Through this exercise, I have discovered that well-being is not a simple, straightforward concept to define. It is complex and fluid and because not all people are the same, no two persons have the same criteria for defining what well-being means for them. There are certainly similarities and converging thoughts that make us all human, but if you had to compare the lived experiences of people, socially and geographically and emotionally, I think that no two people would rate their well-being in exactly the same terms.

 

 

 

One of the most striking similarities that emerged from analysing my team mates' descriptions is that well-being is dependant not only on the self, but on those around us.
Some of the other similarities that came up were:

* Safety                                        
* Health
* Jobs
* Home or shelter

It seems as though we need things in order to survive, first and foremost, things that we don't necessarily think about as contributing factors toward well-being because they are such basic human requirements that we more often than not take them for granted. These include food, water, clean air, safety from our environment in which we live, and protection from the elements. In modern society a job, which pays enough money, is the means by which we are enabled to acquire the secondary needs of shelter, clothing, health care.

This is where the concept of 'needs' comes into contact with 'wants', and where the similarities start to become apparent. Differences occur in the way that people rate the importance of money, and their associated interpretations of 'wealth' and 'poverty'. For instance, a 'poor' person living in a 'third world' country such as South Africa, may experience poverty in a completely different way to people living in a developed country like the United States, who consider themselves 'poor'. It is all relative to one's perceptions.

I agree with Sue Ellen's thought that material objects are not really 'crucial' to one's well-being, and I must agree that it is not always easy to recognise that the superficial happiness created by material wealth does not constitute real well-being.

What we all agree on, and what I found most significant, is that well-being is aided through love and support from family and friends. It seems as though, no matter that we are on two completely different continents in some respects, living different experiences, at least for these three women, our well-being depends on those we surround ourselves with. And that draws us all together as women.

 

What Stacey's interpretation of well-being showed me was that well-being evolves with time as we grow older, especially with the increased reponsibility of being a wife, and expectations that evolve from being in a partnership with another person. These are not things that I think of as factors in my own well-being at present since I am still living a single life, but even being able to choose whether I will become a wife or mother, makes a big difference to my well-being.

 

 

I cannot imagine living in the kind of society which does not allow women these kinds of choices that we, living in democratic societies may take for granted - things like having access to contraception and health care; having the freedom to choose abortion; being able to marry for love - or choosing not to marry; being allowed to associate with people from different backgrounds and races; having the right to education; being able to move freely in one's own country without restrictions being placed on where you can and cannot go; having the right to practise your religion or politics or speak your mothertongue; and having the freedom to express your views without fear of censorship.