Any one who cares to look deeper will realise that men still make up the higher pay brackets, partly because of the ‘Good Ol' Boys Club’ rule that let's men climb the corporate ladder quicker, and also because paternity leave lasts for a twelfth of maternity leaves paid time. Not to mention the fact that, while it is estimated that women perform two-thirds of the world’s work, they only earn one tenth of the income, and own less than one per cent of the world’s property. After looking at these statistics it is all too easy to begin to empathise with those who rant on for gender equality.
But we must not forget that no one makes a woman stay at home, no one makes her have children, no one insists that the man must be the earning partner, and that there is in fact a law prohibiting gender discrimination. The choice is always there.
However, we cannot disregard the fact that there is undoubtedly still some discrimination targeted at women, by society. The All England Club recently announced that the men's Wimbledon champion would receive $1.170 million and the women's winner $1.117 million! This begs the question- just how far can law go against preventing prejudice?
Venus Williams, the defending champion and three-time winner said to BBC Radio, before Wimbledon's announcement, that ‘the women simply want to be treated equally’ and that ‘at Wimbledon we would like to have equal prize money to prove that we are equal on all fronts.’ So, we know that women still have to prove themselves, over and over again, to be as competent as men.
Even religion seems to be against the equality of women. After all can you name a woman Pope? Or woman head of religion? Authority figures in institutionalized religions are mostly men.
There is no denying however, that civilization has come a long way in comparism to the days where women were at the very bottom of the earning ladder, not allowed to own properties, not allowed to vote and not allowed to even pursue a career. So, we have come a long way, but many believe we haven’t made it to the end yet. This may be true but it may be unfair to lay the blame solely on civilization as a whole, in particular men. Can we really be sure women want any more equality?
After all, they do not protest against the discrimination that favours them, many still demand affirmative actions.
Women are constantly heard to be struggling to break out of the mould and stereotype that society has created for them. But I have never heard a woman protest when a man says ‘women first’ or pulls out a chair for her or opens doors for her or when he offers to pay- at least not for too long! - And I’ve never heard a woman protest when someone says that it is not right to hit women.
Some men believe that in the process of granting equality for women, they have become victims of discrimination themselves. Possible evidence for this might be the fact that women are given extra marks in civil service exams for being women. If women truly want equality in every sense of the word, why have they not protested against this also?
If men treat women differently because that’s what they do themselves, can it be really classed as prejudiced? I’ve heard more women call women whores and other female ridiculing insults, than I have men. And in nearly every single poll conducted in the US, an astonishing 80% of females said they would not vote for a female president. If they won’t do it why should men?
It almost seems as if women believe that their equality can be judged in their ability to perform in masculine spheres of activity that involve imitating men, yet want to be given the special treatment that being a woman brings.
Hopefully as civilization steps into the future and into the coming decade, situations will change to suit and please both sexes. Though it may take nothing less than the second coming of Christ to do so!
