to driver
homemaker to head of household
lay (nuns are lay!) to priests

30+ = old maid
30+ = bachelor

When a person or victim is not conscientized he/she will also perpetuate their
own oppression! Women end up perpetuating patriarchy! They will rear their children’s children to perpetuate it!

Issues Facing Women

Inequality and discrimination

Triple exploitation of women

• race
• class
• gender

the poor, ethnic woman

Who is she??? --NO BODY!!!!!

Violence Against Women

• rape
• molestation
• incest
• wife battery

Trafficking of women

• prostitution
• mail order bride
• d.h. or domestic helper
• ‘filipina’ = domestic helper in some dictionaries
  

Some facts about Women

• 60% of the 1billion poor are wome
• Of 960m illiterate- 70% are women
• 1/3 of all women are physically abused
• One woman is raped every 6 minutes
• Women are paid 30-40% less than men for doing the same
• Women do 2/3 of the world’s work but get only 10% of the world’s income, own
  1% of the world’s land.
• Women’s share of the worlds parliament in 96 was 12% and has not seen much
  growth.

The Woman Question

The fact that there is

DISCRIMINTION, SUBORDINATION, EXPLOITATION, OPRESSION

of women as women (in differing degrees) that cut across

CLASS, RACE, CREED, NATIONALITY

It is an Ideological, Systemic, Structural and Global question.