The counter-intuitive restrictions on Allah: my God or your God

A longstanding and totally nonsensical struggle has opposed Muslims and Christians in Malaysia over the usage of the word Allah in prayer. Malay and other Arab-speaking Christians have used the word Allah for centuries to refer to God; this makes sense, because in Arabic, Allah means 'the God' (Allah is a contraction of al ilah, the God). Although Muslims believe that there is only one God, Allah, they obtained a Malaysian high-court decision that forbids the use of Allah by Christians. Thus the high-court rejects an earlier appeal by Christians, based on the fact that the word Allah predates Islam by thousands of years (first written evidence of the usage of the word Allah comes from Babylonian tablets form 1700 BCE). When will we realise that we all prey to the same God? Should Christians try to obtain a ruling that forbids the usage of the word 'God' by non-Christians?

Free the Nelson Mandela in you

As political leaders and other influential figures gather in the FNB stadium in Soweto to pay homage to Nelson Mandela, they should also start to free their Inner Nelson in their future decision making. Mandela, just as many other famous leaders (including Ghandi, or even Mohammad or Jesus, if you wish) have proven that peace and forgiveness are more successful than violence and punishment. World leaders, don't just remember Mandela today, remember him each time you make decisions.

It's 'Stand By Your Nationality' month!

I feel it's time to declare a 'Stand By Your Nationality' month!
Often, people from so-called third-world countries need to struggle to obtain a first-world passport to at last be able to have a successful career - or simply to survive. All those have the unfortunate tendency to then claim to be 'French', 'English', 'Canadian', etc, rather then their first, original, nationality (typically from Africa, Asia or Latin America).
I would urge all those dual citizens to be proud of their original nationality, and stand by their roots, whenever possible (i.e. not for administrative, professional or travel purposes...). Be proud to be from whatever 'underdeveloped' country you are, because the current 'underdevelopment' is simply the result of century-long forced exploitation by a 'developed' country. Be proud of where you came from, because most likely every step on the path was difficult and required hard work, perseverance and cunningness. And each time you claim your original nationality, you will shed good light on your country. 

Everything is natural

In a simplified way, we think that ‘natural’ (without human intervention or technology) is opposed to ‘artificial’ (produced by humans). This divide may be misleading and dangerous. We are, like it or not, a product and part of Nature. Hence, what we produce is also a product and part of Nature. Currently, our actions are not sustainable, because they push the current natural system, of which we are just a minor part, out of balance. Being all linked, systems-biological feedback, provided by ‘Nature’, will act on our planet (and us). We can, and do, act on our global system, but we cannot be separated from it. Whatever we do is natural, and we cannot stop Nature from acting on us. 

Republicans, Christian values, and Obamacare

US House Republicans are trying yet another way to to block Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ('Obamacare') through voting in favour of a temporary spending bill that includes a 1-year delay for Obamacare.
The Republicans are always eager to link Christian values to their party, allowing them to get votes from people who actually don't really profit from Republican's politics. Given that Obamacre is supposed to bring affordable health care to a bigger part of the US population, let's just ask how Jesus would have voted. That should be the Republican's vote, too.

The Great Paradox Of Religions: Words

All religions agree that the highest divinity, the highest spiritual principle (God, Allah, Brahman, Yahwe etc...) cannot be truthfully and comprehensively expressed by our human words. These divinities are far greater then us, hence our words can only describe highly limited aspects, like a shade describes a tree.
We know our words can never describe God, yet we will do everything, including killing and torturing, so that another human being will use the same words as we use to refer to God.

These things the world will never know.

Two days ago, my Italian friend slipped and fell down 10 meters during a hiking trip in a remote part of Saudi Arabia. He was seriously injured and needed immediate medical treatment to survive, however we didn't have a car close by, and no cell phone connection. The only other persons in the place were two Saudi men, and a ten year old boy, the son of one of them. Without hesitation, these men offered to take my friend to the next hospital in their new car, despite the fact that my friend was heavily bleeding, screaming, and making uncontrolled movements; and despite the fact that this journey would not only ruin the whole backseat area of their car (which they had to use to travel back 400 km to their home town), but also traumatise the child. Because of them, my friend did not die that day.
Late at night, on the TV screen of the hospital next to the bed where my friend was sleeping, I saw first pictures of the victims of the Nairobi islamists. The world only saw the pictures of the islamist's victims.

Humane actions to save the Devil

The native Tasmanian human population has been exterminated by us, without the blink of an eye. But now the international community produces immense financial and human efforts to save the Tasmanian Devil. Is the Tasmanian Devil closer to us than the Tasmanian Human?

The Fête de l'Humanité ended yesterday.

Why work-life balance is bound to make you unhappy and unbalanced. And what we can do instead.

What is Work-Life Balance?

According to wikipedia:

 “Work-Life Balance is a broad concept including proper prioritizing between ‘work’ (career and ambition) on one hand and ‘life’ (pleasure, leisure, family and spiritual development) on the other.” 

However in real life, Work-Life Balance means both of two things:

1) to pay my bills, I spend most of my awake life-time with something that is neither pleasure nor leisure, that hurts my family, and transforms me into an ungodly villain.

2) if I'm stressed and overworked, than it's my own fault, because I'm too dumb to get the work-life balance right.

This is depressing. Therefore I came up with a new concept: the Balanced Worklife. 

Yes, it’s all in the word order and the absence of the hyphen. It’s a fine concept; the problem is I am not yet quite sure what it actually means.

Maybe: Rather than trying to stop the wicked ‘Work’ just seconds before it definitely crushes the jolly ‘Life’, we should attempt to have a well-balanced ‘Worklife’. An entangled harmonious Oneness. Fine – and how do we do that? Honestly, I don’t know. I guess it’s much in the intention. If I am frustrated and angry because I need to stop work to find a birthday present for my wife, and then am even more upset because this obliges me to spend the following Sunday finishing a manuscript, than that’s reasonable Work-Life balance, but an unbalanced Worklife. If I accept to work on a Sunday as a result of having made my wife happy the other day, well, then that’s much better, even though the facts are just the same.

But intention is also that: If I work hard to be recognized or rewarded (at work or at home), then this will leave me frustrated or bitter, even if I succeed. However if I am totally dedicated to what I am doing, I do not need a reward to be happy – even though I am likely to get one as a result. In a nutshell: Be dedicated, and be aware of it, at any moment, and, on occasion, do all those things wise people in baggy cloths have told us for millennia. I mean, what are the chances they were all wrong?

Sales Managers: What would humanity be without them?

Sales Managers for scientific instruments are incredible. They have absolutely no idea about the products they sell, and don't even hide it. Here is an excerpt from my (ME) last weeks encounter with one (SM):

ME: So what brought you to our institute today.

SM: I am trying to meet a few people and see if I can sell some things. - What do you do?

ME: Molecular Biophysics.

SM: I don't know this method. What do you need? [starts dropping random catalogues on my table]

ME: So what is the measuring volume of this instrument?

SM: I don't know. It's in the catalogue.

ME: We already have an instrument of the other company in our core facilities.

SM: Apparently there is a problem with this instruments. They don't like it.

ME: What is the problem?

SM: I don't know.

SM: The other company does not have customer support here. We have customer support.

ME: Where is he based?

SM: In Belgium.

ME: That is more than 5000 miles away, on a different continent.

SM: Yes, but he comes here regularly. And I only live 1 hour away. I can come too, and help.

MS: But you don't know the instrument.

SM: No sir.

ME: I thought this SPR method was patented. How did your company deal with it?

SM: I don't know.

ME: I don't think SPR is a useful method. I never had any good results with Biacore. What is the difference between your company and biacore?

SM: It's better.

ME: why is it better?

SM: I don't know. My company says so. 

ME: ...?

SM: I can put you in contact with our application specialist. He will call you.

ME: No, please just give me his contact details, and I will contact him if I need to.

SM: He will call you in the next few days.

ME: I do not need to be called. I will call if I need to.

Two days later I received a stream of email messages, including:

Dear Dr. Massimo:

Day before yesterday I met Prof Bernhard and we had a discussion about NanO ITC and, he wants to have a comparison statement on our Nano ITC with Microcal.

Secondly he has to clarify some more points with Application and so we recommend that you will call him as a courtesy.

Is it possible to call him? He is ready for a Skype Call also. Below is his contact info.

[...]

and:

Dear Dr. Bernhard:

Our Senior Application Specialist sent a mail as below.

She wants to talk to you.

Please let me know by return mail , whether this time is OK for a call?

Please let me know your convenient time

Regards

Reasons for Violence

It is astonishing what reasons one Homo sapiens puts forward to use violence against another Homo sapiens. There is how one calls god (Christian vs Muslim vs Hindu vs Jews vs ...), but also down to the very details of how one interprets the same religious text (sunni vs shiites; protestant vs catholic..). There are colour of skin, or of hair, language, if someone earns a living with livestock or with agriculture (Darfur), what kind of human one is attracted to (hetero vs homosexuality), geographic origin (especially in neighbouring regions), what kind of sports team one favours, gender (male vs female), ... and some of the worst conflicts are based on differences between people that are so similar, that even modern science struggles to find out what these differences actually are, apart from the name of the group (Hutu vs Tutsi).
Differences between humans are simple pretexts, rather than true reasons, for violence.

Images of God #2

There is this wise and spiritual man, who has several followers. He spreads a message of peace and tolerance. He gets killed by another man, with a hatchet. The disciples of the killed decide to use an image of a hatched as symbol for the wise man and his message. How much will this choice of symbol affect the way future generations of disciples will spread, interpret and adapt the teachings - and interact with ‘non-believers’, especially those of the same group as the killer?

Who chose the cross? Why not a heart? How would our history have changed had early Christians chosen a different image? How would the focus and evolution of Christianity have changed?

Recycling the religious police

In Saudi Arabia and a few other places, members of the mutaween (religious police) circulate to enforce proper attire and behaviour among the population. However, it seems to me that their actions are mostly insignificant. People choose their dress code according to their own, their family's or the country's standards, and not because of the mutaween. In fact, if criticised for not covering their hair in public, a woman will simply put on the veil just for a few steps, until she passed the mutaween, and then take it off immediately.
So the actions of the mutaween appear to be mostly a waste of energy and time.
Yet, at the same time, plastic waste is accumulating all over Saudi Arabia. It's a threat to the environment, and disfigures the country.
My wife had therefore a great idea: she suggests to transform the religious police into an environmental police. This new cohort of mutaween should simply encourage citizens not to litter, and make sure that the population adopts good practices with respect to the environment. A pure spirit in a pure country - recycling the religious police!

Images of God #1

There is this wise and spiritual man, who has several followers. He spreads a message of peace and tolerance. He gets killed by another man, with a hatchet. The disciples of the killed decide to use an image of a hatched as symbol for the wise man and his message. How much will this choice of symbol affect the way future generations of disciples will spread, interpret and adapt the teachings, and interact with ‘non-believers’?

Who chose the cross? Why not a heart? How would our history have changed had early Christians chosen a different image? How would the focus and evolution of Christianity have changed?

Talking about Temptation

It is interesting how different cultures deal with temptation - such as sex or non-recommended food or drinks. In places like Saudi Arabia or other conservative Muslim strongholds, temptation is dealt with by removing the tempting object as much as possible. For example women are covered from head to toe, including the face, not allowed in certain places or separated from men, and contacts between unmarried men and women are highly restricted (in public). Pork, alcohol and places of cults for other religions are not allowed. During Ramadan, restaurants, cafes and other shops are closed at day time, and eating and drinking in public is not allowed during the fasting hours.
In capitalistic countries, temptation is exalted to sell any type of product. Temptation is highly perfected, with top level science and technology allowing to maximise temptation for each individual. Also for persons, to be a temptation to others is considered positive, as long as within certain limits. Hence in these countries, omnipresent and targeted temptation has to be faced with ones own financial and personal limits.
In which system are people globally happier, and less frustrated? Should we eradicate temptation, use it to sell products, or is there another way?

You know you are living the American Dream...

...when the end of your weekend feels like your weak end.

Are we wasting our time and money?

In most social species, the perception that one animal has about the other is simply linked to clear physical traits (size, age, body features) and character (aggressive, fearful, etc). Homo sapiens however spends an awful amount of time, effort and money to manipulate the perception that others have of him or her. This includes altering physical traits by putting colour on face and hair, covering the body with particular types of cloth, lifting weights and taking all sorts of chemicals, some of which by mouth, skin, or through injections; using fake hair, nails or eye lashes, implanting silicon, or purchasing special items. Also included are time-consuming efforts for addressing one or several other Homo sapiens in a particular manner, by speech or writing. However, just as much as Homo sapiens has become expert in manipulating physical and character traits, Homo sapiens has become expert in detecting these manipulations. Homo sapiens therefore needs to spend more and more time in manipulative actions to have at least a slim chance for a short-term illusion.

As an alternative to this escalation: Should we just all accept who we are and stop wasting our time and money?

A lapidary inquest into the meaning of the word 'humane'

[...]

>Lapland sounds nice! - are you going to the Swedish or Finish Lapland?

- It's Finish Lapland. Is this more lapidary?

>Nope, they are about 'equal' in status. Anyway, they are occupied territories where the natives (the 'lap'-people) have been displaced and abused by the governments in Helsinki and Stockholm... Not to make you feel bad about your holiday destination :-).

- As a German, it is somehow mildly reassuring that other nations did also do a bit of unnecessary intra-species violence.

As a scientist, I'd say this proves once more the point that the selection within the human race is not done by intelligence, but by violence. Which explains a lot about our planet's current state.

As a human, I'd say that's one more proof for the fact that the current meaning of the word 'humane' is wrong and should be replaced by 'unnecessary intra-species violence with medium to extreme brutality'.

the right kiss : does kissing make our love last longer?

In our body, we have about 10 times more microorganism cells than human cells. Especially our skin, mouth and digestive system are full of them. The body’s microorganisms have been shown to determine partner choice in some species, where one individual prefers a partner who has a similar microbiome in its body. Could it be that we kiss and touch our partners so to exchange and homogenise our microbes? If so, then this behaviour may improve our relationship. Or, more intriguingly, is our kissing and touching behaviour influenced by our microbes, to allow them to inhabit other individuals of our species? Unlikely? Well, a number of behaviour-altering effects of microorganims on humans have been reported...

Intraspecies vs Interspecies communications. In fact we are alone.

If you get the chance, dive around a coral reef. The complexity of interactions between species is amazing. Of course, much more of the interactions are not visible, for example the symbiosis between corals and dinoflagellates. Of course, all other wild animals are constantly in exchange and relation with other wild species. In comparison, we modern humans, with how many other species do we interact on a daily basis? Mostly none, except for those who have a pet. However pets are adjusted to humans, and depend on us. So in fact, we're the only species who does not interact with all others. We're pretty alone - but so complex in our head that we are so much occupied with ourselves that we don't really notice how alone we are.

Re: Darwinian selection of religions

Following up on my question of why world religions are so malleable in their interpretations (see my post 'Darwinian selection of religions'), I asked a Muslim why the Qur'an has not been written more clearly and explicitly. She said that the ambiguity in the Qur'an is a test for followers. The way you interpret the text--with love or hate, with a spirit of openness or of exclusion--is a mirror of your soul. The first word of the Qur'an, 'iqra', can be interpreted as 'read!' (with meanings such as 'follow closely [the prescriptions]), or 'instruct yourself!' (which could mean to learn, gather knowledge), or 'search!' (which could mean to search in yourself, or in the scriptures, to understand).

Seek - and you will find... yourself?

Comedy Relief

I wonder how the world would change if everyone watched or listened to a 5-min hilarious comedy show or transmission three times a day.

The American Dream #7: total freedom to rest

On Friday at 2 pm, you notice  that you have utterly, completely and satisfactorily finished all your things on all your to-do lists.

The American Dream #6:

total security

Religious racism - Relicism?

A good friend has slowly drifted into a ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam. As the second wife of an ulema, a Muslim scholar, completely covered in public, and reading only the Qur'an at home, she says she was never happier. Is this a good thing as long as she does not harm anyone? Can educating her children in the same fundamentalist way be considered 'harm' or 'doing the best for her children to the best of her knowledge'?

Would my reaction have been different if she had joined a fundamentalist current of Buddhism instead, an interpretation which does not allow music, encourages daily studying of the holy texts, provides a strict daily schedule and obliges her to wear a particular garment in a particular colour?

How much of my 'common sense' reactions are due to 'relicism' - some sort of religious racism?

Darwinian selection of religions

Every human group appears to have forged their spiritual experiences into some sort of religious framework. Why do we nonetheless only have a handful of world religions, rather than a patchwork of local beliefs, as diverse as human ethnic groups and their geographic situations? Why have almost all of these world religions been used as a pretext to commit the most horrible acts of violence, although all preach non-violent behaviour as a core value? And why are all these religions based on holy texts that are so ambiguous that followers fight over right and wrong interpretations, and use the same text to justify one thing and its opposite? Is it simply the result of the features a religion needs to have to survive and dominate others?  

Imagine for example a religion that is based on a half page of text that states simply and clearly that as a follower, you have to (for example) pray/meditate with good intentions, not harm anyone in any way, treat everybody like you want to be treated and help those in need. Full-stop. Either you do this, or you’re out. Would this religion have millions of followers and thrive for centuries? Or imagine a religion that is founded by a wise old woman who lives alone on a remote island and has no intentions to travel. Would this religion stand any chance of survival against a religion that is malleable, permissive, adaptive, and aggressively promoted worldwide by a powerful people? Even the most ingenious virus that infected only the Dodo has died out. Or, on the other hand, how peaceful can a religion be that is spread through violence?

Are our current dominating religions simply the result of a Darwinian (and hence human) struggle for survival? 

Your own, personal Jesus - part II: Copyright on Jesus - DENIED

In my previous post I wrote how I prepared a short personal version of Jesus' teachings based on selecting and rewriting passages from the Complete Gospels.
Since I thought that this particular selection I made highlighted unusual aspects of Jesus' teachings, I thought I may just self-online publish the text in case anyone is interested.
I therefore contacted the editor of the Complete Gospels just to make sure there is no problem with it.
Here is the short answer I received:

Polebridge Press, the copyright holder,  denies you the right to use any part, or a substantial similarity, of The Complete Gospels edited by Robert J. Miller, in all media now known or later developed. This matter is now closed and not open to any further negotiation.

I was quite puzzled by this reply. One the one hand, of course, the Complete Gospels were written based on new translations of all available texts, which took a tremendous amount of time, effort and expertise. From this point of view the text deserves the copyright. On the other hand, it seems wired that one can be forbidden to publish a text of 'substantial similarity' to the Complete Gospels... after 2000 years during which substantially similar versions of Jesus' gospels were taught all over the world.

Of course, it is extremely unlikely that reading my little text would have stopped anyone from buying the Complete Gospels (which I strongly recommend reading!).

Your own, personal Jesus - part I: Meeting Yeshua bar Yosef

I always found it frustrating that Jesus, unlike Mohammed, appears to have done nothing to assure a verbatim transmission of his teachings. As a result, Jesus’ words and deeds have only been written down decades or even centuries after his death, in a different language, by persons who most probably have never met him. Because of the socio-political context at the time of writing, selection and rephrasing of the gospels was strongly biased.

The obvious question is therefore on how much has this error-generating transmission affected the message of the historical Jesus?

To find out, I did the following: I bought the Complete Gospels (which contain also fresh translations of non-canonical texts, such as the Gospels of Thomas or Mary, or the Q and Signs Gospels) and selected sentences that I found particularly touching. I then rephrased these sentences to some extend, and put them in a different order, so to obtain something like a suggestive little story line.

The result of my little experiment (which took me two years, and resulted in a short manuscript) were twofold: 1) there is a particular message and spirit of the Gospels that is reassuringly robust to manipulation. 2) By chewing on the texts for long to produce a distilled and personal version, I felt I understood Jesus' message - and maybe Jesus himself - much better. In a way, it almost felt like I got to know this Yeshua personally, at least a little bit. Bottom line: If you want to understand Jesus, you have to rewrite the Gospels; you have to wrestle with the available texts, take them apart and write your own, personal Jesus. 

A little later I read that Buddha advised followers to question and chew on his teachings...

It's good to be the King

It is a scientifically proven fact that improving education, especially for lower-income parts of the society, has far-reaching benefits for a country. Benefits are not limited to simply stimulating and sustaining innovation, but also include reduction in crime rates (including domestic violence against women), and improvement of public health.
Hence, improving education improves a country's economy in two ways: by enhancing the technological competitiveness and by reducing expenses (e.g. for prisons or health care).
The down-side of investments in education is that it pays off only in 10-20 years. Since most democratic leaders of countries are elected for one or maximum two 4-5 year terms, such investment would not be beneficial. And it is preferred to invest in economic projects that pay off in the short-term, ideally before the next elections.
In this regard, it's good to be the King. For example Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has put in place a 15 year program to pay studies abroad for Saudi students - currently 130,000 (26,000 women) in 46 countries. Fellowship recipients receive full university tuition coverage, as well as full medical and dental insurance, a monthly stipend, materials allowances, and annual airfare vouchers for the student and his or her family to Saudi Arabia and back to the host country. Recipients’ families receive the same insurance coverage, and joint scholarships are given to students with spouses.
As a welcome side-effect, these students will showcase their own culture abroad and, in turn, obtain deep insights in foreign cultures.
It certainly helps to have a bit of spare oil money to spend - however the cost of this program is probably only a small fraction of the yearly US military budget.

Brain gained, paradise lost?

Our brain, which creates our particular intelligence, consciousness, language and theory of mind; we think all this is advancement, progress toward a supreme being. But could these features simply be a specialisation? A specialisation necessary to protect us from what has become our greatest threat: our own race, our own complex society. Could it be a specialisation necessary to understand ourselves, to thrive or survive in our society. To escape and to dominate our own species. And if so, what have we lost in exchange for this specialisation that focusses so much energy on ourselves? Maybe a connection to all other live? Or maybe the understanding that all live on earth is one? Is that the paradise we've lost?

Seeing is believing, is ...?

The East German people's movement that resulted in the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 was significantly motivated by many East Germans being able to capture West German TV.
Saudis are the nr 1 per capita users of youtube in the world. How will this influence a society which does not allow night clubs, bars, mixed dancing, revealing cloths?

Aspects of Democracy: US vs Iran

For the presidential elections 2013 in Iran, voters had the choice between 8 candidates. For many aspects, the elected president's decisions need to be in agreement with political and social views of the Supreme Leader. The Supreme Leader is elected by the Assembly of Experts. Members of this Assembly are elected by direct public vote for a 6-years term.

For the US elections in 2012, voters had the choice between 2 candidates. Since candidates cannot win an election in the US without massive funds contributed by big companies and corporations, the elected president's decisions need to be in agreement with the political and economic interests of those individuals that own/direct these businesses. 

Crowd sourcing peace?

If you pray several times a day, consistently, for your whole life - what do you expect?
happiness? peace? understanding? rest? health? wealth? auspiciousness? love?
And if all people of a whole country pray every day, several times - what would be the effects? And how much would the effects depend on the intentions of the prayers?

And if in a country almost nobody prays - what would be the effects?

Can peace be crowd-sourced?

link between chicken and urinary tract infection - or between low cost meat and high-cost health care

According to several reports, the use of antibiotics to produce low-cost chicken meat leads to the evolution of 'superbugs' - multi-drug resistant bacteria, which can cause a number of human diseases, including urinary tract infections. Such infections account for a 1-2 billion USD health care cost. It's a great deal: First large-scale poultry factories maximise their gains by selling sick chicken, and then pharmaceutical industry and health care providers get huge revenues from the sick humans. It's a win-win, except for those who don't have the money to buy organic produce or who don't have the guts to go vegetarian.

What's the colour of love?

What is the colour, the age, the style of 'romantic relationship' in the 21st century? Let's ask google.

According to google.com (Images), romance in the 21st century is overwhelmingly visualized and thus defined as the close tête-à-tête between a young white male with short straight hair, and a young white woman. Google is global, and, therefore, this image is seen worldwide, even in the most remote places. Interestingly enough, even searches in the more country-specific sites such as google.co.uk, or google.co.za or google.co.jp, display more or less the same set of images. There are overwhelmingly those of a happy young Caucasian couple in Western summer clothes embodying the epitome of romantic relationship. Why not a happy Mayan couple? Or a loving elderly Caucasian couple?

Just like the image of Santa Claus - an old white man in Coca Cola red all over the world - and just as we listen to pretty much the same tunes in bars in Bogotá, Bali or Boston, romantic relationships are, indeed, getting more and more globally normative. And they are rarely black or Asian, never Inuit.

How does it feel for all those whose images, and consequently existences, are not evidenced by Google? Shouldn't the representation of love reflect all facets, and shades, of the human race?

(copied from this webpage. See that link for more thoughts on this topic)

Do men drive better than women? Let's test it!

Men often complain that women are bad drivers, and that it's the women who get all the bumps and scratches on the cars. Now, that's easy to test! Let's got to Saudi Arabia, where women are not allowed to drive cars, and check it out.
That's what I have done - I went to Jeddah. There are only men driving - yet there is not a single car without bumps and scratches, and it is the worst traffic and driving I have seen so far. And I have been to France, Italy, China, Malaysia, Caribbean Islands, Africa....
Is there any country where only women are allowed to drive?
Or would a mixed driving population perform best?