To display the structured discussion or engage in the debate, view the topic on https://debato.org/html/discussion?a=ckole&p=living-in-a-society-where-there-s-no-gender-would-be-a-nice-approachnnpw3
According to sociologists, biological sex is a physical reality while their gender is socially constructed for a range of purpose. There has been a lot of controversies concerning gender equality in the world. Some people believe that the removal of gender role will damage the current system and erupt confusion. The fear that men will lose their place is another ultimate concern.
With all these complexities that surround gender in our society, would gender equality or a society with simply no gender be better?
In nature most things have both genders. We are just ascribing a means of division to it right now. I know there’s lots of issues with inequality but removing gender itself is certainly not the answer. The division agenda is strong right now and these issues are used to divide and control more then they are meant to solve anything.
Posted using Partiko iOS
The thing is, in nature most things have a biological sex, gender is a construct that points to ones identity rather than biological sex. And I can understand that different people get different wages according to capabilities, or even if a country prohibits people that cannot drive to own a driving license, I can live with that. But this differentiation should be based on capabilities and not on presumptions about ones gender. The fact that women get less opportunities in their career because 'they might quit one day when she wants babies', or that women cannot access the same education in some countries is unacceptable to me. It's also the other way around. The fact that men are expected to provide income and that it is considered weird when he decides to stay at home to take care of the household, or that a man is expected to be tough and deal with it without having the same social safety net. These are issues in my opinion.
Well, I agree with you with regard to having equal opportunities.
The fact that men are expected to provide income and that it is considered weird when he decides to stay at home to take care of the household, or that a man is expected to be tough and deal with it without having the same social safety net. These are issues in my opinionIf i may ask, who designed it that way? Men are tough and women are light. This fact is natural. There are some roles that women cannot handle perfectly, and vise versa. The fact that we are created differently gives rise to most of these role sharing. Men have their ego and to say the fact, any man that stays at home to wash the dishes and expects the wife to cater for the family is a dummy. In this generation, couples work hand in hand to care for the family. Still, the wife has more role to play in keeping the house hold in order. Women generally have the notion that the man should provide. Theirs is to support. Man can help his wife to take care of the children when he is available. Nothing bad in that. When there is no division of labour, both party will expect the other to take charge. Many things will be left undone. The fact is we cant be totally equal in some areas. We cant recruit equal women and men in the force. Deploy female army to fight male army and see the outcome. We should treat the sensitive parts where the women are being deprived of some basic things like education, political power, some vital position in an organization and so on and not some family roles matter.
I love this. So convenient for the men. I remember my first real job. The men tried to send me home. I didn't belong there. The reasons were many. Wives would be jealous. A woman on the job would bring the pay level down. It wasn't safe. It just wasn't right. It didn't matter that I had bills to pay. Responsibilities. I was supposed to just bow out.
I don't think so. Men shouldn't be afraid of competition, from each other or from women. If you're worried about being usurped, just get better. Otherwise make way. We're coming.
Do I sound irritated? You bet.
I love being a woman. If someone prefers to live life in a gender-neutral state, that's fine, for them. Just don't tell me what to do.
As for destroying traditional gender roles--good heavens, yes. Enough oppression. My husband and I met on that first job. Equality in no way interfered with courtship or marriage. 46-year anniversary celebrated on April 30, 2019.
I stay home with the kids and my wife works... I can tell you it ain't right. I see how my children suffer with their mother gone, and I'm sure yours did too. I just think it’s funny that it’s okay for women to be slaves to their boss but if they want to stay at home to raise their children somehow that makes them inferior to men...
Nobody suffered in my family, at least not because of role differences. I will say I wasn't a perfect parent and wish I could do that all over again.
I doubt it will change anything unless we all have the same level if IQ interests character and we are clones.
Why do we all need the same IQ for it to make a difference? It is not necessarily the goal to give the same life to everyone, that would be a debate about communism. The issue here is that people do not get the same chances in life because of gender. There are undoubtedly differences from person to person, but similar personalities should have the same chances in my opinion.
:)
Even people without similar personalities. No way to really test ability. Give people a shot. Let them fail, or succeed, based on merit.
Indeed you should treat everyone equally, but if their capabilities show to be lacking you should be able to fire him/her, or he/she should start another education for example. They should have the same chances disregarding gender but not be te same because everyone has a different personality.
Merit should rule, not a predetermined quality. I agree. It's just that, having had a hand in education (professionally), I'm fully aware that assessments are not accurate. Many abilities are not measurable. Just give people a chance to prove themselves. If they cannot perform, they must be redirected. Not only are many abilities not measurable, but bias inevitably enters into every assessment. Just give people a chance to fail--or succeed. I've seen some surprising outcomes in my time.
It will destroy the traditional role of both sexes and the society's cultural norms will be decayed, which is detrimental to the growth of courtship and marriage.
Different sexes might still be biologically inclined to take certain roles in society. Gender equality would mean that there is no prejudice and that both genders have equal chances in life, not that they should be equal. That would be social equity instead of social equality.
0
Taking up the same role in the society is not a bad thing as I’ve earlier mentioned in one of my comment. What I’m stressing on is that the equality should be limited to some points. Naturally, men are created stronger than women. Men protects the women. The Women bear children. Women are always pampered because they have less physical strength. They are weaker. They mostly rely on men to do the tasking job. Of cos there are women that are very in-dependable, but how many do we have out there? On a biological-physical level, we are created differently and we need to accept that fact instead of fighting endlessly for equality. While clamouring for equality between man and woman, always remember that women will have to defend themselves. Special respect that men gives women will be lost. Men can beat women with no lawsuit against him and so on. I’m not totally against equality, but it must have a boundary. If not, I’m afraid of what would happen if men and women are equal in all ways.
:)
Having slaves was ones a cultural norm. Cultural change and cultural decay are not necessarily bad things.
Not all cultural norms can be decayed. We all know that slavery is part of depriving others of their right to many things, which is reasonably not acceptable. Cultural norms in courtship and marriages is still very important in many part of the world. Equality to some extent will tear this apart and make courtship and marriage an ish.
I think the way we are taking it is what is really causing problem. The talk on Gender equality shouldn't make things complex. We should all remember that everything that has advantage surely has its other side and vice versa. IMHO, society without gender isn't cool. I can only support equality in some areas but not all.
Can you further explain on what fields gender equality would not be beneficial?
When all are equal, none are free.
Posted using Partiko iOS
As I see it: "When all are 'treated' equal, everyone is free."
There is a correlation with gender equality in a country and its experienced happiness. That is already a reason to live in a society where gender equality is better, or the concept of gender is even absent. (Article link in comment)
Article from Researchgate
If you don't have access, here is a wetransfer link that is valid until 5-5-2019: https://we.tl/t-SJPT8LDR9C
The word gender equality is more confusing. I will tag it as inappropriate in that context. It simply means total equality between both sex, which is absurd. I think it would be more better if it can be analysed. Like Gender equality where and where? That would make more sense than just parading it collectively.