A word often spoken in the context of many aspects. But arguably based on a flawed interpretation. By this I mean, a consistent rhetoric has developed regarding what it means to be balanced, and men are sub-consciously attuned to this one-dimensional line of thought and applying the associated vision to judge and define behaviours. Let’s explore this further.

Consider the work, life balance debate. It’s widely accepted that men work to live. That without working, one can’t make a living and therefore survive. So, that’s exactly what men do. They work. And most, very hard. An integral and crucial part in the circle of life. However, the idea of balance between work and life in general has become increasingly topical, especially in the advent of Covid-19; where one of the major realisations across the world was that life should be more balanced. With the pandemic exposing the scales in many lives to be tipped heavily in favour of work; lesser attention paid to family, leisure, spiritual growth, exercise, etc. Yet how the world looked on in disbelief as this didn’t count for much when millions were literally dying by the day. Leaving behind the very jobs in which they were mostly invested.

Interestingly, the work, life balance debate is also spoken of in the context of male versus female professionals. Where females, as mothers and home makers, seek recognition between work and responsibilities in the home. The argument being that women must be given the opportunity to be home makers without negatively impacting their career aspirations. An unspoken risk. However, I believe this argument is an example of the flaw in interpretation I alluded to earlier. Because if we understood balance the way we should, we’d know how to navigate the issue to our advantage. But pin this thought for a moment.

Mental health issues have come to the fore in recent times. With suicide increasing at an alarming rate; currently classified as the fourth leading cause of death among 15 to 29-year-olds across the world. Studies show that more and more people are dealing with severe mental health issues that cannot be fully articulated, since their cause cannot be easily identified; neither can their cure be readily established. It doesn’t help that Covid-19 forced millions across the world to isolate for over two years; some doing this completely solo. So, certain instabilities, imbalances and even madnesses are emerging in people all over the world. And an increasing number are suffering from emotional and mental breakdowns. Social workers are currently one of the most widely demanded professions in the world today, with countries like the United Kingdom and the United States of America recruiting from as far as Africa, offering enticing packages that include the relocation of entire families, simply because of the shortage of skills relative to the increasing demand.

A recent study by the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa found that mental health issues are endemic in the country (i.e., here to stay), with South Africans suffering higher rates of probable depression and anxiety than other countries. Yet most cases remain untreated. So, all these people are walking around yet struggling with this silent killer. The United Nations foresaw this emerging world conversation when it included mental illness as one of the sustainable development goals in 2015 (the 17 calls to action identified as necessary to transform the world by 2030).

Now, I hold a different view on the issue of working to make a living. In fact, I’m of the strong opinion that men shouldn’t work to live, but rather live to work. That working is a rite of passage on earth. I believe every person should be doing something as his contribution to humanity. The man I’m referring to isn’t (neither can he be) a survivor or victim of circumstance. But one that’s in control of his destiny and able to chart a deliberate course based on where he expects to land up according to his individual part. The man who works to live can only be a survivor. Because his hands are literally cuffed by how much he’s able to achieve subject to what is available to him amongst the many. It’s a fight for space; and he’s a recipient of life’s circumstances. In my view, the idea of balance will inevitably play out differently for both.

So, let’s start by unpacking what balance is. The Oxford Dictionary defines balance as “an even distribution of weight enabling someone or something to remain upright and steady”. Another interpretation is “a situation in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions”. Interestingly, balance is also defined in relation to specific areas. For instance, balance in art or design (which refers to a distribution of the visual weight of objects, colours, texture and space), in sport (which refers to the ability to stay upright or stay in control of body movement), and in photography (dealing with a composition technique that arranges elements within the frame to achieve equal visual weight across the image). In all these cases, the essence comes through clearly. An equal weighting must be applied in respect of certain factors to arrive at a perfect positioning.

As some of you know, I’m a Lawyer by profession. And I believe the scales of justice provide a good visual to further enunciate this concept. Scales are weighed on either side of a judgement pole; the idea being that the scales must be equally balanced with a view to ensuring fairness in the court process. That the court hears both sides and then judges each case to eventually tip the scales in favour of one over the other. Introducing a justifiable imbalance in the place of balance through the decision adopted in the circumstances.

Now, let’s bring this home.

Balance in relation to individuals is commonly evaluated in the context of the spiritual, physical, emotional, and intellectual aspects of one’s life. Being the areas that it’s believed should be given due attention in order to ensure the wholeness of an individual. And thereby enhance his overall mental wellness. These categories are further sub-divided. We find things like faith and religion, under spiritual; exercise and rest, under physical; family and hobbies, under emotional; and work and study, under intellectual. The lists go on. So, if most attention is given to work, study, continuous improvement, and the like, this would indicate that the intellect is preferred over the spiritual, physical and emotional aspects of one’s life. Or so they say.

But there’s an inherent error. When the scales are tipped from the onset – one in favour of another; priorities emerge. Which goes against the equal distribution of weight that constitutes balance. And the man inadvertently functions from a place of imbalance. In dealing with the different aspects on a daily basis, while some may require more attention than others, and may take more time; this should be from the premise that the man is already upright and balanced. Because balance is about standing upright in the face of the many factors that have to be weighed against each other. Not in defining an order of priorities between them and then balancing between them. This presupposes that each area is given the required attention from time-to-time; being what is necessary to keep the flame alight.

If we don’t look at balance in this way, we’ll judge each other erroneously. And impute blame where patience and understanding are required. The prioritisation of things begs entitlement, as though one is required to handle matters on a certain basis. How then do you explain the President that remains happily married? The richest man in the world that keeps his family? A Pastor that leads a congregation of thousands across the world? They all work hard. They have to. But they’ll exercise when they can; spend time with their families when they should; and continually invest in themselves as they must. They are whole despite the fact that their usage of time does not look like that of an ordinary man.

I believe it turns on how you use the time that’s available to you to do what you must, when you must, to ensure that you’re a balanced person. Allocating sufficient time to each aspect. Not preferring one thing over another in the name of balance, or demanding recognition or acknowledgement for the various factors you have to balance. Let’s not even go there.

It’s possible to do it all. In fact, it’s possible to do it all and be happy through it all. The key’s in finding the due time for it all according to how much time is required to be invested in it all. When you do this, you’re able to make it all fit. Everything has its place. There’s a time and season for everything. And this, friends, is what a balanced person looks like.

My point is this. For whatever you have on your plate, simply purpose to use your time wisely to make it all work. And by work, I mean every area must be reconciled in peace. Happy marriage, successful career, healthy body, stable mental state, wholeness, and so forth. This doesn’t work when everything is a mess and falling apart because you’re failing to make it all fit in the time that you have. That’s clearly imbalance. If you can do this, you’ve found balance, however it may look for you. Don’t let anyone judge you. Because there’s no formula. And don’t be emotional about it either. Sometimes it’ll hurt to do what you must at the expense of another thing. But, let’s separate balance from priorities. That’s a conversation for another day.

Yours in baking (and everything else),

Chi