Bikinis: a way to transform a woman to object

Even if common sense told us that when you put a scantily clad woman in front of men they will see it as objects, not as a person with thoughts and feelings, a recent research is confirming this.

According to National Geographic, when bain scans were done in 21 heterosexual males, the region of the brain associated with tool use lighted up.

Men saw women "as sexually inviting, but they were not thinking about their minds".

In the case of women, it's difficult to know if they would react the same way that men because women tend to try to interpret men's minds, think what they are interested in and try to please them.

I don't know if this is an instinct or it's something cause by media, but I believe we have a better knowledge and information that allow us to avoid being treated as tools and that can help us our daughters to understand this and try not to objectify themselves.

Different women leadership

I am surprised how women with very different styles and background have been the protagonists of this year's international politics.

The most visible, were, of course, the ones who participated in the US election. First, it was Hillary Clinton. She was, as Tina Brown in The Daily Beast puts it, an Iron Lady, ready to be commander in chief at 3 a.m. Things didn't turn out like that, she was maybe too much for many people, so the candidacy of the Democratic Party and then the Presidency of the USA ended in the hands of Barack Obama (an historic Presidency because it's a 'first time' event, as it would have been if a woman have ended as President).

Then, let's say that the second protagonist of this year was not as good as it could have been. Sarah Palin, one woman that could have represented a intelligent, valuable asset as a candidate for VP, ended up being the 'political choice': the beautiful face and apparently no brain someone selected to give some 'glitter' to a dying Republican Party. Bad movement for this party and bad for women in general, because it seems to be a 'confirmation' that women are only meaningful if they are beautiful or charismatic. Sad thing.

Finally, Michelle Obama. I believe, as Geraldine Brooks writes also in an article in the Daily Beast, she is smarter than she has let us see. She is not only the gracious and discreet First Lady that knows how to take care of their kids and remains a shadow while her husband shines as President. I don't think she will try to outshine him, not at all, but she is not going to be a decorative figure. It's very probable she will be there with her husband in anything she can influence and help. It's going to be an interesting term.

While I see this kind of women in other countries, in Latin America and in Mexico I do not believe things are going as good. In Latin America there are two women Presidents: Michelle Bachelet in Chile and Cristina Fernández (also known as Cristina Kirchner) in Argentina. They hold their positions with some level of competency and have given a step further for other women who wants to be in that same post, but two is still a low number for 21 countries.

In Mexico, and this is really not pleasing, women have achieved great success in all kinds of fields, but at least in politics there have been only 6 women governors in Mexico, two of them are still in office: Amalia García, in Zacatecas and Ivonne Ortega Pacheco, in Yucatán. One woman, Patricia Mercado, participated as candidate in the last election (in 2006) and she won a good number of votes, being the first time this happened, but she still have only 2.70 percent of the votes.

I don't know if a woman in Presidency is something that will happen soon in Mexico. In other countries in America this is a reality, in US is something I think we will see soon, but in Mexico politics seems to be for 'machos' or for women who don't mind to be called bitches only because they want to lead their country.

I hope the women that are being leaders right now in other countries will know how to be smart and valuable to pave the way for others who want to break that archaic glass ceiling.

Women must stand by themselves to close wage gap

In an article published in Time Magazine there is an explanation on why men earn more than women doing the same job.

A study made by two researchers from the University of Florida found that men that have more stereotypical views of gender roles earn more than their peers with more egalitarian ideas.

In the case of women, those who have more traditional ideas (i.e. that women belong in the home) earn less than women with egalitarian ideas.

Why does this happen? The article explains that men with traditional roles and women with egalitarian ideas earn more because they negotiate a better salary, because they believe they deserve this wage.

Also, a woman with traditional ideas show attitudes that is possible their employers perceive. In this case, employers are more likely to take advantage of them.

In other words, it's an everyday job to show women deserve the same kind of wage.  This may seem unfair, but there is hope in the fact that women are being treated less like second-class persons and more like any other employee.

New role of women, ¿cause for violence against them?

A recent article in the Washington Post tells how women in India, having achieved new opportunities in this traditional society, now face increased violence because of the resentment of men. The Indian men some times see this new role as a threat to the status quo of the Indian society.

Reading the article by Emily Wax I can only find coincidences (very disturbing coincidences) about the way men treats women in Mexico.

Lets start just with one recent declaration made by the Catholic Church. A high rank priest said that women should not use mini-skirts and other 'provocative' clothes to avoid the harassment of men.

Is this really the cause of violence, harassment and rapes? Are women guilty of this? Of course not. And his affirmation would have no logic if he had analyzed the way women in India (and other traditional countries) are the victims of violence. Their outfit cannot be seen as 'provocative' in any way, yet in Mexico the priests keep giving advices like these instead of trying to make men more respectful and to convince them of giving better treatment to females.

The real cause for violence against women, as the Indian society case seems to probe, it's men feeling that women want to be 'the boss', and the sensation that they no longer control the situation as it has happen traditionally.


Independence in women in some societies (like the Mexican) it is still harshly criticized. Women who tries to earn and control money, to choose their way of life or to begin living outside their parents home are seen like pariahs who will not have all the 'rewards' a more traditional female can 'earn'.

In some towns in Mexico women are even not allowed to do what in many countries is natural: to participate in the political process and earn important posts in the government.

In Mexico, less than 25 percent of the ministries are guided by women and, in America Latina, our country is 11 in 18 nations in political opportunities for women, as states a news article in the newspaper La Jornada.

Recently, a woman in Oaxaca, Eufrosina Cruz, tried to participate as candidate for Mayor of her town, only to be expelled by men. It is sad to see that this situation happens. Native people in Mexico call this exclusion 'usos y costumbres' (traditions), but the fact is that ignorance some times is the reason to treat women like this, and not only between  native people, but in men of all kinds.