In this essay, women are not equal to men. Nature has it, from time immemorial, that the two can and will never be equal. Even though feminism tries to make the equality a reality by trying to secure similar rights as those of men, it shall never be achieved. Maybe in the virtual life, equality can be achieved but not in the physical life.
A tool that is used to make rules and regulations and to determine the course of life is power (Lukes 1974 and 2005, and Connolly 1983). It is true beyond any reasonable doubt that this tool rests in the hands of selected few: the males. Without distorting the meaning of power to suit the different positions, it remains as the ability to act when compelled to. This makes it a powerful resource. When viewed critically, it’s seen that this positive social advantage is unequally distributed among sex. The males walk away with a greater portion that the females. This has made the feminine to device methods of redistributing this asset. The question that arises in the process is that “who distributed this resource initially? And was there inequality? Who has the power to redistribute this resource now? And how feasible can it be? These are questions without definite answers. Trying to distribute power equally among sex is a good idea that nobody can oppose, but, is power a commodity that is possessed by individuals in different amounts? (Young 1990, 31). In Justice, Gender, and the Family, Susan Moller Okin is aware and states clearly that families lack power balance. A given family member is advantaged over the other. Considering the domination that is brought about by power, several feminists look at it as oppression, patriarchy and subjection. This is a misperception of the highest order as it distorts the whole meaning of power. In attempt to balance the situation, there is an overreaction displayed by women. They forget that they were made and not created. This is according to the Holy bible. The bible further affirms that man is the head of the family. (I’ve alluded to the bible because I believe in it)
Another aspect of inequality (or equality as others may view it) is in the social aspect of life. Protection is a key point about life. Everybody enjoys the fruits of a safe and secure environment. In a family, who provides this security? The answer is obvious. Physical security may exist but another aspect of security always misses in the absence of man. The presence of a man in a family streamlines everything.
Truly, something cannot exist where it doesn’t or fail to exist where it truly does. We cannot talk about non-existing phenomena. We always mention inequality because it truly exists and everybody knows this. Several movements are in place now to champion for the female rights and equality. If equality existed, then why all these movements? Why all the women organizations? Why?
The more the attention is shifted towards women, the more the male counterparts are exposed to danger. Several pro women campaigns endanger males. This has resulted in gender imbalance and current population results reveal that women population is beyond compare to men. And with such campaigns, if no serious action is taken, the males might be extinct.
It is surprising to see women tending to move toward men when not even a single man desires to be like a woman. The term widow in my community is so common, but why not widowers? How many times have we seen women trying to be like men? Similarly how many cases have been seen about women tending to be like women? The answers are clear. Women always try to be like men. This is a confirmation that they have identified what lacks in them so as to be completely equal to men.
It is an environmental injustice to claim equality between men and women. However, cover ups are normally taken to wrap the underlying reality. It is a bitter reality that might take ladies their entire life to come into terms with. In basic simple terms, man is not and will never be equal to women.
Morriss, P. (2002). Power: A Philosophical Analysis, 2nd edition. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Okin, S. M. (1989). Justice, Gender and the Family. New York: Basic Books.
Pateman, C. (1988). The Sexual Contract. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Pitkin, H. F. (1972). Wittgenstein and Justice: On the Significance of Ludwig Wittgenstein for Social and Political Thought. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Ramazanoglu, C(1993). Up Against Foucault: Explorations of some tensions between Foucault and feminism. New York: Routledge.
Rubin, G. (1976). “The Traffic in Women: Notes on the Political Economy of Sex,” in Rayna Reiter, ed., Toward an Anthropology of Women. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Said,E. (1986). “Foucault and the Imagination of Power,” in Foucault: A Critical Reader, ed. David Couzens Hoy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sawicki, J. (1991). Disciplining Foucault: Feminism, Power, and the Body. New York: Routledge.
Wartenberg, T. (1990). The Forms of Power: From Domination to Transformation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, trans. Ephraim Fischoff et al. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.