In a survey of top women managers in the US about the main reasons for their success, they all attributed a large part of their success to spousal support.... so many said that they "married the right guy - the second time".... and it was also determined that for a woman to succeed in her career it helps that a strong male support her - be it the father, husband, brother or someone... so you can see Hillary Clinton (an exceptional woman in my opinion) has waxed eloquent about the influnence of her father and the support of Bill Clintion, Madame Curie was supported by her husband in her pursuits of finding radium and he even abandonded his own research to support her ... Margaret Thatcher credits her father and her loving husband with all of her achievements.....and there are countless others....

One factor that I do notice is however that while women are encouraged by their fathers .... most men if asked about the reason for their sucess would attribute it to their mothers! I have often had discussions with my guys friends about the most influential person in their lives and almost 99% of them have said that it was their mother who helped them.... and so it was with world leaders as well... Clinton is unabashed about the sacrifices made by his mother to educate him, Lincoln relied a lot on his mother for his early formative ideas, even Barack Obama in his autobiography credits his mother with the guidance given (and chastises his dad for being an absent father) and also cried openly when his grandmother died....

So isnt it a bit curious that women are encouraged by their fathers and men are encouraged by their mothers? Personally speaking I attribute a lot of my principles to my father and would think his confidence in me has kept me going till date.....and will keep me going for many years to come....

So why is our society so schewed against women? If fathers can support their daughters then why is it that women didnt break the bastions of male dominance long back?????

One reason could be that while the man is willing to promote his offspring, he is not willing to share the podium with the wife.... so as in the early days most women married by 18/19 and their best productive years were with a man who would influence her decisions for long time to come... so imagine a 18 year being asked to sit at home by a dominant husband... she just would.... there would be no challenge.... and hence by the time the woman is in her 40s she has lost her productive years and her children have grown up leaving her feeling completely inadequate.... it is said that most homemakers in their 40s suffer from depression and soon look to outside support to tide over it.... their children and husbands dont matter in the equation anymore....

In the modern day scenario it is never as straight forward... in the effort to appear to be forward a man openly declares that he will "permit" his wife to work.... but the catch is that as long as she is not taking away from his care time (which is the reason he married her) or doesnot demand that he change his lifestyle, place of business or profession..... so most often women who are young have to subserve their interest to that of the 'liberal" husbands... and some even justify it saying "at least he allows me to work" or even something so base as "his sucess is my success so why do I need to excel in anything"... smart thing to do but really is that what it comes down to? I know a person who when asked whether his wife works said "she used to work when I got married but soon after she became pregnant and after that I told her there was no point in her working".... fair point... but the shocking thing was that he was able to dictate that to her... I wonder what his thots would be if his daughter was dictated to in the same way? Would he like that? I presume he thinks his wife is better off not working... and to be honest he is an exceptional father and husband so I do believe his wife is very happy but this is just to highlight the concept.... and the restriction does not stop there.... most often when it is economically necessary for both the wife and the husband to work, tensions start in the relationship when the wife earns more than the husband....a man I considered to be extremely liberal was upset when his wife started earning almost as much as him.. and expressed to me his fear that his wife would not need him anymore.... the important thing to note is that his ego was suddenly shaken....

In all this I see a definite discrimination... and unfairness... it goes against the tenent of every religious teachings in the world including hinduism that one should always be fair in ones dealings with others...

Yet, why is it that moms everywhere tell their high achieving daughters to "adjust" and be "submissive" and to quit their jobs as soon as the husband is threatened.... is that fair? In whose books?