A bulky research report titled The Global Gender Gap Index has been published annually, since 2006, by the World Economic Index. The current 325-page report analyzed the status of women relative to men in 134 nations (out of the world’s 193) in four categories: Health, Education, Economy, and Politics. Every nation was then ranked, from 1-134, in a list of best-to-worst nations for women. What nations were picked in 2010 as the best in the world for women? Here’s a list of the Top Ten:
1. Iceland 2. Finland 3. Norway 4. Sweden 5. New Zealand 6. Ireland 7. Denmark 8. Lesotho 9. The Philippines 10. Switzerland
Other rankings of leading nations are: 19. United States 46. France 61. China 76. Italy 94. Japan 104. South Korea
The United States has risen quickly in the last two years, while France has plummeted; both changes are due to cabinet appointments, or lack thereof. Barack Obama can be categorized as one of the present world’s most “feminist” leaders because he’s assigned numerous women to top positions and improved the USA’s ranking. Meanwhile, French Prime Minister Nicolai Sarkosky has done the opposite, he dismissed many women and replaced them with men, and France has subsequently dropped in the standings.
Let’s peek at the bottom now. Here are the Ten Worst out of 134 nations, staring with the most awful.
134. Yemen 133. Chad 132. Pakistan 131. Mali 130. Ivory Coast 129. Saudi Arabia 128. Benin 127 Morocco 126. Turkey 125. Egypt
The Top 10 list contains seven European nations and the Bottom 10 is all African and Western Asian. Anything else? Below, I’ve placed percentages next to several nations in both lists. These percentages represent the sement of the population that is “religious.”
1. Iceland 38% 2. Finland 25% 3. Norway 20% 4. Sweden 17% 7. Denmark 18% 10. Switzerland 48% 134. Yemen - 99% 133. Chad - 99% 132. Pakistan 96% 131. Mali - 90% 130. Ivory Coast - 90% 129. Saudi Arabia 97% 128. Benin - 90% 126. Turkey - 95% 125. Egypt - 100%
Obviously, the “non-religious” nations on the top list - we can call them “secular” or “humanist” or ‘agnostic/atheist” - are far, far better for women than the overwhelmingly religious nations in the lower list. It seems, gazing solely at the data above, that a hypothesis can be asserted that “religion is bad for women’s rights” - but this would be a premature claim because we haven’t examined all 134 nations yet. It is also erroneous, or premature, to generalize at this point and say that “Islam is bad for women” because Ivory Coast and Benin have large Christian populations.
The truth is - if we look at the entire list of 134 - there are quite a few “religious nations” that score high in women’s equality, and there are many “non-religious nations” that have weak ranks in the Gender Gap Index.
Here’s another list: 8. Lesotho (90% religious) 9. The Philippines (90% religious) 16. Sri Lanka (99% religious) 19. United States (65% religious) 43. Poland (80% religious) 46. France (25% religious) 47. Estonia (14% religious) 65. Czech Republic (21% religious) 72. Vietnam (19% religious) 94. Japan (24% religious) 104. South Korea (48% religious)
Scrutinizing these statistics, we notice that “religious” nations don’t automatically fail to advance women’s equality. Five “nations of faith” - including the United States, which is frequently defined as the most religious nation in the developed world - are currently outperforming in women’s rights the six “non-religious” nations of the second list.
However, if we examine the “Bottom 30” in women’s rights, we discover that ALL those nations are “religious.” The majority of them have Islam as the majority religion, about 66%, but other nations do not, for example, India (#112) and Nepal (#115) are both 81% Hindu, Guatemala (#109) is Catholic, and Zambia (#106), Fiji (#108), and Ethiopia (#121) are all majority Christian.
Surprisingly enough, the link between religion and poor women’s equality is stronger within the United States. This next set of data posted below indicates the states that are the most and least “women-friendly” based on two criteria - how many women they have in elected political positions, and the narrowness of the wage gap between men and women:
Best States for Women 1. Colorado (38% representation) 2. Vermont (37.5% representation) 3. New Hampshire (37% representation) 4. Minnesota (34% representation) 5. Connecticut 6. Maryland 7. Washington 8. Nevada 9. Massachusetts 10. Alaska
Worst States for Women 50. South Carolina (10% representation) 49. Oklahoma (11% representation) 48. Mississippi 47. Arkansas 46. Louisiana 45. West Virginia 44. Kentucky 43. Montana 42. Tennessee 41. New Mexico
It is rather startling to see how similarly these two lists match up when we compare them to the “least religious” and “most religious” states:
Least Religious States 1. Vermont (2nd on the Women-Friendly list) 2. New Hampshire (3rd on the “Women-Friendly” list) 3. Maine 4. Massachusetts (9th on the Women-Friendly list) 5. Alaska (10th on the Women-Friendly list) 6. Washington (7th on the Women-Friendly list) 7. Oregon 8. Rhode Island 9. Nevada (8th on the Women-Friendly list) 10. Connecticut
Most Religious States 1. Mississippi (48th on the Worst States for Women) 2. Alabama 3. South Carolina (50th on the Worst States for Women) 4. Tennessee (42nd on the Worst States for Women) 5. Louisiana (46th on the Worst States for Women) 6. Arkansas (47th on the Worst States for Women) 7. Georgia 8. North Carolina 9. Oklahoma (49th on the Worst States for Women) 10. Kentucky (44th on the Worst States for Women)
Six of the Least Religious States are also listed among the top ten Best States for Women, and seven of the Most Religious States are in the list for ten Worst States for Women. Furthermore, none of the “non-religious” states are in the bottom ten, and none of the religious states are in the top ten. If the lists had been extended to include the top and bottom 20 States for Women, I believe all of the religious states would be in the bottom 20, and all of the non-religious states would have been in the top 20.
These rankings imply what the international rankings suggested — that secular places score higher on women’s rights. However, it would be crazy and irresponsible to think that religiosity was the sole determining factor in advancing women’s equality.
Let’s look at another factor now, per capita income, in the top 10 and bottom 10 nations:
1. Iceland $38,029 2. Finland 44,491 3. Norway 79,089 4. Sweden 43,654 5. New Zealand 29,000 6. Ireland 51,049 7. Denmark 55,992 8. Lesotho 851 9. The Philippines 1,745 10. Switzerland 63,000
134. Yemen 1,061 133. Chad 687 132. Pakistan 989 131. Mali 657 130. Ivory Coast 1,052 129. Saudi Arabia 14,450 128. Benin 709 127. Morocco 2,882 126. Turkey 8,248 124. Egypt 2,269
The per capita income in the Top 10 is considerably higher than it is in the Bottom 10, with eight of the Top Ten nations earning considerably more than all of the Bottom Ten nations. It is not unanimous though - The Philippines and Lesotho have high ratings in women’s equality, even though they are poor nations. Four of the Bottom Ten nations have higher per capita income than The Philippines, and seven have higher per capita than Lesotho.
Obviously, there are factors besides wealth (and religion) that have allowed The Philippines and Lesotho to advance women’s rights. There are also numerous other nations that break any stereotype anyone might have of rich nations having superior women’s rights. Here they are; the first list is of wealthy nations that are under-achievers in women’s right, the second list is of poor nations that are doing far better in advancing women’s rights, despite having less income:
Wealthy Low Achievers in Women’s Equality
74. Italy $35,084 per capita income 79. Hungary 12,868 91. Mexico 8,144 94. Japan 39,727 104. South Korea 17,078 105. Kuwait 27,835 110. Bahrain 19,817 117. Qatar 59,990 129. Saudi Arabia 14,540
Impoverished High Achievers in Women’s Equality 8. Lesotho $ 851 per capita income 9. The Philippines 1,745 16. Sri Lanka 2,068 22. Mozambique 428 25. Namibia 4,338 27. Mongolia 1,573 30. Nicaragua 1,097 33. Uganda 481 34. Moldava 1,516
Once again, similar to the “religion” factor, we see that “per capita income” often coincides with women’s equality but is certainly no guarantee. It is possible to be desperately poor - like Mozambique - and still have a much narrow gender gap than other nations where the annual per capita income is up to 100 times more.
In the United States, though, the relationship between poverty and women’s inequality is much stronger. Let’s peruse those lists of the Top and Bottom Ten States in Women’s Equality, alongside their per capita income:
Best States for Women
1. Colorado $55,430 2. Vermont 51,618 3. New Hampshire 60,567 4. Minnesota 55,616 5. Connecticut 67,034 6. Maryland 69,272 7. Washington 56,548 8. Nevada 53,341 9. Massachusetts 64,081 10. Alaska 66,953
Worst States for Women 50. South Carolina $42,442 49. Oklahoma 41,664 48. Mississippi 36,646 47. Arkansas 37,823 46. Louisiana 42,492 45. West Virginia 37,435 44. Kentucky 40,072 43. Montana 42,322 42. Tennessee 41,725 41. New Mexico 43,028
There is an enormous discrepancy here — all the Best States for Women have higher incomes than the Worst States for Women, by a wide margin — over $8,000 annually.
To conclude, it seems possible that these two national characteristics - religion and income - frequently parallel a rise in women’s equality, but we’re not sure yet what comes first. Does secular thinking and increased per capita income advance women’s equality? Or does women’s equality promote secular thinking and per capita income? How do these three characteristics interact?
If they’re all linked, it’s logical to surmise that a rising trend in secular thinking and per capita income will be accompanied by an advance in women’s equality. What do surveys reveal about that? Secularization is rising very quickly in Europe, this is apparent in the empty churches and the harsh criticism of the Pope. Secularization is also advancing in North and South America and in many parts of Asia, but it is not clearly progressing in Africa, the Middle East, and other parts of Asia, due partially to a rising tide of fundamentalism.
Per capita income growth is definitely increasing, however, it’s grown rapidly in the last few decades and one forecaster predicts that it will expand 700% by the year 2100.
Is women’s equality also advancing? The Global Gender Gap reports of the last five years indicate that in that short span of time 86% of the nations surveyed have improved their women’s status, with only 14% of the nations declining in equality. In reality, the situation is more lopsided than that, because the declines in the 14% are miniscule, while the advances in the majority of the 86% of nations are enormous.
Overall, women’s equality seems to be barreling ahead at a phenomenal rate of acceleration. Imagine, if this international arc continues moving in Iceland’s direction for another ten or twenty years, what will happen?. Will we journey beyond the current “Nordic Feminism” of the top four nations (Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden) into another zone, towards societies that have never existed before, societies with women-equal cultures that are utterly new, unprecedented in modern civilization?
“ Scientists claim to be a step closer to reversing the aging process after rejuvenating worn out organs in elderly mice. The experimental treatment developed by researchers at Harvard Medical School turned weak and feeble old mice into healthy animals by regenerating their aged bodies. ”
Please click the title above to visit the referenced link.
By Breki Tomasson
New Scientist is reporting about a chemical elixir that - if it works on humans the same way as it works on mice - could extend our lifespans by up to ten years, allowing us better endurance and motor coordination as we age.
Needless to say, all of these reports should be taken with a grain of salt, but they’re always interesting to follow in the years leading up to the cure for aging.
Please click the title above to visit the referenced link.
Will Mississippi be last in 2035? That’s what one futurist believes. On the bright side, the majority of the states in the USA will be ratifying gay marriage in the next 8 years, according to this forecaster.
