In Australia, Landy is perhaps most famously remembered for his performance in the 1500 metres final at the 1956 Australian National Championships prior to the Melbourne 1956 Olympic Games.

In the race, Landy stopped and doubled backed to check on fellow runner Ron Clarke after another runner clipped Clarke’s heel, causing him to fall early in the third lap of the race. Clarke, the then-junior 1500 metre world champion, who had been leading the race, got back to his feet and started running again; Landy followed. Incredibly, in the final two laps Landy made up a large deficit to win the race, something considered one of the greatest moments in Australian sporting history.

Said the National Centre for History and Education in Australia, “It was a spontaneous gesture of sportsmanship and it has never been forgotten.”  A bronze sculpture of the moment when Landy helps Clarke to his feet is situated on the lawns adjacent to Olympic Park on Olympic Boulevard, Melbourne.

Australian champion runner John Landy and one-mile world-record holder, now Governor of Victoria, was involved in a near identical incident. However, the stakes were somewhat higher.

Thousands were packed into the stands where they hoped to witness Landy again break the previously elusive “four-minute-mile” and set another benchmark performance. Huge expectation preceded the event, with all of the pressure and focus on Landy.

Entering the third lap of four, the field was beginning to pick up the pace—a world record pace. However, hope was extinguished when Ron Clarke was accidentally tripped by the pack and fell. As Landy leapt over him, his spike caught Clarke and injured him.

It was a moment witnessed by well-known Australian Dr Gordon Moyes, who recalls it as if it “happened yesterday.”

“Landy . . . did the most incredibly stupid, beautiful, foolish, gentlemanly act I have ever seen,” says Moyes. “He stopped, ran back to the fallen young Ron Clarke and helped him up to his feet, brushed cinders from knees, and checking his bloodied shoulder said, ‘Sorry.”

Harry Gordon, a journalist for Melbourne’s Sun, also found the moment incredible and wrote on the day of Landy’s courageous action, saying, “Yours was the classic sporting gesture. It was a senseless piece of chivalry, but it will be remembered as one of the finest actions in the history of sport.

“In a nutshell, you sacrificed your chance of a world record to go to the aid of a fallen rival. And in pulling up, trotting back to Ron Clarke, muttering ‘Sorry’ and deciding to chase the field you achieved much more than any world record.”

For those unfamiliar with the events of the day, Landy, upon helping Clarke to his feet, then ran down the field who were some 30 metres ahead and won the race, just six seconds outside his world record. Experts are in no doubt that Landy was in a form that would have broken his own record that day but for the vital seconds lost in helping Clarke.

“I stopped involuntarily,” Landy said later, “and for a moment I thought, I’ve been disqualified. Then I thought, No, I’m still in the race. It looked impossible, with the rest of the field some 30 yards ahead, but I thought I’d better have a go. I was in a blind panic, and I didn’t think about times or tactics. I just ran.”2

John Landy etched a more permanent record into history that day, but for a rather different and more elevated reason.

And while Landy may be justifiably renowned for his selfless act that day, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that at the time he was an incredible athlete, one of the fastest milers, only bettered by his British nemesis, Roger Bannister.

Bannister beat him in the 1954 Vancouver Commonwealth Games in another amazing story—“the backward glance”—two years earlier. In fact, it was just 46 days after Bannister had cracked the seemingly impossible four-minute mile in the “race of the century” at Oxford University, on May 6, 1954, that Landy bettered him in world record time.

Two years later, at the colourful opening ceremony of the Melbourne Olympics, on November 22, 1956, Landy shared the limelight with Ron Clarke, who carried the Olympic flame into the arena, where Landy read the Olympic oath.

Landy won numerous races and titles in his athletics career, giving him deserved legendary status among track athletes, something now overshadowed by that event, but something we shouldn’t forget. In 1955, he was awarded the MBE for services to sport, but his career off the track is just as distinguished and includes several notable and inspirational achievements.

Born in Melbourne in 1930, Landy, now aged 75, can look back on his life away from athletics and still be proud of his accomplishments. He carried his prowess on the track to his commitment in serving the community.

Apart from his love for athletics and competition, he has a passion for Australia’s natural beauty and its conservation and restoration. Landy is a foundation member of the Land Conservation Council, in which he played a major role in increasing Victoria’s National Parks from yesterday’s minimal 200,000 hectares to more than one million today. He has also authored two books themed around nature, one of which won the C J Dennis Award.

He has served his community, state and country at a high level, chairing numerous committees, including Clean Up Australia, Athletics International, and the Australia Day and the Greening Australia Committees (to name but a few). All these accomplishments add to a significant life, one shared with his wife, Lynne, and two children, Matthew and Alison.

Evidently John Landy’s accomplishments, commitment and profile provided the essential attributes and experience necessary to become the 25th governor of Victoria, which he took up on New Year’s Day, 2001. It’s fitting that John Landy, AC, MBE, Governor of Victoria, stand with royalty for the opening of the Commonwealth Games in Melbourne.

John Landy’s distinguished career and service to the community is emphasised by the meaning behind the maxim, “One’s true character is revealed in the competitive sporting arena.” Landy’s true character has certainly been convincingly demonstrated not only on the track but also through his devoted and loyal service to Australia.

As an amateur sportsperson, and professionally as leader of children, I’m grateful for the inspiration John Landy gives me and those I serve. His life and deeds should inspire us all, running our own race in life. The lesson of life that Landy taught us is that we shouldn’t be so concerned with the position in which we finish, nor how we compare with others, but in how we run our race—how well we serve others in our community, our country and, especially, how we help those who fall.

Pip Cornall Resources for helping boys become good men – The story of the Two Wolves – Several Versions

Frank Bolella, success coach to NFL, Major League Baseball and Fortune 500 executives Tells story of The Two Wolves. It’s about Focus and attraction.

http://revver.com/video/752760/focus-story-of-two-wolves/

The Story of Two Wolves

A Grandfather from the Cherokee Nation was talking with his grandson.

“A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy.

“It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.”

“One wolf is evil and ugly: He is anger, envy, war, greed, self-pity, sorrow, regret, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, selfishness and arrogance.”

“The other wolf is beautiful and good: He is friendly, joyful, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, justice, fairness, empathy, generosity, true, compassion, gratitude, and deep VISION.”

“This same fight is going on inside you, and inside every other human as well.”

The grandson paused in deep reflection because of what his grandfather had just said.

Then he finally asked: “Grandfather, which wolf will win?”

The elder Cherokee replied, “The wolf that you feed.”

Another Version a Great Resource from www.teachertube.com

http://www.teachertube.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=111601&title=The_Story_of_Two_Wolves

The Story of the Two Wolves….

http://www.nativenotion.com/2008/03/story-of-two-wolves.html

Native American stories –

A grandfather and grandson were out hunting one early morning, and they came upon a ridge on the mountain they were walking on…. over the ridge was a large clearing below, where at a distance, they could see two wolves – a black one, and a white one – fighting furiously.

They watched as the wolves attacked each other in battle. The grandfather narrowed his eyes, and said slowly, “Ah, yes…. this is the way with all of us Human Beings, within our hearts, each and every day.”

The grandson asked, “What do you mean, grandfather?”, to which the old one replied;

“Always in our hearts, every day, is a struggling battle, like those two wolves down there…. one is the wolf in us who wishes to do bad things, and the other is the wolf who wishes to do good and honourable things.”

The grandson listened more intently now, with a look of slight recognition, and deep concern. The grandfather continued….

“Sometimes, the bad one seems to win…. and other times, the good one seems to take a stronger lead. When we see honourable people who do great deeds, and make great sacrifices for the good of others, we know that the good wolf’s spirit is strong within his heart, and is the winning spirit in that Human Being. Each good and honourable deed he does gives this spirit more power within him. This in turn, empowers the Human Being to be more honourable.”

The boy smiled, as the grandfather continued to speak….

“But when we see those people who turn to badness, and hatred, doing terrible and dishonourable things, we can know that the bad wolf within him is strong – and each bad and wrongful deed he does, gives the bad wolf more power over him, until it has won, and has utterly consumed him.”

The young one’s face fell with a look of slight, shuddering inner fear.

So the boy thought long and hard on these things, as he continued to watch the wolves battling below. They both battled fiercely, giving no quarter – neither one backing down. Seeing this, he looked within himself, and saw the truth of his wise grandfather’s words, and it made him very concerned for himself with a great, deep fear.

“But grandfather,” said the boy, “How will I know which wolf will win within me??”

The grandfather smiled, looked at him with an understanding eye, and after a moment, told him,

” ….the one you FEED the MOST.”

eagle story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f15ckyek5Yk

The following links are to people I trained with or worked with in my peace promotion and violence prevention/masculinity work. They are globally reconised as top people in their field.

Jackson Katz “Tough Guise”

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=3exzMPT4nGI

While the social construction of femininity has been widely examined, the dominant role of masculinity has until recently remained largely invisible. Tough Guise is the first educational video geared toward college and high school students to systematically examine the relationship between pop-cultural imagery and the social construction of masculine identities in the U.S. at the dawn of the 21st century.

In this innovative and wide-ranging analysis, Jackson Katz argues that widespread violence in American society, including the tragic school shootings in Littleton, Colorado, Jonesboro, Arkansas, and elsewhere, needs to be understood as part of an ongoing crisis in masculinity.

This exciting new media literacy tool– utilizing racially diverse subject matter and examples– will enlighten and provoke students (both males and females) to evaluate their own participation in the culture of contemporary masculinity.

Jackson Katz “Tough Guise” Opening Montage

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmy2IHYq_y8&feature=related

Music by Pearl Jam

Song: “Better Man”

Jackson Katz ‘Wrestling with Manhood’

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ikDXcfzA848&feature=related

George Gerbner – The Killing Screens

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=2PHxTr-59hE&feature=related

Addressing specifically the question of violence and the media, The Killing Screens urges us to think about the effects of the media in new and complex ways. In contrast to the relatively simplistic behaviourist model that media violence causes real-world violence, Gerbner encourages us to think about the psychological, political, social and developmental impacts of growing up and living within a cultural environment of pervasive, ritualized violent images.

Kai Brand Jacobsen – The Roots of Violence http://www.bigpicture.tv/videos/watch/14bfa6bb1

Brand-Jacobsen talks about how violence is built in to the fabric of our present social, economic and political systems. He talks about three levels of violence that pervade society – direct violence, structural violence and cultural violence. He explains how structural and cultural violence manifest themselves in numerous subtle ways and gives examples of both cases. He goes on to suggest how together they often lead to acts of direct violence such as war and terrorism.

Johan Galtung – (Often called the father of world peace studies)

http://www.bigpicture.tv/videos/watch/6c4b761a2

Professor Galtung lists his chief concerns in the world today.. It starts with the dangers posed by ‘global hyper-capitalism’ and the ‘structural violence’ it inflicts on people. He expresses profound concern for the developing relationship between Christians and Muslims, pointing out that the Christian dominated European Union could soon face an Islamic Union “stretching from Casablanca to Mindanao.” He stresses that this must be seen as an opportunity for a cooperative partnership, rather than a threat. Finally, Galtung highlights the encircling of Russia, China and India by American bases. This poses a major threat to stability and reflects the ambitions and military might of the United States. Galtung lists violence against women as a global problem with huge and lasting consequences.

Misogyny in Media and Culture – Trailer

A film by Thomas Keith, PH.D – http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=lEd2ZGLsUew

Despite the achievements of the women’s movement over the past four decades, misogyny remains a persistent force in American culture. In this important documentary, Thomas Keith, professor of philosophy at California State University-Long Beach, looks specifically at misogyny and sexism in mainstream American media, exploring how negative definitions of femininity and hateful attitudes toward women get constructed and perpetuated at the very heart of our popular culture.

The film tracks the destructive dynamics of misogyny across a broad and disturbing range of media phenomena: including the hyper-sexualization of commercial products aimed at girls, the explosion of violence in video games aimed at boys, the near-hysterical sexist rants of hip-hop artists and talk radio shock jocks, and the harsh, patronizing caricatures of femininity and feminism that reverberate throughout the mainstream of American popular culture.

Along the way, Generation M forces us to confront the dangerous real-life consequences of misogyny in all its forms – making a compelling case that when we devalue more than half the population based on gender, we harm boys and men as well as women and girls.

Featuring interviews with gender violence prevention educators Byron Hurt, Jackson Katz, and Jean Kilbourne.

Pip Cornall and Joe Ehrmann

The following article presents the views of Coach Joe Ehrmann

Joe, like myself, believes that sport, for many boys, can be a community where true male values are taught.

Joe Ehrmann –

How sport brings out the worst in boys and men, and what to do about it.

Sport often promotes destructive notions of masculinity, perverting whatever virtues the experience might offer. But sport—especially when assisted by conscious and loving coaches can be a powerful nation-wide platform from which to launch notions of a healthy masculinity.

The greatest myth in Australia or America is that sports builds character. It won’t do that unless a coach teaches it and it’s intentional. This is not to blame coaches—they are under incredible pressure—we’ve reduced sports to winning at all costs, at every level. Most studies show that the longer a child is successful at sports, the greater the ethical corners he’ll start cutting

Sport is actually an incredible way to teach character, but it’s got nothing to do with role models.

The three myths of masculinity: that men need to possess athletic ability, that they need to have sexual conquests, and that they have to have economic success. Athletes have all three of those lies embedded within their lives. As a society, we have to start moving against that, because none of those myths has anything to do with masculinity or creating a good person.

There’s probably not another venue in Australia or America where we can address our deepest social problems. Sport is really the main religion of both countries. It engages more individuals, families, and communities than any cultural institution we have. And the high priest of that religion is the coach. The football codes really should be viewed as a tool for teaching. The problem is we’ve lost sight of sports as a way to teach. Sports should be the last class of the day. If it’s not an educational activity, what good is it? Why do schools even have sports teams? Why should taxpayers be funding it?

The biggest predictor of a child’s success is self-esteem. You can’t teach kids in this age without teaching about racism, relationships, and other things that make them aware of how people have treated each other, or how they should treat each other.

For me, the success you have in being a man or woman comes down to two things: Can you love and be loved? It’s about building relationships. Coaches have an amazing amount of power to teach that because every boy who plays wants to please that coach. Kids are tremendous. They want someone to look them in the eye and tell them they have value. If I realize that I have that kind of platform, I can speak to them about important values and about why many of the cultural messages they receive are wrong.

During practices and before games, we teach them about poverty, racism, gender inequality, violence. Two of our primary topics are relationships and how to become a good man. How do you define that? We teach them the three lies of masculinity, how to be empathetic and gentle. During Homecoming Week, we’ll teach our guys about how to date a girl. We’ll say: ‘That girl you’re dating isn’t there to be disrespected or used by you. She’s her parents’ prized possession. Treat her like you would your mother or your sister.’ I’ll teach kids about the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision that said black men weren’t constitutionally protected, how racism affects poverty. There’s no reason why coaches across the country can’t do something similar for young people.

I’d like to see coaches be required to develop and turn in lesson plans, like teachers do. They would have to tell administrators what lessons they’ll be teaching, including ones about morality, citizenship, and relationships. When I give seminars for coaches, I have them write down on an index card why they’re a coach, why they coach the way they do, and what they want to get out of it, among other things. I try to get them to locate their core values and think about ways to relate them to their kids. What I’ve learned is that with coaches and any other adult, they can convey those values if they’ve made sense of their own lives—created a meaningful narrative from it. My wife— who is a psychotherapist —and I call it “mindsight.” It’s the capacity to understand yourself and others. It’s not real complicated.

But sports ought to make you racism-proof. I know I became much more aware of social ills because I got to meet and work closely with people from a wide range of backgrounds. Even if that were all I got out of sports, it would have made it well worth it.

Despite the notion that we inherited the ‘lucky country’ Australians today are scared! They are afraid of their children! More than 70% have stated this. I’ve recently met some young university students from Lismore who won’t go out at night because of the youth violence.

Communities around this beautiful country are reeling from the physical, financial and social costs of youth violence. Are there solutions that work?

When I worked with youth in America in the 90’s I feared the school violence evident there would spread to Auustralia

Today we learned of a fatal stabbing of a 12 year old in a Brisbane Catholic school. Late last year a lad died in a school fight in the peaceful rural town of Mullumbimby, in northern NSW.

We’ve had the cricket bat bashing murder on the beach  in Western Australia, the Cronulla Race Riots and glassing becoming all too comonplace.

The community wants solutions but what are they we all ask?

We need to look to countries that have succesfully tackled the problem and not re-invent the wheel and we need to do it fast.

Read More…

Race Riots in Australia; Naming the Obvious

It is staring us in the face, it’s a root cause behind the beach violence in Sydney, yet it remains invisible to most. In naming the obvious we make visible the fact that the perpetrators in the rioting were men, indicating that the underlying issue is a gender issue.

Here is the paradox; while it is true that most men are not violent it is also true that most violence in the world is perpetrated by men. The good news is that masculinity (not maleness) can be changed because it is not innately biological. In other words masculinities are constructed; they vary from culture to culture and change throughout history. In today’s society the mass media is a primary force in constructing masculine values and ideals. It is useful to understand the origins of unhealthy male norms in order to make positive changes.

Historian Rianne Eisler, coined the terms dominator and partnership models to describe where societies stood in their evolutionary process. Many modern societies, irrespective of wealth, as measured by GDP, still follow the dominator system. For example some Middle Eastern countries are wealthy but women are still not allowed to vote or drive, women still remain subservient to men and the dominant religion.

The US, the often touted democratic role model, shares bottom place with Mexico and Russia in wealth sharing, suffers high rates of violence, has the largest prison population in the world, low rates of women in government and regularly ignores global democracy. Such behaviors illustrate how the US manifests many aspects of domination cultures. Other democracies, such as Scandinavia and some European countries are closer to the partnership ideals according to UN studies showing the quality of life is better there than other western countries.

Although democracy is based on the partnership model most of the world’s democracies contain lingering elements of the old dominator paradigm. However Eisler reminds us that the mix of the domination model and high technology—the nuclear, biological, and chemical technologies that threaten us and our natural habitat with irremediable harm—is not sustainable in the long term. Today as we grapple with wars, overpopulation, global warming and depletion of oil supplies the need for partnership methodology is more critical than ever.

To maintain dominator style societies, boys must be systematically socialized for domination and, therefore, for violence. Male violence has to be idealized – as seen in much of our normative literature and media celebrating violent “heroes.” Indeed, in these societies violent behavior patterns are systematically taught to males from early childhood through toys like swords, guns, and violent video games, while only girls are systematically socialized for nurturing, compassion, and caring. Indeed

The men on both sides of the recent violence at Sydney beaches obviously subscribe to the old male paradigm which lingers, in part, due to the mixed messages given by society. Most of us play at least some role, albeit unintentionally, in supporting these hegemonic male values. For example while we allow our youth to witness high levels of TV violence in which brute force is glorified, while we sanction sexist attitudes in our football codes, and other male cultures, while we go to war against innocent Iraqis instead of using non-violent means, while we tolerant divisive and adversarial language use in the press, media, schools and communities, while we destroy the environment for future generations so we can have more possessions, we are supporting the dominator model, a model which glorifies the strong man at the top.

Restorative Justice

The New Hope for Revitalizing Community

By Pip Cornall

We live in an amazing time of unprecedented growth in human consciousness. The recent women’s movement has been the catalyst for men—who are still overwhelmingly the decision makers—to embrace new beliefs and behaviors enabling a shift from dominator to partnership models of governance and community, true partnerships with women, with children, and with nature.

The relationship between men and women is the foundation of society. As relationships become more egalitarian, restoring and revitalizing our sense of self and increasing our ability to deeply value each other, we can turn our attention towards restoring and revitalizing communities as well.

Some countries are already much more advanced in this process and not coincidentally the UN suggests they are the best places to live. As these more progressive democracies embrace partnership principles, their justice systems are undergoing significant changes. Restorative Justice (RJ) is now a rapidly growing worldwide pheno-menon. Based on indigenous justice practices it has been used with success for thousands of years to resolve conflicts within tribal communities.

The rising global spiritual movement, in which people realize that we are all connected to every living person and thing, is also driving the search for compassionate justice methods. As a mediator I regularly witness the success of these heart based methods of dealing with conflict and I am delighted by their rapid worldwide adoption.

The restorative approach is going in the right direction and recent reports have shown its effectiveness in reducing violence worldwide.

In an address to the Foreign Policy Association in New York last December, Gareth Evans, President of International Crisis Group, pointed to a reduction in wars taking place:

“Contrary to conventional wisdom, and perhaps all our intuitions, there has been a very significant trend decline—after a high point in the late 1980s and very early 1990s—in the number of wars taking place, both between and within states, in the number of genocidal and other mass atrocities, and the number of people dying violent deaths as a result of them. There are now 40 percent fewer conflicts taking place than there were in 1992. In the case of serious conflicts (defined as those with 1000 or more battle deaths in a year) and mass killings there has been an 80 per cent decline since the early ‘90s, and an even more striking decrease in the number of battle deaths.”

Andrew Mack from the Human Security Centre in Canada, says, “The best explanation is the one that stares us in the face, even if a great many don’t want to acknowledge it: the huge upsurge in activity in conflict prevention, conflict management, and post-conflict peace building activity that has occurred over the last fifteen years, with most of this being spearheaded by the much maligned UN.”

Restorative Justice, defined as a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused or revealed by criminal behavior, has a broader meaning encompassing a growing social movement to institutionalize peaceful approaches to harm, problem-solving and violations of legal and human rights. These include international peacemaking tribunals such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa to innovations within our criminal justice system, schools, social services and communities.

Retributive justice systems, where crime is seen as a violation of the state, are defined by lawbreaking and guilt. Retributive Justice asserts that a legitimate moral response to crime is a proportionate punishment, irrespective of whether this will achieve any positive social consequences. Some liken Restorative Justice to a “horse whisperer” approach to justice and community, while describing re-tributive justice as a “horse breaking” approach.

Retributive and Restorative values and behaviors arise from dominator and partnership systems respectively, which determine how families, communities and nations operate. They also determine our approach to war, inter-national policies and justice.

Norwegian Johan Galtung, international mediator and founder of peace studies (International Peace Center, http://www.transcend.org), uses two frameworks that he calls “security discourse” and the “peace discourse” in his peace theory. These are usually applied to international conflict but are valid for national applications as well. I believe both frameworks are born from retributive and restorative approaches rooted in the emotions of fear (security) or compassion (peace). Both address the same concern but are almost diametrically opposed.

A security approach works when evil/strong parties are weakened through defeat or deterrence by the “chosen ones,” and/or converted to become good.

The peace discourse approach pre-supposes that an acceptable and sustainable outcome is possible—one that will satisfy all parties. As a result, people and nations are not divided into “good” or “bad” or “chosen” or “evil.” Instead there is a perceived potential for a global community, especially if the root causes of violence are addressed—including both structural and cultural violence. (A good example is the Bush “Axis of Evil” speech.)

The security approach/retributive methods are more commonly used in dominator-oriented governments and conversely restorative/peace approaches occur more in partnership-oriented democracies.

Today many progressive democracies are adopting or experimenting with restorative justice and an examination of the failure of many retributive systems will explain why this trend exists.

Historically we have viewed crime through a retributive or punishment based lens. The current “criminal justice” process which uses that lens fails to meet many of the needs of either victim or offender. The process neglects victims while both failing to hold offenders accountable and failing to deter crime.

This focus on proportionate punishment, irrespective of whether it will achieve positive social consequences, is indicative of the influence of a retributive/dominator philosophy.

According to the Human Rights Watch report last December written by US program director Jamie Fellner, a record 2.2 million are in prison or jail in the US, an increase of 2.7 percent over 2005. The United States currently incarcerates 1.4 million inmates—more people than any other country in the world, even more than China, which has a population four times that of the US.

Despite such incarceration levels, US crime rates remain much higher than other industrialized nations. Families and communities are shattered and individuals are isolated by this system. Re-integration into the community and the work force is severely compromised.

Marshal Rosenberg, the founder of Nonviolent Communication (www.cnvc.org), says “The concept of ‘deserve’ is at the basis of retributive justice. The way you control people, given that our nature is evil and selfish, is through a system of justice in which people who behave in a good manner get rewarded, while those who are evil are made to suffer. In order to see such a system as fair, one has to believe that both sides deserve what they get.”

Riane Eisler of the Center for Partnership (www.partnershipway.org) and author of The Chalice and the Blade, explains:

“Unlike earlier classifications, the domination and partnership models take into account the central importance of the primary human relations—the formative childhood relationships and the relations between the male and female halves of humanity—in molding our attitudes and behaviors.

“When children experience violence from parents or others in their families, or observe violence against their mothers within their own families, they learn it’s acceptable to use force to impose one’s will on others.

“Dominator societies are all characterized by top-down rankings in the family and state or tribe maintained through physical, psychological, and economic control; the rigid ranking of the male half of humanity over the female half; and a high degree of culturally accepted abuse and violence—from child and wife-beating to chronic warfare. These societies use punitive justice systems to support the dominators.”
Riane Eisler continues, “The partnership model has a different core configuration: a democratic and egalitarian structure in both the family and the state or tribe; equal partnership between women and men; and a low degree of built-in violence because force is not needed to maintain rigid rankings of domination.

“Cultures with this configuration can be tribal, such as the Teduray of the Philippines; agrarian, as are the Minagkabau of East Sumatra; or industrial and postindustrial, like Sweden, Norway, and Finland.

“Without judging these societies as ‘ideal’ or not, their beliefs and institutions can be said to support respect for human rights in families and the family of nations. The democratic Nordic nations, where there aren’t huge gaps between haves and have-nots, have laws prohibiting physical punishment of children. They also host a strong men’s movement disentangling ‘masculinity’ from domination and violence.

“Women play important leadership roles too, consti-tuting approximately 40 percent of the legislatures. Accordingly, stereotypically feminine traits and activities such as nurturance, nonviolence, and care giving are considered appropriate for men as well as women.

“The people of these societies are supported by fiscal policies such as funding for universal health care, elder care, childcare allowances, paid parental leave, peace stu-dies, and environmental protection. And these nations are regularly at the top of the UN national quality-of-life charts; deeming them the best places in the world to live.”

Women’s participation in the legislature is a primary indicator of a country’s social health. The US, with only 14% women in government positions, ranks 59th in the world. Scandinavian and some European countries top the survey with women’s legislative participation rates ranging between 36-45%.

New Zealand was the first country to give women the vote (1893), followed by Australia in 1901. Perhaps it is no accident that Youth Justice Conferencing, central to many restorative justice processes, began in these countries and is now being exported to other parts of the world.

Retributive justice systems and their laws have been largely created by men (imbued with a male dominant paradigm) with very little input from women until more recent times. The death penalty, still upheld in some US states, is seen as abhorrent in most European democracies. In some Middle Eastern countries where women’s participation is low (some don’t yet have the right to vote), punishments tend to be severe.

Retribution is a philosophy, a belief system that we have all been raised with, reinforced by religion and cultural beliefs. Its impacts go far beyond the justice system and include politics, media, sport, marriage, parenting, commerce and even personal psychology. Those raised in punitive systems tend to punish themselves, their spouses and families, their workmates and even their friends when certain (often ill-defined) lines are crossed.

One cannot underestimate the impact of being raised within the retributive model. Tragically, retribution and punishment stifles truth. Many of us have told lies because we were afraid being punished if we told the truth. As a society long on punishment and short on forgiveness, we tend to be merciless on our political leaders. Perhaps in this way we all play a role in the lack of transparency and truth telling that we are clamoring for. In such critical times of global climate change, commercial inequity and violence in all its forms, truth telling is of the utmost importance.

There is a profound link between a country steeped in retribution and the way it conducts international affairs. When the population has been educated in retributive justice, there is nothing they want more than to see someone suffer (revenge).

I was on the beach in Australia when the September 11 attacks occurred. Fearing a violent response from the US, I wished that I could mediate between Osama Bin Laden and George Bush. Having witnessed so many successful mediations I believed it possible in international conflicts—I still do. Many lives would have been saved with a mediated solution.

I knew that if we’d been listening to the messages coming to us from the Arab world for many years we might have chosen a different approach. The pain, ex-pressed by the Arabs had never been responded to with empathy or understanding by the West.

Rosenberg reminds us that when we don’t hear people’s pain, it keeps coming out in ways that make empathy even harder.

Riane Eisler says, “A culture steeped in domestic violence, bullying, and ruthless competition is bound to choose aggressive means to solve international disputes. Creating peace abroad requires being more peaceful at home in our own families, schools, and cities.”

Because the dominator model relies on obedience to a strong state, the premise of crime as lawbreaking results in an emphasis on the act of breaking a defined rule, rather than the harm done or the experiences of those affected. Under this system, the victim is the state and “crime is an offence against the state,” not against the individual. Thus the real victims, those who suffered the actual harm, are left out of the decision making process. They are only called upon to be witnesses or secondary players in the process. The singular focus on legal guilt, not moral, social, or even factual guilt, further isolates victims.

The cumulative effect of retributive justice is that it isolates both the victim and the offender from their personal experiences. For offenders, there is potentially a greater reward for denying than accepting responsibility. For victims, their limited role in the process makes empowerment difficult. Because the community has little or no say in the outcome, members of the community tend to feel entirely alienated and helpless. The result of retributive justice is a system where few are satisfied with the outcome and many are rendered worse off.

It seems the only winners in retributive justice are the lawyers and the booming prison industry.

Restorative justice views crime as a violation of people and relationships, or as a conflict within the community, creating an obligation for offenders to make things right. In other words, in a restorative justice model, crime is primarily a conflict between individuals resulting in injuries to victims, communities, and the offenders them-selves; only secondarily is it Law Breaking. Therefore Restorative Justice involves the victim, the offender, and the community in a search for solutions which promote repair, reconciliation, and reassurance.

It is important that Restorative Justice not be confused with the “permissive approach,” known for its low control and high support. This method also called “rehabilitative” tends to prevent people from experiencing the consequences of their wrongdoing, thus requiring low accountability.

In contrast the restorative approach has high levels of control and support—it confronts and disapproves of wrongdoing while affirming the intrinsic worth of the offender. The victim’s needs are also better met in this process, because it is based around a concept of collaborative problem-solving.

Although methods and formats vary Restorative Justice provides an opportunity for those who have been most affected by an incident to come together to:

• Describe how they were affected.
• Share their feelings.
• Develop a plan to repair the harm done and/or prevent a reoccurrence.

In this way the restorative approach is re-integrative—allowing the offender to make amends and shed the offender label—and is best accomplished through various cooperative processes that include all stakeholders. Primary stakeholders include victims and offenders because they are the most directly affected. Others with a significant emotional connection to victim or offender such as parents, spouses, siblings, friends, teachers or co-workers are also directly affected. They constitute the victims’ and offenders’ communities of care.

Restorative Justice, which requires offenders to take responsibility for their wrongdoing and to meet the needs of affected victims and communities, represents a true restoration of victims, offenders, and the affected community.

If the overarching aim of the criminal justice process is to reconcile parties while repairing the injuries caused by the crime, then the criminal justice process should facilitate active participation by victims, offenders and their communities. It should not be dominated by the government to the exclusion of others.

The collaborative processes, programs and outcomes typically identified with restorative justice include:

• Victim offender mediations and programs.
• Conferencing—such as Youth Justice Conferencing in Australia and New Zealand.
• Circles—used for community conflicts.
• Victim assistance.
• Ex-offender assistance.
• Restitution
• Community service.

I first encountered Restorative Justice in the Victim Offender programs at Mediation Works in Medford, Oregon in the 90’s; and then with the Department of Juvenile Justice where I convened Youth Justice Conferences (YJC) in NSW, Australia. (Conferencing is a process for transforming conflict into cooperation, in situations involving up to 40 people.)

Excited by the process and successes I saw, I began to apply conference techniques to the workplace, organi-zations and the broader community. As a mediator I found this process surpassed other methods for resolving conflict and internal tensions in groups. In 2003, I used conferencing to help resolve disputes within an Australian Olympic Team prior to the 2004 Olympics.

Most participants in Justice and Workplace conferences enter the conference with high levels of reluctance and skepticism, and most are pleasantly surprised at the outcomes, with responses like “I’m amazed at the results, we’d tried to resolve this for so long we had given up.” Because of this much of my energy is put into encouraging participants to show up and stay the process. I have seen enough successes for me to have complete faith in the method. It reinforces my belief that heart-based (restorative) systems bring out the best in participants (and punitive systems bring out the worst). I think the main reason conferencing is powerful is because it allows for the thorough venting of feelings. After victims of a conflict feel thoroughly heard (but not before) they are more able to collaborate in the outcome plan and are even generous with the offender.

A restorative criminal justice system aims not just to reduce crime, but to reduce the impact of crime as well. Crimes harm people and relationships. Restorative Justice requires that harm be repaired as much as possible. The process offers a potential for much community healing.

Each process of healing through restorative justice is an opportunity to create deeper community bonds while building social capital and creating more heart-based solutions to local problems. The capacity of restorative justice to address these emotional and relational needs—and to engage the citizenry in doing so—is the key to achieving and sustaining a healthy civil society. An international restorative/peace approach to international conflicts has been proven to drastically reduce deaths by war and other forms of violence. A criminal justice system that merely doles out punishment to offenders and sidelines victims does not address the emotional or relational needs of those who have been affected by crime. Nor does it address the root causes underlying the crime.

Since childhood I’ve known that humans should be treated with respect, dignity and kindness—this knowing was not intellectual but existed in every cell of my body. Perhaps your childhood was similar. Restorative Justice offers us an opportunity to proceed beyond merely talking about peace and justice, to implementing an effective model that embodies that same childhood wisdom.

Pip Cornall is a mediator, conference facilitator and trainer. He was a member of the Australian Delegation and represented Oregon’s Congressional District 2 at the Second International People’s Summit to create Departments and Ministries of Peace that took place in Canada in June 2006. He is currently participating in the introduction of Restorative Justice to Ashland and the Rogue Valley. For additional information please visit http://www.malechallenge.com

http://www.sentienttimes.com/07/07_feb_mar/justice.html

Voice Male 2005

Hunting for Masculinity

Two white tailed deer grazed contentedly among the wildflowers in a southern Oregon field. Watching them, my friend breathed deeply enjoying the serenity of nature’s perfection, her busy mind soothed by their soft brown eyes, their innocence. Her heart opened, her body relaxed.

Steady footsteps on the path in front of her interrupted this peaceful moment. Upon seeing the deer, the young man raised his arms simulating a rifle and took aim. “Blam!” he shot one, “Blam!” then the other. Lowering his imaginary gun, he continued his hike. My friend observed that the young man now walked more upright, shoulders squared. Clearly he felt stronger and more powerful after his “kill.”

Many years ago I could have been that young man. Like him, I was not hunting for food, I was hunting for masculinity within myself, and this, I thought at the time, was a matter of my survival. Re-establishing my masculinity was a task I would need to repeat over and over until I’d gained some awareness as to how I’d been socialized and began to break free. Like him, I’d have been unaware of the deep programming of men:
To dominate, to kill is what defines us as real men.

My friend told me of her experience while we were discussing a recent hate crime perpetrated by some young men in Ashland, Oregon. Please feel free to use this story (with acknowledgment) to promote gender violence prevention.
Pip Cornall (see www.malechallenge.com )

Addressing the Root Cause of Hate Crimes

by Pip Cornall

Recently several young women were allegedly harassed by a group of young men at the Southern Oregon University. When a young gay man came to their assistance he was allegedly pursued by the group, spat on and repeatedly taunted and harassed for being gay. The incident has promoted a supportive response from the University and the community.

The recent ‘hate crimes’ at the Southern Oregon University need to be seen for what they are; a manifestation of a tenacious and powerful programming. Firstly it is important to name the gender responsible. It is not surprising that it was a group of men who allegedly harassed a group of women and then aggressively harassed the young man who came to their defense. Men are responsible for 99% of all rape and sexual assault (this was a sexist harassment) and 90-95% of all other violence.

Secondly there is nothing inherently wrong with men. Most men (75%) are unhappy with how they have been socialized, especially with respect to attitudes about women and gays. For thousands of years one half of humanity has been socialized to dominate the other half. Historically, men acting without equal input from women have been the political and economic leaders and decision makers — the ones who took us to war, the ones who raped and committed domestic violence, the ones who tolerated poverty and hardship. The old forms of masculinity, the dominator forms, if continued, constitute one of the gravest threats to the future of humanity.

Author Riane Eisler* says, “The centuries-old dominator paradigm is not something inherent in women or men. Rather, it is a matter of the gender-specific socialization required to maintain a system in which — beginning with the ranking of one half of humanity over the other — the primary principle of social organization is one of rankings of domination ultimately backed up by fear of pain or force.

Violence Prevention Educator Jackson Katz** agrees stating, “What must be changed is our socialization as men and not our essential biological nature.”

So we are looking at an attainable task, one which is well underway as testified by the thousands of male and female scholars, politicians, activists and workshop-leaders who are working tirelessly to reduce male violence and questioning age old assumptions about masculinity.

The young men involved in the alleged harassment last week at SOU, are a product of an ancient conversation about women, which still persists despite many years of the equity movement. However we must be careful not to direct our wrath towards the alleged perpetrators for that will not eliminate sexism; it will simply shift the anger, not transform it. As Riane Eisler points out, “Men are not the enemy — it’s the programming, the dominator system itself.”

Misogyny and homophobia arise out of the dominator paradigm and manifest as structural violence, which is rampant in the US and will change as we change the structure. For example America has a very low percentage of women in government placing it 59th amongst modern democracies; a concrete statement that women and their values do not matter. Is it any coincidence that rape and gender-based violence are many times higher here than in other comparable countries?

The ancient conversation about women socializes males for dominance and not for equalitarian power sharing. It objectifies and negatively stereotypes women and gays so that they can be kept in their ‘place’ through intimidation and fear. It lumps gay men with women because they are seen to be similar. Unfortunately the myth of the “real man” persists today, and he is defined as not “sissy, girly or gay;” he is tough, dominant, competitive, shows no emotions other than anger, and he is a stud.

But in defining males in this way, men, sadly, are being groomed for failure in relationships with their wives or partners, children and workmates; in other words men too are victims of their own socialization. Male sexist language, like racist language, sows the seeds of violence against women, gay people and other men. Interestingly, research indicates that 75% of men disapprove of the way they were socialized, nevertheless, attitudes towards women, out of which violence and inequity arise, are sustained by the tacit agreement of good men to the hegemonic male myth still prevalent in most societies.

That the courageous young man, who spoke out to stop his female friends from being harassed, happens to be gay should be unimportant; he is simply a caring human being doing the right thing. Any men who protect women from the sexist behavior of other males will be taunted with derogatory put-downs such as “faggot, pussy or girl,” terms that imply they are less than “real men.” This is how males are socialized to conform to the prevailing form of masculinity, and that is what we must change. We can challenge this programming in primary school by explaining to children that to be called girly, gay or sissy arises from old male programming; some boys are taught to use these gibes. Reminding children that gays or girls are not inferior shows them that being called these names need not be taken as an insult. A typical response might be, “Thank you I know many girls or gay people I’d be proud to be similar to.”

The alleged perpetrators of this so-called Ashland ‘hate crime’ were agents of this lingering programming. The same socializing that makes rapists and domestic batterers also made us, which is why we, the largely silent 75% of men, need to learn more about gender construction/gender violence and to challenge all forms of sexist behavior, starting with our own thoughts, words and deeds. We must see sexism, harassment and rape as male issues and realize that the benefits of educating and changing ourselves are more than we ever imagined. Every man whom I know that has embraced these changes is grateful to have done so!

The Campaign for a Department of Peace

A Holistic Approach for Reducing Violence

By Pip Cornall

A tsunami of change is sweeping America. In fact, all around the world people are saying “enough violence, enough destruction, we are prepared to do what it takes to achieve peace.” In 2004 author Arundhati Roy said at the World Forum “Another world is not only possible, she is on her way and on a quiet day, if I listen carefully I can hear her breathing.” Signs of that world manifested in Feb-ruary 2003, with the largest anti-war movement in history as people around the world expressed their opposition to a violent solution to the situation in Iraq. She manifested again in February 2007 when seven hundred of us visited senate and congressional offices in Washington, DC; and with 42,000 campaigners from forty-seven states actively supporting a bill (HR 808) currently before the US House of Representatives to establish a Cabinet Level Department of Peace and Nonviolence (DoP). With 62 co-sponsors so far, this landmark measure will provide practical, nonviolent solutions to the problems of national and international conflict.

Determination to create a safer and saner century inspired the birth of the US and Global campaigns to create Departments and Ministries of Peace. These movements have quickly attracted the best people and institutions in peace scholarship and violence prevention from across the world, experts who all agree that a holistic approach is needed to reduce violence. A war on terrorism, a war on drugs, and a war on youth violence is not going to bring peace. The root causes of domestic violence, gang violence and international terrorism need to be treated with a whole systems approach—which includes seriously working to improve ourselves. Just as we can prevent disease in ourselves by addressing the deep causes, in the same way we can treat the disease of violence.

The DoP campaign draws on existing peace practices and violence prevention institutions who already apply a systemic procedure to peace making. One such institute is Transcend, a training and research partnered with the global DoP campaign (www.transcend.org). The Transcend model identifies three categories of violence. Direct violence is the violence we see, such as wars, terrorism, homicide, domestic violence, sexual violence, gang violence and others. A far more pervasive form is structural violence, which is built into the very fabric of our societies and is mostly unintended. Structural violence is built into our laws, our economic systems, our schools, towns and nations. It is the violence which excludes certain people from access to water, food and medicines, a living wage employment, and results in over 100,000 deaths every day (many more than die in wars). It includes structures like authoritarian regimes but also lists economic authoritarianism which denies many people basic human rights. Cultural violence refers to cultural norms that make the direct and structural violence seem normal and acceptable and includes cultural concepts (like “you are with us or against us”); economic theories and economic apartheid which favor a small elite; and the normalization, even the glorification of violence on TV and in video games. An example of cultural violence occurs when important issues such as sustainability, organic food, energy medicine and global warming are relegated unimportant and demeaned in the mainstream media.

Structural and cultural violence create large numbers of desperate people who are more likely to take desperate measures (direct violence) to address their dire situations. This applies nationally as well as internationally.

Lasting peace will not be attained by stopping one war or preventing the next but by applying a systemic approach to the structural and cultural violence behind the direct violence. In this way we can treat and resolve the conflicts before they escalate into violence. The most efficient way a Department of Peace can operate is to fund and coordinate existing efforts to reduce violence at the grassroots level.

From exhaustive studies by Transcend, the UN, WHO and Amnesty International we now know what the root causes of violence are. We have the science, the research is in, we have the skilled people, we know what works, both here and abroad, we have the ability and the desire. What is now needed is an institutional platform to provide the coordinating, the funding, the focus and the institutional heft to back that desire.

HR 808 will establish a Cabinet level Department of Peace and Nonviolence which can provide much-needed assistance to efforts by communities and state governments in coordinating existing violence prevention programs as well as the development of new programs to:

• Teach violence prevention and mediation to America’s school children.
• Effectively treat and dismantle gang psychology.
• Rehabilitate the prison population—the world’s largest.
• Build peace-making efforts among conflicting cultures both in the US and abroad.
• Support our military with complementary approaches to peace-building.
• Create a US Peace Academy, a sister organization to the US Military Academy.

The Department of Peace will be primarily a coordinating and funding body supporting proven organizations and best practices in the fields that already exist. One third of the emphasis will be international violence reduction; two thirds will be on national violence reduction issues mentioned above. A US Peace Academy which acts as a sister organization to the US Military Academy will research and teach the most cutting-edge techniques for the amelioration of violence among domestic and international populations. The Peace Academy will join the Military Academy in providing assistance to the military in international conflict-resolution. The Peace Academy faculty will be derived from well-established practitioners known for best practices in the field of conflict reduction and resolution.

In addition to leading the Department, the Secretary of Peace shall provide the President with statistically-verified recommendations on how a specific policy either increases or diminishes the prospect of domestic and international peace along with recommendations regarding the social and financial impact of domestic and international policies.

This campaign, which is arising from a coordinated grassroots movement, represents a revolution in human dignity, forged as we increasingly realize the wisdom the ordinary citizen has to contribute to problem solving—the realization that the lay person is an essential part of the solution. We are blowing wide open the myth that we live in a hierarchical world and discovering a networked world, a web where all input is valuable. For collaborative peace making to be most successful the elder’s wisdom and experience needs to be combined with the input of the young who can adapt to this fast changing world.

The bill to date has been a collaboration of the best institutions and experts in the vast field of violence prevention. Every effort is being made to establish feedback loops so community wisdom can be utilized. Within the DoP campaign there is also a fast growing body of students for peace. The Student Peace Alliance chapters are organizing at community colleges, liberal arts colleges, universities, and high schools across the nation. By integrating efforts SPA groups build strong partnerships with those outside school walls through grassroots org-anizing, lobbying, and working to support cultures of peace on their campuses and in their communities.

As Marianne Williamson said at our recent campaign training in Washington, DC, “America did not suddenly wake up one morning and adopt the requests of the abolitionists, and the women’s suffragettes. Those movements persevered and networked and slowly spread the word until solid in the hearts and minds of a critical mass of Americans.”

While we’re very committed to the goal of creating a cabinet level Department of Peace, we’re also very committed to the journey of peace making and walking the talk. Our goal of achieving peace by peaceful means dictates that we do not demonize those who hold opposing views. For a national and global campaign of peace to succeed we must be engaged in self improvement. Most importantly we must experience peace within ourselves if we are to be beacons of peace. An angry activist will not bring peace to the world.

Peace is entirely possible if our goal is to create a world that works for everyone.
The best route towards creating a process that enables a world for everyone is eloquently expressed by Johan Galtung, international mediator, who writes:

“In international conflicts any worthy mediation method seeks to identify the goals of all the parties through empathic dialogue, and to find creative ways to meet all parties’ legitimate goals. Goals are legitimate if they affirm human rights and serve to meet basic human needs.”

Legitimate goals are reciprocal, i.e., whatever we want, we should be willing to grant to other parties as well. The level of human happiness and satisfaction of basic needs in any given society measures a policy’s success. By these criteria, the current US foreign policy in Iraq and elsewhere, which causes great human suffering, is a failure.

Deepak Chopra, at our recent campaign conference, used the transformation of the caterpillar into a magnificent butterfly as a metaphor describing the transformation of the human race in these crucial times. The old form (of the caterpillar or of non-sustainable human behavior) destroys itself so that nothing of the original is left. However, arising from the “nutritive soup” are “imaginal clusters,” different types of cells, which, when they join together, form a magical and beautiful co-creation, a global family devoted to achieving peace by peaceful means based on the platform of creating a world that works for everybody.

The Department of Peace, Oregon District 2 Campaign seeks to develop chapters in Medford, Grants Pass, in smaller towns, in the schools and colleges, and in churches and clubs. This is a model we are following across America and within other countries. Peace promotion can be fun—I invite you to join your passion to the campaign. Dance or sing for peace, paddle for peace, jog for peace, or consider fun activities of your choice to raise funds and build peace in your community while spreading awareness for the campaign. You’ll join with some of the most wonderful people on the planet and play a part in this great evolution occurring in the hearts of conscious people all around the world.

Peace is coming to our world and it is unstoppable. I feel it, it is spoken of convincingly by the emerging new paradigm leaders; it’s visible in the living democracy movements, among sustainable energy activists and in the young who see themselves as part of a global family. It will take a lot of work but the work is a wonderful part of the process and gets easier as our global family experiences the shift—a true collective evolution of consciousness.

Pip Cornall is a mediator, conference facilitator and trainer. Please visit http://www.pipcornall.com to contact him for further information. For more on the Department of peace visit http://www.thepeacealliance.org.

http://www.sentienttimes.com/07/07_june_july/dept_peace.html