Source: The Morung Express
Jean Shinoda Bolen, a best-selling author and internationally-known lecturer, is a qualified psychiatrist and Jungian analyst. She is presently a clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California Medical Center. Her fan following includes the acclaimed novelist Alice Walker, who once wrote that “the healing power of Jean Shinoda Bolen’s work and thought transform all who will allow encounter”, and feminist icon Gloria Steinem, who has observed that Bolen has shown people how “the cult of masculinity is endangering us all.” Pamela Philipose interviewed her in New York.

Q: You speak about a “third women’s movement”. What would that be?
A: I see this as the “women’s peace movement”. As I noted in one of my recent books, the goal is to stop violence by involving women in the prevention of violence, resolution of conflicts and the restoration of peace. Domestic violence, school ground violence, street violence, terrorism and wars have the same origins in the need to dominate and to be predator. Until women collectively become involved in creating a culture of peace to stop violence begetting violence in the human family, women and children will continue to be the primary casualties of such conflict.

Q: The year 2011 marked the 10th anniversary of the United Nations Security Council’s resolution 1325, which expressly underlines the importance of women’s participation in peace negotiations.
A: Yes, UNSC’s resolution 1325 is a very important one. In principle it states that women should be involved in resolving conflicts at every stage. And yet, when it comes to the most serious conflicts in the world today, we see that women are nowhere in the picture. Ideally, every official and non-official peace keeping body should have a balance of women and men, because each sex brings to the table its own distinct abilities.

Q: What do you see as women’s ‘distinct’ abilities when it comes to conflict resolution?
A: Women are noted as a gender of nurture – when I say this I am conscious that this does not hold true for every woman but it holds true for at least three-quarters of women in the world – for many reasons, part of which are sociological and neurological, and part of which draw from nature itself. We don’t know, but there is enough research to say that women respond to stress by wanting to communicate what they are stressed about and by listening to other people. They are, therefore, better able to solve things by taking other people’s concerns into consideration. If you can see the position that the other person is in and can empathise with him or her, your approach to solving a conflict will take on board the other’s point of view. This I believe is the basis for a true resolution of any conflict.
Every year, for over a decade, I have been participating in the annual sessions of the Commission on the Status of Women at the UN in New York. In 2002, the women from Sierra Leone were talking about how resolution 1325 was being applied to the conflict in their country because the UN was able to ensure that the resolution was part of the peace negotiations and the warlords in Sierra Leone had to agree to have women present during the talks. A women reporting on that process revealed how one warlord even exclaimed loudly, “What do we want the women for? You know that they will only compromise.” And everybody in the room burst out, “Why of course. You have to compromise if you want negotiations to work.” But in the world of alpha males, compromise is about being weaker than the other, and entails humiliation. So clearly, we don’t need that pattern of conflict resolution.

Q: How would you interpret the developments that are taking place in countries like Egypt?
A: When the Tahrir Square events were unfolding, I once saw on You Tube an appeal from women to conduct the resistance in a peaceful manner. The potential of men to be seen as being protective rather than dominant and violent presents a very different model. But if democracy equals equality, then it is that model that should apply. A democratic project may begin with the overthrow of a dictator but the power that ordinary people have unleashed in changing history is an amazing power and it has the responsibility to make that history work. We can only hope that what is taking place in the Middle East today also ushers lasting peace in these countries, as well as the equality of both men and women there.

Q: You have commented on the hierarchy of power in your work but is there an alternative? 
A: I always find the analogy of the circle useful here. A circle in principle signifies that everyone has an equal relationship with everyone else. Everyone’s face is seen in a circle and everyone’s voice is heard. In a typical hierarchy, the head of the institution looks down upon everybody he or she is speaking to, and everybody has to look up. When hierarchies prevail, whoever is the boss assumes the right to lord it over everybody else. But in a circle, it’s every different. Everyone’s presence and voice matters. We need to embrace the circle rather than traditional hierarchy of power.