Do people get caught up in the word 'equality' too much?

Question

While I don't really believe in psychological difference between men and women as being anything more than accidents of our enculturation, I do realize that biologically and thus physically men and women are different and this does have a social and cultural effect. Gender equality is something often argued for, but is that word only confusing the issue? Sameness is not the goal for most, but rather high social standing for both men and women and that will naturally include irradication of some of the traditionalist links between s*x and personality which of course adds to the confusion. Should the term gender equality be replaced?

Answer 1

Gender is a subjective concept.  Humanism / feminism is not about "gender" equality.  Humanism / feminism is far more rational than that.  The sexes are separate expressions of humanity and have inalienable EQUAL RIGHTS.  No two humans are "alike" or "equal".  It's like a boat.  We all have the same inalienable equal right to be in the boat.  What we do on the boat, our individual and subjective cultural expressions, how we dress, walk, behave, pray, part our hair, etc. is individuality within equal rights.  Humanism / feminism does not dictate individual behavior within the boat, just that we all have a right to be allowed on that boat in the first place and that no human or no group of humans has a right to pretend to decide who may or may not be allowed on that boat of equal rights.

"Traditionalists"/ Conservatives and others who believe in preserving the ways of the past and locking down the future and growth and who believe that all their own cultural breeding behaviors are "special and sacred" roles and the "one-and-only-right-way" are the folks who want to dictate and eliminate the "individual" in all behaviors of the people on the boat. They are the ones into censorship and "Purity Balls", chastity belts, burkas and nuclear missiles.  They're insane. Those are the people who say you cannot be on the boat unless you assume their pet collection of morbid moldy ways of behaviors related to breeding, courtship / marriage / family, the "proper" way to dress, the "politically correct" way to speak, the "chivalrous way to hold doors open for others, etc..  

Those superstitious and feeble-minded pre-rational fear-based kinds of people are very vicious and primitive in consciousness, usually no more than tribal or traditional (at best) level of social consciousness. They acquire power and wealth through exploitation and plunder of "lesser" beings than they.  They are predators who feed off other humans.  They believe you and I should either be enslaved or denied equal protections of our inalienable human rights UNLESS we follow their rules of behavior and particular pet versions of "gender" and "racial" and "religious" purity and superiority.  That's fascism and it's a mental and social disease that humanism / feminism is helping humanity to rise above and guard against with constant struggles for stronger legal protections of our legal rights and right to be individuals.

Answer 2

"Equal" is a mathematical term.

Things don't need to be the same to be equal:

(2 + 2) = (4)

Different, yet completely equal.

Answer 3

No, the problem isn't with the word 'equality' at all.

Equality is NOT the same as 'sameness' -- anyone who thinks all humans are identical to each other in every way is simply insane. But that's not what equality under the law or equal opportunity are about -- at all.

What we need to do is stop seeing people solely in terms of whether their reproductive organs inside or outside their bodies, and concluding all sorts of false things from that one, relatively insignificant fact.

Except for that difference and its consequences, there is NO characteristic or trait that is universal to all members of one s*x and completely absent in all memebers of the other.

PEOPLE vary, in all sorts of ways. That's what we need to understand.

Thus, equality is GOOD; assuming these or those people have or lack traits A and B is silly, without specific information about each person.

The law should apply equally to everyone, whether they have an aptitude for language, spatial relations, or anything else.

Jobs requiring specific talents should be available for every person who has those talents. (Not the location of their reproductive organs.)

No 'sameness' assumption required.

Equality GOOD.

Answer 4

NO

Answer 5

I think the word balance would be more adequate. There is no power balance between men and women in many societies. The old boys club still is in business in many countries. The word gender equality can be confusing since men and women obviously weren't build the same. If all the people in the world lived by the realization that both women and men are human beings with hopes, dreams, ambitions, fears and desires the word gender equality wouldn't even be heard.

People should just stop putting men and women in boxes like: The overemotional box (often occupied by women), or the macho box (often occupied by men). I believe men and women don't like being put in boxes, but often they live in a society which does put them in one. I think we should forget about the boxes, the labels and the stereotypes and live and let live....(am I making any sense...lol)

Answer 6

"I don't really believe in psychological difference between men and women as being anything more than accidents of our enculturation"

It doesn't matter what you "believe". Neuroendocrinological differences between males and females are well understood by scientists.

This is the problem. We're supposed to pretend that men and women are the same (despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary), when only the blind believe this to be true. We can accept these differences and still accept "gender equality" (so long as it means: to accord both sexes with the same status, treat them equally well, and hold them to the same standards wherever possible).

Answer 7

Some people think equity is a better word. Maybe it is.

Answer 8

Equal treatment and equal opportunity (and I mean this in th real sense, not in the legalistic sense) are terms worthy of remaining on the table.  Equality and difference are neither opposite nor really connected, unless you make unwarranted value judgments about difference.  

What a boring an unproductive world it would be if we were all the same.  

I believe people get caught up in questions of gender and sexual orientation too much. However, if equality were readily available and naturalized in our conscious minds, we would not need to discuss it.  

So.. IMO... no 'equality' is not an over-used word, though it is a frequently mis-used word.

Answer 9

Yes. "Gender equity" is more appropriate. Many women are offended by the idea of equality if equality means she has to pay half the bills in addition to giving birth or being responsible for preventing birth, and being the primary caretaker of the home and children.