Men -Gender equality is your issue too. (Cont.)

''We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes, but I can see that they are and that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence. If men don’t have to be aggressive in order to be accepted, women won’t feel compelled to be submissive. If men don’t have to control, women won’t have to be controlled..Both men and women should feel free to be sensitive. Both men and women should feel free to be strong. It is time that we all perceive gender on a spectrum – not as two opposing sets of ideals...If we stop defining each other by what we are not and start defining ourselves by what we are, we can all be freer and this is what HeForShe is about. It’s about freedom.''

And I'm all with Emma Watson in this and I feel extend happy that she's used her image to bring out such a core sociological point! Some have to prove themselves in spheres like driving a lorry, being a postman, military soldier, business tycoon, Prime Minister, President and so many other 'manly' jobs! But that's more like painting a canvas where only the female are extending their arms for equality and togetherness with the men having his arms crossed across his puff chest, head held high up and reluctant to look down. For listen up, men have never- NEVER- ever once been called upon to prove themselves in female roles as such as females have been beckoned to prove themselves into the male realm which mainly consists of the public sphere. Why?

Well, perhaps because it is the same patriarchy that defines female roles as being petty and not worth striving for.

Sadly. That's what the rest of the world think as well. Sadly that's what women think as well. Thankfully though they've not abandoned the female roles. Because that would only have meant  that the patriarch has succeeded into proving that values that demonstrate prowess, machochism and physique are the ultimate values.

What's sad is that many people tend to think is that gender equality is about some getting rights, of proving that this sex is able to do what is thought to be reserved exclusively to the opposite sex.

Truth is that it's not. Equality is far from being achieved by proofs or by acquiring even that economic, social and financial equality that feminists talk of.

Equality is about valuing each role as having the same worth.

Why is going out to work better than working at home and working for your family?

Only because of the social constructions associated to who is the 'natural' breadwinner? Perhaps remuneration is what causes the hierarchy to form. My wife brings money home, and I only empty the dustbin. She's better than I am, I should submit to her will for I won't survive without her.

Hell no!

Even she won't survive without you. Tell her to come home everyday with the weeks garbage still not thrown away. She depends on you just as much. No work is better. 

This brings us to the doctor-scavenger story where a scavenger has low social prestige and a doctor a high profile for he saves lives. But what we tend to overlook is that the scavenger is preventing the disease into he first place. It is because of the scavenger that you won't be risking your immunity system and go spending money at the doctor's. Both doctor and scavenger deserve equal amount of respect and appreciation. Both breadwinner role and non-breadwinner role deserve the same amount if respect. Both sexes deserve the sane amount of respect, prestige and dignity.

Materialism like money, level of education and income and power have disillusioned us enough! More than enough.

It's not about striving to get into the better role, for there is no such thing as a better role. One doesn't exist without the other. A miner is no less important or less valuable than a female scientist. A business tycoon is no more greater than an entrepreneur. A vegetable seller is no less exceptional than the planter. Men is no less beautiful than women.

Equality is about the respect of each role in this whole kaleidoscope of roles. It's not about which role we should undertake to prove that we can do  what the opposite sex thinks our sex can't. Equality is not about bringing equality in economic, political or social terms. Equality is not about such materialistic concepts. Equality occurs in thought. Respect. Equality is about having equal social respect, dignity and status. And the rest will automatically follow..

Some would argue. Still.

''Women insist on their "divine rights," "immutable rights," "inalienable rights." These phrases are not so sensible as one might wish. When one comes to think of it, there are no such things as divine, immutable or inalienable rights. Rights are things we get when we are strong enough to make good our claim to them. Men spent hundreds of years and did much hard fighting to get the rights they now call divine, immutable and inalienable. Today women are demanding rights that tomorrow nobody will be foolhardy enough to question.~''

To that. Have the materialistic gains mattered so far? Smiles.

Gender issues are just one rung of the whole stratification concept which is way more complicated and complex. Gender issues has become a web- a huge one with which we've recently decided to mingle economic disparities, and political issues into. Things would get more and more complicated with time is our values continue to become so shallow and so lusted with power. Women wanted that even. Else they would not have sought for such rights.

I'm not saying it was a wrong doing. They were not ''given'' the right to vote. They fought and died for it. But for je, what's the point of having gained access to such 'prestige' finally politically and economically? Socially women are still brought down. !Examples- TO BE ADDED!

Perhaps the right way to tackled it was to win the fight if morality and equality in thoughts first thing. The economy and political aspects would have followed suit automatically. But by probing the later initially is making to hard and us renaming more investment.. Sure thoughts if people cannot be manipulated and not all of them would  change their will to respect everyone. But I'm not concerned with the totality of the whole populace. I'm talking about the majority..

The majority of people think alike right? Then why can't we think about respect alike?