El-mom

- Topic 6: Working smart is actually hard work

"Practice doesn’t make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect." I'm remembering this... YouTube video, I think, that I saw a couple of months ago which was about Oxford University and who gets in. The argument was that Oxford, while being meritocratic and less... unambiguous in its acceptance criteria, the majority of people that go to Oxford tend to be from the top private schools in Britain. Which makes one wonder, in a country where the public school education is considered adequate enough for students to get into Oxbridge, why are the numbers still skewed towards those from the top private schools? The answer to this is, as much as it's about resources, it's also about the type of practice. Practice, study, and hard work by themselves aren't enough, knowing how to practice also matters. And that's what differentiates the top schools from the albeit qualified "good schools" in the UK, in the sense that the students that go to top schools not only have better resources, perhaps a better culture of learning, more expectations, but they also build a better system on how to study and how to practice. Let me put this back into our context. In school, you probably have noticed that you can classify the top students in the class in two, those that chill around and still manage to get good grades, and those that study 24/7 and get good grades. The differences among them could be attributed to whether they had a good intellectual base as children or whether they're late bloomers, and to some extent, to their natural abilities as well. But still, in competition among the two groups, you somehow still find those who chill doing marginally better across many areas of life than those that grind 24/7. Both are working hard, obviously, but one is working better than the other. Now after all this argument, my initial title might seem misleading to you, so here's my clarification: Simply working hard for the sake of it is less cognitively demanding, if you think about it. You don't analyze your learning process, you don't look into building up from first principles, you don't have to take risks, you can just take the pre-determined path you're given and grind on it. It is challenging, but it's challenging in the sense that the specific issues are challenging, while the lens you're approaching it is the same. On the other hand, when you decide to work smart, you actually have to actively work on how you work in addition to what you work on. You have to look for better ways to learn, bite a lot more than you can chew and break your teeth in the process of chewing it, constantly question what you're learning and how you're learning, and constantly look for the bigger picture and across other areas of knowledge to find links on how to better learn. Working smart requires you to constantly look into and build systems behind your work and it requires you to build a personal feedback loop that looks beyond surface level results and "I should work harder", and this, in my opinion, makes "working smart" be actually harder than it looks. Food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 5: On building Rome in a day

One of the things that bugs me from some cultures is this, it's the notion that you can become "besties" in a day. Don't get me wrong, there are people you click with instantly and find yourself at ease within a very short amount of time, but getting close in a meaningful way requires time and what time brings. A couple of months ago, I was having a conversation with some of the Addis Shapers in who we consider close friends and what our metrics were (don't ask which line of conversation got us there). There were a lot of metrics: vulnerability, dependence, comfort in being yourself... my biggest one was time. The friends I consider closest to me are those I've known for more than 10 years now, and the only person who has managed to be an exception is someone I've known for almost three years now. I didn't understand why this was until yesterday. I realized, it's because time is the best way to show you the different colors of someone and the growth stages of someone. Sure, I can try to compress topics in an afternoon, get to know someone deeply, and tell myself that we're friends, but it doesn't work that way. Time shows you how a person truly acts, and what that means to you. Time also makes you truly vulnerable, in ways that simply talking about your problems doesn't. And time gives you the space to show the different aspects of yourself, to let your seasons unfold and grow within them. I realized, to call someone close, to build the Rome of friendships, I have to be around day in and day out for longer periods of time. This doesn't necessarily mean seeing them everyday, I have long distance friendships that are just as fulfilling as with those I see in-person, but it means some form of constant presence, constant communication. And, again, that communication doesn't have to be everyday or even every week at times, but it has to exist, and I have to see you unfold, grow, and live through time to consider myself close to you. I don't know what you (the reader) can take away from this to be honest, maybe looking into what time means for you or what makes a friendship truly a friendship for you. But, anyway, food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 4: On hustle culture

Umm... ok, so do argue with me on this, but I genuinely think hustle culture doesn't make sense. Whenever I hear "there's someone working more hours than you making more money than you" or "no rest for the wicked" or I don't know, whatever sends the message that work is all there is to life, I can't help but question, "so what?". One thing I've learnt these past few months is that I genuinely couldn't care less about having a lot of money or being able to afford everything for the sake of it. Don't get me wrong, I do care about money a lot, but genuinely, I'm content with a simple life. I can't tell you the happiness I felt when I cleaned out my closet, dumped almost 1/3rd of it to my little sister (as God had intended), and was left with only the comfy essentials. I've learnt that all the money in the world wouldn't compensate for hours-long good conversations with that white friend of mine, or laughing till my insides hurt in the middle of a walk in Kasanchis at 8 PM, or my little sister running for a hug the moment I get into my home, or Sunday mornings with my good cup of tea and saved articles on Substack. I don't understand the need to sell your soul, the need to chase money wherever it is, when ambition doesn't necessarily mean money. Again, this is where my take on perspective comes. Whenever I look at the older Addis Shapers (granted, they lived and worked in different times than I do now), I see stability, thriving, good careers, while also having more than enough time to lounge around, relax, take walks, go to cafes. And again, maybe I'm heavily biased, but isn't that what life is about? Something I'd like to make sure isn't taken out of context here, when I'm saying this, I'm not discarding the pursuit of money or working hard. I actually think both are important. And I don't think money or working hard are evil, in the contrary, I think both are truly essential topics and skills that can truly enrich your life. My question lies on the "so what?". So you make money, so you work extremely hard, and...? What do those serve exactly? Are they fulfilling you? Is the money you're making enriching your life and buying you your time (could be present time, could be future time) or making you even more miserable? Is there truly a point to you losing out on the small moments for the sake of "working hard"? Food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 2: on content and obviousness

You can never be original, not really. But applying it to reflections and writings, I can't help but think that everything I can say or write is obvious in one way or another. Any type of lesson, theme, or reflection I can try imparting on people is something that already exists out there, and I'm not really inventing or showing you anything new. And this sometimes bugs me, it makes me feel like I'm not contributing anything of value. Like, when you think about it, obviously, choosing to deliberately be naïve is the hack to happiness. Obviously (the next topic), different perspectives exist. So me writing them down or choosing to reflect on them feels, not dumb per se, but like telling you what you already know, and why would I do that? But then, I think about some of my favourite writings and reflections, and I realize that they serve to make me think about/ reflect on the obvious more. The thing that made Diana my inspiration for my writing from the moment I read her first blog was that. I somehow had always known that Ethiopian Feminism should be different from Western Feminism, I had known that good marriages exist but that they're a lot of work, and I had known that Ethiopian pride existed. Seeing it written down in a sorted-out way, in a challenging way, and in a way that gave me perspective was what made it different. Whenever I sit down with writers', both professional and non-professional, the question of "why do we write?" always gets asked. And the typical answers, "catharsis", "because it's relatable", "passion", get thrown around, and they get debated on to the point that they stop becoming valid reasons. The one reason I've seen hold its ground in these discussions is this, "it's to reflect what's seemingly obvious but is different in every context and in every story". Most stories, reflections, and experiences people talk about and write about have been told, thought, and written many times before, and if one chooses to look for them, are obvious. What makes each different is the perspective it gets told from, and the way they're communicated.

#Theblogseries

- Topic 1: Choosing to deliberately be naïve

I'm a generally happy individual, truly. My default moods are usually grateful, content, or at their worst (aka, PMS), tired. I really try not to dwell much on the disappointments and the negative things in life (which are a lot), both in my personal one and around the world. How I do this is by deliberately being naïve, by deliberately ignoring the things outside of my control and adopting the "how can I solve it?" mindset when things are in my control, and by assuming the good in everything. I'm delusional to a pragmatic extent. I have this mindset that things will work out anyway, that I'll have the life I want, and that I'll die with a life well-lived. I'm going to focus on the "assuming the good in everything" part. I don't have the energy to assume anybody is out to get me or that I have haters surrounding me, I genuinely don't. I'm not saying I'm completely oblivious here, I do put up my boundaries and dissociate when I see red flags (or when my gut instinct twitches even a tiny bit), but I'd rather still assume a person is good when I first interact with them. And for good measure, I've met enough good people to cancel out the bad ones, so I'll continue believing that. About three months ago, I had a conversation with a friend who asked me "would you rather go for the truth or for the comfort in things within your life?". That question was posed specifically for religion, but applying it generally, I'd ideally go for truth than comfort. But I've learnt that my peace of mind hangs on me choosing comfort, and I've also learnt that choosing comfort doesn't necessarily mean not choosing truth. It could mean seeing the truth, but choosing to amplify the positive aspects of it, choosing to forget the parts that aren't in your control, and choosing to still see good.

#Theblogseries

The Blueprint https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/blueprint-diana-yohannes-6cytf?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via

Comment section (if needed, again).

This, but let me elaborate on it a bit. Talking about finances as a whole is taboo here, and the cultural underpinning, I think, comes from the majority's run towards catching up with the Joneses. Being honest will have us confront our reality, our financial illiteracy, and we'd rather not have those conversations altogether than actually face them. But the interesting thing here, even if you stop living in the loop of catching up with the joneses and start living a well-to-do (middle-class to rich) life (as I'm imagining quite the majority of the people here are), culture follows you, in ways you don't expect. It follows you in deciding to tolerate your employer when they delay your salary, it follows you in not asking for your worth to try not to look desperate, and it follows you in employers not following up on you the moment you ask for the number of your salary during the interview process. Maybe Tech Nerd (or Naty, one of them) is right, it's better to switch to companies abroad whenever possible.

Why Are Salaries Hidden in Ethiopian Job Posts? https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-salaries-hidden-ethiopian-job-posts-ethiopis-tadesse-dtm-pmp-uaf1f?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via

Everyone, meet my child.

The April edition of LinkUp Magazine is finally here, and we’re so excited to be back and with new columns we know you’re going to love. This month, we sit down with communications professional Diana Yohannes for a thoughtful conversation on her journey, her work, and her take on storytelling and impact. You’ll also take a flavourful ride with Reboot Coffee, get a glimpse of the Creative DNA Launch, and explore a space that works with you, GullÍt, alongside new columns like PhotoBreak and more. And the best part? You can enjoy the full issue now on the LinkUp Premium app Read here now: LinkUp magazine: April Edition @LinkUpaddis

Comment section (if needed)

I've been thinking about respect quite a bit nowadays, in the sense of people who demand it. I'm realizing that the people whom I've deeply respected and tried my best to appear as a good person in front of, never demanded it or even cared for it as much. They made sure their boundaries were protected, and they clearly showed you where their lines were, but beyond that, they were the most humble people I've ever met. On the other hand, the people who actively demand respect, those who felt threatened simply because I treated them like everyone else, regardless of their status, were the ones to whom I lost my respect almost instantly. And thinking through that now, I'm pretty sure security in itself is highly related to the way they demand respect. The people I respect deeply were secure to the point that they didn't mind being treated as equal to other people (and sometimes, equal to people my age), because they also knew that their presence, the way they showed themselves, was of someone humble but also not someone whose lines you could cross. And I'm thinking... this applies to us as a nation. Our pride comes from our insecurity, our demand for respect comes from our insecurity. We're insecure about our wars, about still being poor, about not living by our national values, and when faced with it, we choose to mask it by "we're not black though", or "we're generous", or "we're the birthplace of coffee". Arguable in all honesty, and a rumble more than a writing trying to jot down its points and argue, but food for thought (both for you as an individual and a citizen of a proud nation)?

Rereading this classic, stumbled upon something I've been thinking about recently. Long rant incoming....

Reminds me of this

Another thing I've been mulling over is this. "100% of the people in our program are women" - really, why?

Ok, this is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, and I’m still thinking it through, so please argue with me. Am I the only one who feels a bit off hearing things like "80% of our graduates are women", or "we make sure that half our workforce is women," or "we need quotas to reach X% women"? And this is coming from someone who very much considers herself a feminist. My argument here is two things. First: if the goal is equality, what does that actually mean in practice? Isn't the number supposed to be, ideally and in most cases, close to 50/50? I understand the need to correct historical imbalances, and I’m not against intentional efforts to bring more women into certain spaces. I get that. And I'm ok with certain fields being tilted to one side like that (because, historically, let's not lie, preferences among the sexes towards certain fields exist), but neutral/casual places being tilted like that? That's not equality now, really, is it? The second argument follows up on the first argument, but goes something like this: if we acknowledge that there is a preference among the sexes, shouldn't we focus more on creating the spaces and the mindset that enable women to succeed more than the numbers? My counterargument here is in fields like nursing. You don't see anyone complaining about the number of men being much less than the number of women in nursing, and we all know that there really aren't THAT challenging systemic barriers and limitations (besides, maybe cultural perceptions) that limit men from entering the field. Shouldn't the same argument be there for women in Tech? Like, I get the baseline argument that there are limitations, but isn't focusing on the numbers and the figures somewhat... demeaning, unnuanced? To be clear, I'm not against increasing women's perception; I'm all for it. I'm just wondering, in our quest to push optics and quantifying every "impact" we come across, are we losing the nuance of what equality in practice is?

If you have a different opinion, please voice it. I would really love to hear different takes on this. #anotherrandombloginthesameday #gasp #Theblogseries

On subscriber number obsession, why you should consider opening a channel? (unedited, mostly)

(It actually feels weird writing long-form about this.) I have a confession… of sorts. I have been thinking about this during March, and it is something I have known for a while, but couldn't quite admit because..... it felt weird to say out loud. I couldn't care less about my channel’s subscriber count. I feel like it might be because this is a personal blog, and I know what I say, my journey, my shenanigans, aren't relevant to everyone. And I do not expect them to be. I used to care about numbers in the early stages of this channel (lord knows how happy I was when I hit my first hundred), but now, if you gave me a choice between 200 engaged subscribers who actually get something from what I post (could be entertainment, could be someone relatable, could be something valuable) and 20,000 subs for the sake of it, I would absolutely pick the 200 ones. I mostly (not currently, lol) keep this channel public because I remember 14-year-old me stumbling into random personal content creators and learning a ton from them. I think that, to some extent, had an effect on my growth as a human. I was lucky to stumble into the good ones (most of the time, at least), and I hope I can be that for someone else, too (at least for the most part, I know I'm not the best). But the temptation to make this private, you have no idea. I think this felt weird to admit because, to some extent, quite a lot of content creators here (and almost everyone everywhere) value how much their content spreads. And to be fair, this is a personal channel, so the logic is different. I am not doing this to get monetized, or to advocate for a cause, or to build some outward-facing project that depends on reach. I am here to vent once in a while, share about my day, and see whether anyone relates. To be honest, over time, the people here have made this channel more than just me, and they are also the people who push me, especially during the moments I start losing the relevance of this and want to delete it. It... almost feels like I'm breaking a norm here by not celebrating when I reach a certain number of subs or certain amounts of figures (and not in the revolutionary way, more so in the "is there something I'm missing?" way), but yeah, this is what I think. And I hope this serves as an encouraging point if you want to start sharing your journey, but wonder if you'll get people to be interested in what you have to say. More often than not, it's really not that deep. If your goal is reach, then yeah, that's a different discussion point, but if your goal is just to be out there, find people, let things out, and just have an outlet of sorts for things like this, go ahead with it. Even ten people are enough. Make of this what you will :)

#randomblogsareback