We all love it when, young men are taught to become more sensitive, and young women more confident of themselves.
It is of great utility to encourage forward striving of people in general.
Not just because it is a perfectly reasonable preposition, but also because, only then, can everybody’s talents be maximumly exploited by everyone else so that we all benefit.
The challenge with many African Feminists, Woman Emancipation and other Gender Equality movements there in, is one.
Failing to strike a difference between, *Equality of Opportunity* and *Equality of Outcome.*
The thing about these two phenomena is that, they should never co-exist in the same conceptual universe.
Setting up an economy where everyone (Man or Woman) with the ability could be ultimately exploited for the good of everyone is the best preposition. Which most, if not all feminists and egalitarian policy crusaders agree with.
Yet again, unknowingly, creating an environment where, making men weak or failing to encourage them to be strong whilst encouraging the women simultaneously doesn’t serve any good. Not to the men, not to the women.
This is not to say that, it is the duty of feminists to encourage budding young men to stand strong and be confident of themselves, however, It is as well not to the advantage of Feminists to set up an environment where men are intentionally made to feel weak just as It is an unbalanced attempt for Gender Equality Ambassadors to encourage a one sided gender emancipation campaigns, encouraging one side to be strong whilst leaving the other in blanks. After all, Equality in essence means striking a balance at either side.
You see, there are only two reasons why men and women differ. One is Cultural, another is Biological.
Statistically, when you minimise the cultural differences, you maximise the biology differences.
For example, the biggest differences between men and women known of in the world today, in terms of temperament and interest are in Scandinavia.
Research has it that, these differences have been escalated and maximised because of egalitarian policies (Gender Equality Movements).
What this means, is that, the more egalitarian a state becomes, the bigger the personality differences between men and women.
This is not a good thing.
Gender Equality in its essence to many African Elites, tends to eliminate or to the least seek to weaken the natural hierarchies of dominance.
Yet, Hierrachies of Dominance in Humanity are not a bug of our heredity but a feature of our Evolutionary Existence.
For instance, in order to become an Engineer, like myself, you have to have a temperamental proclivity in things rather than people. (Statistically, most of such people that take this direction in the World are men) and..
Inorder to be a Nurse, one must have a temperamental proclivity or interest in people rather than things. And guess what, (Statistically, most of such people that take this direction in the World are women).
So, you start to see these natural differences in occupational choice not because we’re preconditioned by social engineering but rather by our natural instincts.
It is not a bad thing. Its how we are.
When you set up a society that maximises equality of opportunity, you maximise people’s free choice. But again, the inevitable consequence is that, you also maximise the difference in choice between people.
It happens naturally, you can’t eat your cake and have it at the same time.
Yet again, this is where i think feminists and Gender Equality movements go wrong.
If 10 positions of Engineering Jobs were advertised today. It is only paramount that the company hires the best to do the job (men or women) who ever will turn out to be best should emerge.
Based on statistical info I mentioned earlier, all best 10 to emerge are likely to be men.
This only means that, if an opportunity of 10 similar Nurse Jobs presented itself, the majority or all being Women, would be the likely outcome. Nature striking a fair balance.
If say, the committee tries to forego the 9th and 10th of the men so that they replace the positions with average performing women in order to have a Gender balanced team or workforce, that will be determining the Equality of out come rather than letting Equality of Opportunity take its rightful place.
This is an increasingly prevalent problem. It has escalated as a result of our dire need to push for, say, the number of women to be increased in work places, arising out of the need of striking gender balance rather than basing on competence, which is supported by a system of everybody competing favourably so that the best competent regardless of their gender is chosen.
Our problem is that, we’re transforming our African landscape, socially, culturally and technologically so rapidly, that, it is hard for people to catch up.
For the past 28 years, the data from research on egalitarianism has clearly pointed this out but we insist on acting otherwise.
The facts don’t fit the theory, but we’re instead deciding to resist belief of facts to keep our theory.
We’re playing a fool’s game. We might win the battle but lose the War. Scandinavian Egalitarianism should teach us this.
So yes, my Opinion is that, As much as Gender Equality movements are important, the primary focus and efforts should be regressed towards how it exists as a function Equality of Opportunity rather than tilted towards Equality of Out Outcome.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
