Gender roles in Nordics vs English speaking countries

My English colleague recently shared this video with me:



I know some English and American people who think like that, but very few from the Nordics who can see themselves in this picture. Certainly, no one in my family fits (unless we go back to past generations perhaps).

The situation described in the video portrays a very emotional woman, who takes pride in her home and is a sort of superwoman, who just does everything and swings the wip over her lazy husband. But from a Nordic perspective, this situation does not leave any role for the husband to fill.

She can earn the money and keep the household running so if all he does is making a mess, what does she need him for? I know relationships, where it is the other way around and the man is the one feeling, like he is doing the most around the house. They talk to each other and try to work it out and find a fair balance.

The Nordic woman would not give the man points for the things mentioned. It is expected that he cares about the home and both parties would be deeply disappointed or frustrated if they failed to agree on how to run things around the house and to what standard. The ideal Nordic partners support and respect each other as well as their home.

This is not to say that Nordic men and women are alike. Here is a perspective on gender from the North (Iceland):



As human beings, we have different strengths and weaknesses. Perhaps, one does the cooking and the other one does the laundry. Keeping common areas looking presentable is a shared responsibility.

If both take equal part in the running of the household, both parties can realise themselves in their jobs and become a rounded, complete person. A family person and a professional. Know when to nurse and when to lead.

Hippy Education

I recently read an article on education that made me see my own schooltime from a whole new perspective. It describes a study where a group of students were divided in to two different groups partly in to their course. One group os taught according to the "traditional University model" whereas the other was "deliberate practice": "Class time is spent on problem-solving, discussion and group work, while the absorption of facts and formulae is left for homework."

The article presents this model as if it is a new way of teaching although it is the predominant teaching method I remember from my childhood, youth and university course in Denmark. And suddenly I realised why groupwork was so hard when I did my postgrad at an international management school. I was so used to learning that way that I didn't even think about how to do it. I've been problem-solving, discussing and groupworking as an natural way of learning since I could read. The other guys had learned things off by heart. They were used to working as individuals and I was used to the type of groupwork the University required us to do. But I had no idea of how to deal with people to whom this concept was entirely new.

In the workplace many jobs require you to be able to work together with people as well as working as an individual. It is interesting to see how people's background make them more skilled at one or the other. The challenge is to know when which method is appropriate.