Mahatma Gahndi encouraged his constituents to look inward. And, at the time of this writing, I dare say that I am?toward my stomach. The two years since I?ve lived alone have been met with moderate but constant hunger. There are two reasons for my quasi-famished state. One is obvious, the other is an ingrained societal phenomenon.

The surface explanation is apparent: I can?t cook. When I look at my oven, I see a 450 degree inferno that I would rather not stick my hands in. My toaster once billowed enough flames to engulf both my English muffins and much of its own plastic frame. I haven?t used it since. In sum, I have chosen to risk radiation sickness at the hands on my microwave rather than risk a short, flaming death at the hands of a gas stove.

To confront this, I have invited several friends?all women?to come to my apartment and cook for me. I buy the goods, you serve it up, babe. And to take the looking-inward philosophy a bit further, I?ve come to a disturbing realization: I am, at least in part, a male chauvinist.

This realization, unfortunately, is clearly evidenced by my feeble attempts at self-preservation. First, I have to ask myself why I never learned to cook in the first place. For the first 20 years of my life, I would wake up bright and early in the morning to find a hot, balanced breakfast steaming at my placemat. Thanks, Mom. Lunches and dinners were much the same. And, without thinking, I turned to females to continue the tradition.

I had based my entire life?s sustenance on the false expectation that women do the cooking. It never truly dawned on me that they may not have wanted to serve as my own personal chef anymore than a man. Since I?ve always considered myself a progressive thinker, I found this to be a disturbing thought.

Aside from the most enlightened of us–clearly not me–the evidence suggests that there still exist varying degrees of assumptions that contribute to a patriarchal world.

Even today, in 2002, the political world still doesn?t know why it can?t cook, or, in other words, why it cannot legislate successfully for women. The U.S. government fails to provide adequate health care in women?s prisons, while domestic abuse continues to be a major problem in American suburban life. Also, we have been beaten to the punch by Indonesia in electing a female president. In other parts of the world the situation is even worse. The Taliban in Afghanistan shocked the world with its state sponsored mistreatment of women, however that situation was hardly isolated. In Saudi Arabia, women are largely restricted from driving. In Kenya, Amnesty International reports, “Many women who have been victims of rape or other forms of sexual abuse are too intimidated by certain cultural attitudes to seek redress. To do so can often lead to hostility from the family, the community and the police, with little hope of success.”

In short, sexism is an international problem, buoyed by basic assumptions on the part of patriarchal governments. In my case, I?ve assumed that women are more willing to fix dinner than men. In a more severe case, judges in the Turkish government ruled on the assumption that 200 female murder victims in that country “provoked” their assailants, according to another Amnesty report. The international community, with the usual exception of the United States, has sought out agreements in an attempt to create standards for other world ills, such as pollution, racism, war crimes, etc. It?s time the world community seek out and strike effective treaties on uniform standards for the treatment of women. Consistent with my own anecdote, most politicians are probably unaware there?s a problem. True reform may require a change in our ingrained thinking about women. It?s time we cook for ourselves.

Disagree? Give Josh Leon a piece of your mind by e-mailing him at [email protected].