Who needs gender equality?
the Feminist movement began in the XVIII century and is still very active. Women strenuously demand equality. With feminists of the past everything is clear. Their requirements were not just justified, but necessary. For example, such idle time at first sight question: property right. At his women was not. As soon as the woman married, all her property automatically became property of the husband. At divorce she had no right for anything, even to children. There were restrictions for an available profession, there was no vote and so on.
So it is not surprising that there were feminists who sometimes even at the cost of the life (for example, in 1793 executed Olympia de Guzh, the author of the Declaration of the rights of the woman and the citizen) demanded providing to the woman the rights and freedoms. Now a bit different apportion, and feminism, nevertheless, prospers.
Women already have the right to vote, there are no restrictions for a profession. Moreover, in many earlier exclusively man`s areas of the woman achieved undoubted progress and which - where even leave in leaders. And still requirements of equality proceed.
In some countries reaches to the point of absurdity. Women file a lawsuit for the compliments interested views (at the same time continuing to carry pass - skirts), for the offer to pay the bill in cafe, the hand offered at the exit from the bus and so on. Similar actions are considered as violation of the principle of equality. The husband who stated to the wife discontent concerning a tasteless lunch becomes guilty of woman abuse (by the way, the wife who stated to the husband deep “ôå“ concerning, for example, not hammered into a wall nailing, she is not guilty of anything). And so on. Funny cases a set, but they are considered not as amusing jokes, and as part of fight of women for equality.
It seems, a little more, and will demand from men that they learned to give birth to children - proceeding from the same provision on general equality.
But here an interesting question - and to whom this hypertrophied female equality which, besides, lumps together social and political equality and gender equality is favorable?
If earlier the woman, marrying, had the right to demand that the husband provided her the stone wall protecting from the slightest draft and it, and children, then now many women count only on themselves. They are quite successful at work, they have quite good income, they are capable to ensure that desired protection against drafts.
, It seems, at first sight, all shokoladno. But if to look narrowly at a situation more attentively, then it will turn out that actually equality of this kind is not favorable to the woman at all. The husband is not obliged to provide a family now, and especially - to give to the wife money “on pins“. Equality? Great! It is necessary to you - go earn and buy that you want.
Actually equality of this kind as it is now declared, does well only to men. And that not everything, and only that who does not wish to assume any responsibility.
The real man, without bothering any ideas about gender equality and perfectly understanding that similar equality is unattainable at least owing to physiological distinctions and different roles in a family (the same birth and education of children), continues to follow traditions which establish: the man - strength, the woman - weak, therefore, strong has to protect weak, provide it the most comfortable conditions and so on.
And here the one who does not wish responsibility very conveniently hides behind slogans of equality. He is not obliged to protect anybody. What for? equality! Means, the woman can protect herself. The alimony for children in case of divorce? Still what! Itself gave birth, let itself and contains. Equality! It is possible to become very quiet the gigolo and to live off safely the wife. And what? Equality, and it has a good salary. And so on.
So the women propagandizing general equality should become thoughtful: and who needs it? Whether really is what they want? Or it is about respect from men, about that to opinion of women listened, eventually, about that men, at last, learned to understand women. But it has no relation to equality.
And in general if the nature provided gender equality, then people would be same-sex and bred budding.