Wednesday, May 14, 2014



Gender Equality: The Impossible ideal 
Quite frequently we hear phrases like “Gender equality” and “Equal rights” being thrown around, especially in relation to roles in society and the work force. The term sexual or gender equality has very often been linked with a horde of shameless man-hating feminists who comb the streets in masses advocating “equality” for both sexes. These ugly images are often turned into public jokes as men comment that the female species has already been given more rights than it really deserves. What then? Does gender equality prevail in every society in this new millennium? Will there be a constant, one sided battle between the women who feel they must “Take back” what the evil race known as “men” withheld from them centuries ago, and the real men who just want to co-exist with their female counterparts and companions?
The statement I am about to make will incur the wrath of all feminists and band-wagonists that are seemingly ignorant of the basic nuances of the English Language, but I will make it anyway:
Now that you have finished spluttering over the fact that I just made that apparently misogynistic statement ask yourself this question: What IS equality? You see, the problem is that we have managed to use two totally different words interchangeably. Equality is NOT the same as EQUITY. Equality is giving everyone (ie, both male and female individuals) the same levels of responsibilities right across the board. Equity on the other hand is dispensing the appropriate amount of resources and responsibilities according to their unique abilities and needs. I am 5’6 and I have a friend who is 5’10, both of us need to get over a wall that is 6’ high. If we have eight 1”blocks, it would make more sense to share them EQUITBABLY (6 for me and 2 for him) than equally (4 each). That is the principle of justice. Justice is the EQUITABLE (not equal) distribution of resources/responsibilities.
Gender equality is impossible because of this simple reality: men and women cannot be equal because they are not the SAME. 2+2, 8-4, 16/4 and 2x2 have one thing in common: all of them are equal to or the same as 4. But Man does NOT equal woman. No matter how advanced philosophy is, it still does not contradict the fact that women are physically weaker than men. This allows leeway for rape, molest and domestic abuse which once again support the fact that men are dominant over women and that women are constantly at their mercy. The psychological and emotional make-up of a woman is also, whether stereotyped or proven, more towards the maternal and nurturing side. As the popular saying goes, “men think with their minds, women think with their hearts.” This would make women less rational, a quality which is not respected in an economic society where rational decisions are of topmost importance.
Earlier I made reference to the fact that the terms are often used by feminists, and it is my firm belief that what these individuals mean is female supremacy, because the vast majority of their arguments tear down and seek to destroy the roles of men in society. Case in point: The Feminists Mantra: “Anything a man can do, I can do it too, and do it BETTER”. Really now? Place the average female on a construction site to mix cement and carry blocks at the same rate as the average workman and I guarantee she won’t last till lunchtime. Even better: walk around shirtless for a whole day… if you dare.
Finally, let me show you why this concept is undesirable. Situation: A man and his wife are in bed at 3am when suspicious sounds are heard coming from outside or downstairs. Does the man the curl up into a ball and say to his wife: “Honey, take the flashlight and go check that out”? GOD FORBID! After all, is he not the MAN in the relationship? But hold on… Doesn’t gender equality make both sexes EQUAL? So why can’t SHE check it out too? See the hypocrisy in society’s foolish ideals?
Do not misunderstand my position on this matter or my motive for writing this 

post. I am not a misogynist, I do not support or believe in either sex dominating 

as providers and protectors in society. I am just trying to put things in perspective 

so that we can THINK more logically and individually instead of swallowing 

one more of society’s illogical ideals hook line and sinker without a second 



  1. Awesome logic...Equality is not equal to equity.

  2. hmm.. oyeton Oh Oyeton.. well said but still hav a ffew choice words to rebut wid ... but GREAT ARTICLE! #2thumbup

  3. I must say I enjoyed every drop of this Post, I embrace and respects this Blogger's personal opinion and really like the analogies and the way he or she brought the points across. I will say though that although strong of a point, I do disagree with some statements but if I am so moved I will write a response to this blog.
    Personal Statements or opinions made by the blogger such as:
    "This would make women less rational, a quality which is not respected in an economic society"
    "men are dominant over women and that women are constantly at their mercy." are not only invalid but also unfit to utter logically.

    I am pleased however with this blog and will be reading it again...


  4. I must say that this is purely document was a good read. I agree and disagree to some of your ponits. The fault with gender roles is that they are defined by society as to what a man or a woman can do. Speaking for my self, I am a woman who consider myself with equal footing with men considering the points that you have put forward. E.g. Putting me on a constructing site, I can physically keep up with a man, which means I can extend this courtesy to other women. Please note that both men and women are born with different levels of testosterone and oestrogen some more than some and these hormones is not restricted to a specific gender. So, therefore your agrument of men being physically stronger than women is flawed considering these basic fundamental facts. The fact is that society determines what a specific gender should and should not do. From we were born our toys were divided as male or female toys; and this was a social agency that was set up to define domestic roles to women and other roles to men. Now i ask you to consider the reverse.

    What if boys were given dolls and girls given truck? would the same domestic values be equated to women or men?

    On the other hand men and women can not be equal in its entirety because each gender were made with opposing construction of the human body. So, therefore I agree with you.

    However, the problem evolves when men think they are superior to women.

    1. Dahlia, you are ignoring parts of the article conveniently. Did you not read this part: "Will there be a constant, one sided battle between the women who feel they must “Take back” what the evil race known as “men” withheld from them centuries ago, and the real men who just want to co-exist with their female counterparts and companions?" Does that sound like a man who wants to be "Superior"?

      And one more thing... We know each other very well. I wrote this article with the average female in mind. And we both know that you are not the "average female"

    2. But that's the thing who determines the average female?

      And i saw the part that says some males just want to live peacefully, and yes some women want to do too ..... But this author is generalizing and calling every female as a man hater and is using stereotypical views to support his points which is unfair and annoying.

      And it is not one sided because you men have never been told that you cant get a job because you are woman. There are still men out there who take advantage of women repeatly and consider this society as still being male doninated.

      As a i have said the problem is that society puts a line through both gender roles... And tells each gender what they should and should not do.

  5. Pardon my grammar this was written in anger and annoyance. Didn't have time to proof read any thing, so my apologies.

  6. Nicely done, Mr. Clarke. A thoroughly brave and well written read. I look forward to more.

  7. Good article, Mr Clarke.... well said... You have a little sense after all...