Cricket Is Like A Woman

Tony Deyal, Gleaner Writer



For my PAHO friend and colleague David Taylor, who was there that day with Mike Nathan Hugo Martinez from Cuba who was watching his first cricket match, and me. RIP David. The Almighty must have a cricket ground in Heaven - probably known as Lord's.

THOSE PEOPLE who, proud of their intestinal and testicular fortitude, cling steadfastly to the belief that it is not over until it's over, have ignored the strange lexicon, practices, customs, traditions and rituals of the game of cricket.

In cricket, even though it's over, and the officials in charge confirm that it is over, it is never really over since it is generally the start of another over which does not mean that when that over is over, the whole thing would really be over. Yet, it is not the same thing over and over again, although sometimes, like when the Indians batted slowly and painfully in Trinidad, or when Geoff Boycott is the commentator, it seems that way.

My American friend Jim, a great baseball fan, was befuddled. "Why are those guys in white? They look like ice cream salesmen," he commented. "That is the tradition," I responded. "Cricketers wear white for Test matches." "Why do you call it a Test match?" "Well," I said a trifle testily, my patience sorely tested, "that is the tradition. When two countries are playing each other, it is called a Test match."

"Why are those guys in white coats? Are they doctors?" he asked, his eyes lighting up at the prospect of a brawl. "I always thought that cricket was a sissy game." "No," I said. "Baseball is. It started from a game that girls play called rounders." He mused on this for a while. Holding started pacing out his run and began his long walk to his bowling marker. "Why is that guy leaving?" he asked. "The game hasn't even started." "He isn't leaving," I said. "He is just going to the point from which he starts his run-up to bowl." "Bowl?" he asked, again, puzzled. "I thought this was cricket. Are those three sticks the pins?"

I patiently explained that in cricket we call what he calls the 'pitcher' the 'bowler'. The latter, while it can also be a kind of hat, is not one, and in English a 'pitcher' is a large vessel or jug that is used to hold water or other refreshments. The sticks are the stumps and three stumps make a wicket. But unless there are bails on them, they're not really a wicket. "Hey! That's cool," he said in admiration. "It really isn't a sissy game if you need bails to play cricket. I suppose that's why there are so many policemen around the ground. And all the time I thought they were just loafing around." "That's right," I concurred. "It's a tough game. In addition to bails, you also need balls."

Holding delivered. The batsman, Boycott, played and missed. "What a pitch!" he exclaimed.

"That is not a pitch," I told him. "We call that a ball. The pitch is the bit of ground where the wickets are." He was mystified. "I thought that the ball was the red thing in his hand which he pitched at the guy with the funny bat." "Yes," I said. "But when he bowls it, we also say it is a good ball or bad ball depending on where it pitches." "But I thought you said the pitch is the ground where the wickets are?" I was stumped.

Shortstops

The slips went down for the next delivery. "Why do you need so many shortstops?" he asked.

"They're not shortstops," I explained. "They're slips." "Slips?" he asked, perplexed. "Yes," I said. "Cricket is like a woman. Centuries ago when cricket started, women dressed differently.

"They wore many garments. This is why we have first, second and third slip, cover, extra cover, mid on and long on. Because cricket is like a woman, it also explains why we have long leg and fine leg, square leg and short leg. It is also why it is a game of glorious uncertainties."

Holding bowled again. Again Boycott, nervously bobbing and weaving like a Trinidad pirogue being chased by a Venezuelan coastguard cutter, played and missed. "Three strikes," Jim said. "He's out." "No," I explained. "He's not out yet. To be out he must be caught, bowled, run out, hit wicket, stumped, or adjudged lbw." "What's that?" he asked. "That's leg before wicket. If the ball hits your leg when it would have hit the wicket, you're out." "What about if it hits some other part of your body, say like your head, is that hbw?" "No," I replied patiently. "It is still lbw."

"When a batter is hit in baseball, he walks," Jim said. "When a batsman is out in cricket, he walks," I said. At that point, Boycott walked and Jim, looking at him intently, said, "What a weird-looking guy." "That's what happens," I explained, "when you play too much cricket without a helmet." At that point the umpire said, "Over" and Jim got up to leave.

Tony Deyal was last seen collecting on a bet that he had seen snow fall in Trinidad. True! However, it was John Snow the English bowler and he fell diving to save a four during a Test match at the Oval.

May 28, 2011

jamaica-gleaner

Bahamas Blog International

Bahamas: Deputy Prime Minister Brent Symonette and the U.S. Embassy in Nassau Respond To WikiLeaks Report

DPM, U.S. Embassy Responds To WikiLeaks Report


By Sasha L. Lightbourne
jonesbahamas


Deputy Prime Minister Brent Symonette said he is not bothered by a leaked report from WikiLeaks, which detailed how the prime minister reportedly had no confidence in Mr. Symonette becoming the leader of the Free National Movement (FNM) back in 2003.

"I had no intention of running for leader of the party," Mr. Symonette told the Bahama Journal.

"I ran as deputy leader of the party and was elected. I never sought to get any advice from [Prime Minister Hubert] Ingraham on running for leader because I had no intentions of running for leader so I’m not the least bit interested in this story. I smiled at it because in 2002, I was the only Member of Parliament elected for Nassau for the Free National Movement."

The report, printed in a local daily yesterday, detailed how the prime minister was having a conversation with a U.S. embassy official and said that due to Mr. Symonette’s "personality and lack of appeal" he would not make a good leader.

In 2005, Symonette did not challenge for the leadership at the party’s convention.　

He went for deputy leader and won.　 He was made deputy prime minister when the party won at the polls in 2007.

Mr. Symonette also told the Journal that he does not feel like the report will have an effect on the relationship he has with the prime minister.

"I have an incredibly sound relationship with the prime minister," he said.

"He and I get on incredibly well. We both understand each other and on numerous times under his watch I have served as acting prime minister in his absence. He and I fully understand each other and each other’s contribution."

Minister Symonette said he has no problem working with the prime minister and the comments in the story will have "no bearing on the relationship."

In a statement released late yesterday by the United States Embassy, it said that the unauthorised release of classified material has the very real potential to harm individuals as well as efforts to advance objectives shared by the country and the US.　

"It is unfortunate that a decision has been made to release information from conversations that took place in confidence," the statement said.

"The U.S. Government engages in the drafting and transmission of cables as an efficient form of global communication.　 U.S. policy is made in Washington and field reporting is only one of the factors contributing to policy decisions."

The statement explained that communications between the field and Washington ensures that policymakers in Washington have a full understanding of all the factors at play when they make decisions.　

"By its very nature, field reporting to Washington is candid and often raw information.　 Analysis expressed in cables may also be out of context, or may be the opinion of the reporting officer- and those opinions may not be shared by policymakers," the release said.

May 24th, 2011


jonesbahamas

Bahamas Blog International

“The Bahamas, a giant oil province in the making”

Report reveals potential oil revenue for Bahamas


By STEWART MILLER
NG Business Reporter
thenassauguardian
stewart@nasguard.com


What financial benefit should Bahamians expect to reap if the sands beneath us hold the immense oil treasures some are projecting?

Under the current leasing arrangements, royalties of up to 25 percent of well-head revenue could translate into hundreds of billions over time. But as far as the government’s take goes, the terms of those licenses are quite favorable — for the licensees.

The projection for a small government take relative to other oil-producing countries is playing into the Bahamas Petroleum Company’s (BPC) efforts to attract investors to its Bahamian petroleum exploration project, and was featured in its April 2011 investor presentation, “The Bahamas, a giant oil province in the making”.

“Attractive fiscal terms: Low royalty; no corporation tax,” was the way it read in BPC’s investor presentation. One graph compared how licensee revenues in The Bahamas might stack up against revenue from a royalty-paying federal lease in the United States’ territorial waters in the Gulf of Mexico, based on $90 per barrel oil and 2007 variables. About 33 percent of revenues were allocated to costs in both territories, but with royalties calculated at peak production levels, the Bahamas government would take 25 percent in royalties compared to about 27 percent for the US fields. The US government cut of the lucrative revenue stream does not stop with royalties, however.

US Gulf of Mexico revenue to the licensee was reduced another 25 percent approximately in taxes. In the case of The Bahamas, that would go to the licensee’s net revenue, according to a chart presented. That chart was also a part of BPC’s competent person’s report prepared by the firm Moyes & Co. in 2008 and available on BPC’s website at http://www.bpcplc.com/our-assets/competent-persons-report.

Of the 16 countries used for another chart in BPC’s investor report, the “government take” for The Bahamas was clearly the lowest, and inversely the “free cash flow” projected for licensees in The Bahamas clearly the highest. That chart was based on $100 per barrel Brent oil pricing and more current data than the Moyes data. Oil producers like Canada, Iraq, Nigeria, Libya and closer to home the US and Guyana are included in that study.

While very encouraging to the prospective investor, it may highlight some of the challenges ahead for a country with no oil and a limited mineral resource production history. This nation’s experience with salt and aragonite production may prove poor preparation if the drilling BPC hopes will happen next year proves that world-class oil production potential here.

And the potential is massive.

John Bostwick II, attorney and author of “Bahamas 20/20 Vision” told Guardian Business on Friday that based on public statements made, BPC could be looking at $2.4 trillion worth of oil — his calculations based on $97.50 per barrel prices. He says the size of the potential oil traps may be missed by many.

“I don’t know if people really are focusing on what they are saying,” Bostwick said. “Supergiant traps, not giant — supergiant.”

Supergiant oil traps have 5 billion or more barrels of ultimately recoverable oil.

In its recent investor report, BPC’s leads and prospects showed about 9 billion barrels as the ‘most likely’ yield level from structures in the southern fold belt covered by four of its licenses. If the traps there had a 100 percent structural fill, a less likely scenario, they could hold 24.3 billion barrels. At $100 per barrel for oil, that’s $2.4 trillion across the life of those fields. If predictions by many economists for a continued increase in oil prices prove true, that total value escalates. And that value is only for the areas BPC has done some survey and other research work on — it has additional exploration license applications in the pipeline.

According to the Petroleum Act, a licensee would pay a royalty “at a rate of not less than twelve and one-half per centum of the selling value at the well-head of the petroleum won and saved from the licensed or leased area.”

Information available on BPC’s website details the rates further. The royalty rates are 12.5 percent for oil production up to 75,000 barrels of oil per day (bopd); 15 percent for 75,000 to 150,000; 17.5 percent for 150,000 to 250,000; 20 percent for 250,000 to 350,000; and 25 percent for any amount in excess of 350,000 bopd. Gas production is set at a 12.5 percent rate, and land is rented for $0.92 an acre per annum, though rentals are deductible from royalty payments.

Just for illustration, if 500 million barrels of oil are produced in a year under those license terms, with oil at $100, it would generate about $11.4 billion in annual royalties for government. That assumes production is averaged out across a 365-day year. That’s a lot of roads — or schools, universities, hospitals, court rooms, police equipment, training programs, etc. For comparison, the entire gross domestic product (GDP) of The Bahamas in 2007 was 7.2 billion, according to World Bank data.

But is it enough? Based on BPC’s investor presentation, it’s may be a good deal for their investors.

The issue is likely to grow in prominence for Bahamians as more research is done, and particularly if drilling results change the narrative from a story about possibilities to a story about how The Bahamas became an oil giant.

Despite the billions a government stands to make, when the cost-benefit analysis is done, the potential benefits at least seem less strong than they could be. At least not when compared to what many other nations are able to secure for their petroleum assets.

5/23/2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Resetting US-Caribbean relations

By Anton E. Edmunds:


The announcement of the departure of Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Dr Arturo Valenzuela has prompted quite a reaction in the Washington community that tracks hemispheric affairs. While some argue that Valenzuela was marginalized by others with direct access to the White House and the Secretary of State, others have weighed in on how badly academics do in similar roles. There is even an assessment that the US role of protector of democracy in the region was damaged under his watch.

While it may be unfair to blame this one individual for the collapse of relationships with some countries that have become emboldened in their ability to goad the United States, it is equally unfair to look to Valenzuela’s predecessor as an example of a more effective Assistant Secretary or for that matter, claim that the US regional relationship has suddenly been harmed. The reality is that the United States has long had regional relationship problems and has not had a consistent regional strategy in decades. A key fact that most chose to ignore is that relationships do not remain static, and the region itself for better or worse has changed.

Gone are the fledgling independent Caribbean states of a generation ago, and the new democracies of post conflict Latin America, both groups in the past clinging to a relationship with a regional hegemon freely dispensing aid and protection as these new nations weaned themselves from both colonial master and communist threat. Gone also is the belief by countries that the United States is a benevolent partner, willing to allow them to slowly evolve while accepting systems and standards consistent with its own. Instead what we see is a dysfunctional hodgepodge of struggling economies, each trying to eke out an existence in a merciless global marketplace while their leadership learn on the job the importance of good governance, an area where some would argue many are failing.

A perceived or real absence from the region by the US, while focusing elsewhere has served to exacerbate this weakening of ties and while opening of markets has done wonders for trade flows, it has proven not to be the panacea that Washington or the region once thought it would be. While by rote, Cuba has been the major focus of every incoming head of the Western Hemisphere at the State Department, it may not be any longer in reality the biggest problem. Instead it’s a combination of nuisance situations that serve to aggravate the United States vis-à-vis the Hemisphere.

There is Venezuela who some argue has managed to leverage its petroleum resources to gain friends and influence people; and one also sees a surging China providing aid to multiple nations and financing major a infrastructure and hospitality development. There is even an increased Middle-Eastern presence, with countries promising resources to a region some would argue is starved for attention and support, as in the case of Libya with the Eastern Caribbean.

The fact that the region has changed, with Caribbean and Latin American leaders becoming less wedded to their largest trading partner is not lost on observers. The hope is that with crime rampant, drugs flowing freely through the region and the threat of countries becoming controlled by criminal elements, the US and the region can find themselves once again together as partners sharing solutions to address important socio-economic problems.

This not unlike as in the days of the Cuba-Russia threat that preceded the Caribbean Basin Initiative and other similar initiatives. Recent initiatives such as Merida and the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative may well be attempts by the US to reengage.

Specific to the Caribbean, the Washington relationship appears to be one characterized more and more by feelings of both parties of dissatisfaction, distrust and disillusionment. The Caribbean unfortunately has long believed that a proud history of democracy should mean something more than it does, and that the tradition of a stable transition of government should be rewarded by thoughtful programs to advance this region’s development.

The reality is that be it with Europe or the United States, such a democratic history does not automatically translate into treats. As with the trade negotiations with the European Union, though called flawed by some, a level of maturity and creatively must be developed by the region if it is interested in working with its partners on co-authoring agendas and programs that are nuanced, thoughtful and comprehensive.

Caribbean leadership has also failed to effectively understand how Washington works and instead of cultivating multi-pronged alliances based on shared concerns such as security and mutually beneficial economic growth, instead depend on relationships of old and worse, looks to tenuous familial links between US government officials and countries of the region as a foundation upon which to advance policy discourse.

The great hope that a president of similar likeness and a State Department head who has travelled to the region in the past would usher in an era of re-engagement without real inputs from the Caribbean is a pipedream. Even relationships with entities such as the Congressional Black caucus have been badly managed and the Caribbean with few exceptions has failed to deliver its part of the equation when engaging groups like this by not submitting good ideas for consideration and worse, not engaging in the simplest of action of following up.

For the future, willingness by the Caribbean to develop and proffer solutions that take into consideration US policy direction is critical. That willingness must extend to listening to sometimes ill-conceived proposals but importantly, to understanding what drives them and to work to broker compromise where everyone wins.

While a knowledge gap and weakness at the senior levels at the US Departments of State, Commerce and other agencies in dealing with the Caribbean does not help and some may well characterize the placement of some who cover the region as tokenism, the Caribbean must itself step up to the plate by placing its best and brightest in the right space to rebuild a fractured relationship.

Some point out that a lack of attention by agencies such as USAID supporting on issues such as disaster mitigation and business continuity; the linking of key industries like tourism to agriculture; and the supporting of skills training in viable industry areas reflect changes in Washington and the centralization and politicization of this agency by the State Department.

Others argue that the bigger issue may simply be one of Caribbean irrelevance to the US or as stated before, the region’s inability to make itself heard. In any event, the lack of focus on the Caribbean is real and can be seen across the board.

In the case of the US Department of Commerce, it is perceived that the primary focus continues to be solely one of interest in building stronger alliances with Free Trade countries, with little acknowledgement of and unwillingness to invest in strengthening a robust trading relationship the Caribbean. Caribbean irrelevance to that entity may well be evidenced in the fact that never once in the three year history of that organization’s Americas Competitiveness Forum, has a Caribbean Head of State or corporate leader been featured.

In the case of others, including the Department of Energy, the use of proxies such as the OAS is becoming habit instead of direct engagement. One even sees the use of countries like Brazil and Canada as proxies for US engagement.

Unfortunately, for many in Washington there are some fundamentals that it is argued tell a different story. The lack of responsiveness from the region to overtures by the administration does allow many to question the seriousness of the Caribbean. As this is a problem also experienced by many an investor, the question as to whether Caribbean governments are incompetent or worse is not uncommon.

The now discounted Caribbean promise of an integrated marketplace, and regional standards in areas such as security has also served to dissuade many a career official from trying to advance a Caribbean agenda. Lack of action by the region on past initiatives does little to protect them from change by newcomers to Washington agency offices.

On the regional front, the Caribbean today is very much at the crossroads. The region lacks leadership at its crown jewel CARICOM, which begs the question as to which entity should major US agencies engage on regional programs. While the region itself reflects on the value of this body, one can only imagine what allies within agencies such as the State Department are thinking, as they have long had questions related to that organ’s ability to deliver. Gone too are the Caribbean statesmen of yore and lore who were able to command a certain amount of respect when it came to policy discussions with the US.

Compounding this is the re-emergence of regional and sub-regional rifts, often driven by personal and cultural inter-island animosities and protectionism that now consume significant time and resources.

When asked to comment about the future of the US-Caribbean relationship, there is expressed by many the hope is that the replacement for Dr Valenzuela will bring some broad regional experience and that Cuba and Venezuela, while they will continue to be key countries of focus will not be issues that derail the advancing a productive US-Caribbean relationship.

There is also hope that there will be real depth at the State Department and other administration agencies as it relates to the Caribbean, and one will see the Administration take a real stab at engaging Caribbean experts, maybe from the Diaspora community to fill out some of its ranks. Irrespective of the change in Washington, critical will be the ability of the region to do its part to help reset the relationship.

May 23, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

1,551 centenarians living in Cuba

By JOSÉ A. DE LA OSA:




CURRENTLY living in Cuba are 1,551 individuals over 100 years of age, ten more than in 2010, according to the February updating of a study of centenarians undertaken during the years 2004-2008.

This multi-institutional investigation coordinated by the National Department for the Elderly and the Ministry of Public Health’s Social Assistance Department, documents that the doyenne of those who have passed the landmark age of 100 is Juana de la Candelaria Rodríguez who lives in Campechuela, Granma and will celebrate her 126th birthday in June.

The greatest number of centenarians, who receive special attention in Cuba, live within the provinces of Havana, Santiago de Cuba, Holguín, Camagüey and Villa Clara - the latter being the province with the most elderly population in the country.

Individuals who live on beyond the 100 year mark are of great interest to researchers and the population in general. They have overcome environmental and health obstacles to reach the current limits of human life.

Life expectancy for those born in Cuba now stands at 78 years – 76 for men and 80.2 for women. Within the population of centenarians, there are 20% more women than men.

Havana. May 20, 2011

granma.cu

Bahamas Blog International

Gullible Jamaica

By Peter Espeut:




Various dictionaries define a gullible person as someone 'easily deceived or duped', 'easily taken in or tricked', 'easily persuaded to believe something', and 'easily deceived or cheated'. Do you think that, as a group, as a nation, we Jamaicans are more gullible than other people?

The question occurs to me today because one of the hottest topics around the country right now is whether today is the eve of Judgement Day, whether today is the day before the second coming of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Thankfully, most people interviewed on camera or on radio pooh-pooh the idea - not every Jamaican is that gullible; but the very fact that the subject excites so much interest suggests that many have lingering doubts.

Never mind that the source of the 'prophecy', talk-show host Harold Egbert Camping of Family Radio, based in Oakland, California, had previously predicted that the world would end on September 6, 1994. A civil engineer, Camping dresses up his 'prophecies' in mathematical calculations based on events mentioned in the Bible, which he treats as literal history; his explanation for the world not ending in 1994 is an error in his calculations, which he has now corrected. Anyone who says he is waiting to see whether Jesus will come tomorrow (more than on any other day) is admitting gullibility.

That many Jamaicans are gullible is beyond doubt. One only has to look at the thousands who deposited millions in Cash Plus and Olint expecting to double their money in less than a year. Several churches and Christian communities openly declared that "these schemes were sent by God to make us rich". The legitimacy of these Ponzi schemes was backed by 'evidence' from Bible prophecy and by utterances from charismatic local 'prophets' walking in the power of the Holy Spirit. The gullibility of so many Jamaicans is further revealed by the observation that these churches have not been discredited, that they have not emptied, and that these local 'prophets' are still prophesying.

one-of-a-kind churches

Jamaicans clearly want to believe in something. It is said we have more churches per square mile than any other country on earth. But most of these churches are one-of-a-kind; some guy comes along with a Bible in his hand claiming "the Bible says ...", and immediately he gains a following, and starts a church. His ideas have to be iconoclastic; they have to attack the traditional Christian denominations, showing them to be false, or steeped in paganism, or based on "human wisdom rather than on the Word of God". Usually, these religious luminaries claim some private revelation from God, which means that they have the power of the Spirit. Of course, they all differ in the message they get from the Spirit, except the part where the Spirit says people are supposed to contribute heavily to his (or her) church. The gullibility of Jamaicans is exposed by the fact that we have more churches per square mile than any other country on earth.

Ian Boyne's television programme 'Religious Hard Talk' is able to present new material week after week because of the almost endless religious permutations in Jamaica, all based on eccentric interpretations of the Bible. One would have thought that by now this parade of fundamentalists would have led his audience - and Boyne himself, who projects himself as well-read - to abandon this clearly flawed approach to the interpretation of Sacred Scripture. But gullible fundamentalist Jamaicans keep on searching for the new messiah who will lead them to a truth they can be comfortable with.

The gullibility of Jamaicans is probably best demonstrated in our approach to politics. So many of us continue to vote for political parties which, despite alternating in power for almost 70 years, have taken us deeper into debt, and have failed even to teach a majority of schoolchildren how to read properly. After having proven themselves to be corrupt and venal the last time around, without meaningful changes in personnel or philosophy, we somehow expect them to be different this time. The gangs of Gordon House need gullible Jamaicans for their survival, and through a substandard education system, they make sure our brains are not polluted with ideas about reason and logic.

And these same politicians have not failed to take advantage of the religious gullibility of Jamaicans by employing prophets or revival tables to manipulate us into supporting them.

God help us!

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and a Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

May 20, 2011

jamaica-gleaner

Bahamas Blog International

Dominica's Mary Eugenia Charles - A legacy for gender equality in the Caribbean

By Rebecca Theodore



As Caribbean governments continue their focus on the eradication of direct and indirect forms of discrimination against women through legislative reforms and the enactment of gender sensitive social policies, the achievements of Mary Eugenia Charles, grand dame of the Caribbean come to light.

While the accomplishments and contributions of Mary Eugenia Charles to Caribbean politics are widely discussed in the scholarly and popular literature of universities and political arenas; it is also sometimes argued with much speculation, controversy, admiration and hatred. However, Eugenia Charles confronts Dominica and the Caribbean with the picture of a woman attributed with the enigma of power in a patriarchal society. Her leadership challenges the traditional belief of the inferiority of women and the authority and supremacy of men in the male-dominated sphere of politics in the Caribbean.

According to the Journal of Caribbean International Relations, “Dame Mary Eugenia Charles championed the cause of gender equality long before it became commercially fashionable. As a feminist, Eugenia Charles evoked the burning issues of the rule of law, and the rights of the individual in society.” Yet, her relentless demands for equal rights, social justice, and the end of sex discrimination still does not guarantee women in Dominica and the Caribbean autonomy and freedom in the determination of their lives.

At a time when the human rights of women have been in many aspects undermined by ideals of masculine character and by historical disparities in the decision-making process, women in Dominica and the Caribbean should take strength in the strong symbol that has developed around the image of Dame Mary Eugenia Charles in the international arena.

Despite being president of the international federation of women lawyers, occupational segregation in gender-based wage gaps in the Caribbean still registers women as subjects of discriminatory stereotyping. Women in the Caribbean still lack promotional rights, free from job discrimination as social and legal institutions do not pledge equality in employment and earning and social and political participation.

It is against the drapery of such concepts that the distinctions between women as political leaders and gender inequality in the Caribbean are mirrored. The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) documents that “despite higher levels of education, Caribbean women continue to cluster at the lower sectors of society in terms employment, wages, and political representation, making them vulnerable to poverty and gender-based violence and harassment.”

The role of women in political leadership in the Caribbean questions the meaning of democracy and citizenship and awakens the need for a more inclusive style of governance and politics. The roles that men and women play in society are not biologically determined and it is time to stop using biology as a metaphor for interpreting reality or other socio-cultural traditions and beliefs about a woman's place in the family and society.

While critics advance the view that gender equality has been achieved within the Caribbean community and it is boys and men who are now disadvantaged; gender inequality in the Caribbean still constrains the lives of women and is still a significant challenge despite important law reform efforts. Women’s level of participation in senior political positions remains extremely limited and violates their fundamental human rights.

Against the backdrop of this view, the need for structural reform, redefinition of power and a re-negotiation of our understanding of the practice of leadership becomes an urgent plea. The need to increase women's participation in politics and decision making is a valid goal especially at a time when attempts of developing Caribbean nationhood and identity are smothered by dependence on male constructs and standards. The Commission on the Status of Women further affirms that “women form at least half of the electorate in most Caribbean states, yet they continue to be underrepresented as candidates for public office.”

The male dominated social system in the Caribbean has excluded and been hostile to female participation in the political arena. According to the ECLAC study, female participation in the politics of the Caribbean is about 20 percent overall. In the English-speaking Caribbean, the average participation of women in Parliament averages 13.5 percent, varying from 7 to 25 percent. This means that recognition of the importance of women in reconstruction and the role and discipline of political parties in the Caribbean needs to be addressed because women's empowerment in the Caribbean is vital to sustainable development and the realization of human rights for all.

If reducing gender inequality is essential to increasing women's economic security, defeating poverty and fostering sustainable development and growth, then Caribbean governments should show greater efforts in advocating for legislation to advance gender equality, to eliminate all forms of discrimination based on sex, and to prevent gender-based violence and increase. The education system and the media should also stop upholding the patriarchal orientation of society as well as the epitomes of male supremacy.

Dame Mary Eugenia Charles will forever remain a strong symbol for years to come as a woman who challenged culture, structures of oppression, and gender inequality in the Caribbean. Her legacy of equality and accelerating human rights for women provide a firmer foundation for social and economic development and security and new approaches to leadership in Dominica and the Caribbean.

May 19, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International