So what’s wrong with Equality?
Sri Lanka falls into genderland – 5
[Please see the previous 4 related posts: Part 1 and Part 2 and Part 3 and Part 4]
Sri Lanka is on the verge of legislating an absurd concept known as “gender equality”. The meaning of “gender” itself is rather obscure, but let deal first with “Equality”.
One might believe that equality is a good thing. The fact is that equality is not a fundamental value, and we need to first specify what equality ( ie. the equality of what with what) is being considered.
So, are men and women equal? Many may shout “yea”, “of course”, and there might perhaps even be a Greta-esque “how dare you ask”.
Let’s break it down and get specific. Are men and women equal in human dignity? Yes, well, because men and women are human beings. Should men and women be treated equally before the law? Well, yes, one might say yes to that as well – bearing in mind that the mentioned laws being proposed for this country seek to enforce special privileges on any thing other than men.
Should men and women have equal opportunities for social and economic advancement? Sure. Are men and women equal when it comes to upper body strength? Hm, no. And men will generally be faster, stronger and jump higher. That is why women have their own sports competitions, without which they may never win.
Are men and women equal when it comes to beauty? No, sir, that’s a woman’s prerogative, and I think Charlotte Bronte observed this too, as did Adam when he awoke from his slumber. Are men and women equal in competence in putting baby to sleep? Probably not. Are men and women equal when it comes to pregnancy and lactation? Eh, no, men inherently fail miserably here. Are men and women equal in terms of the factors which motivate them and things that interest them? Generally, no. There are more male engineers and more female nurses because that is what they are drawn towards and are good at, in general, and not because some tyrant is preventing more men from going into nursing. Should a woman have the opportunity to be the CEO? Yes of course. Should she become the CEO? Yes, but only if she is the best candidate, and not because she happens to be a women. She should be on a board because she a great director, not because the law provides quotas for her.
Tyranny is when competency is rejected, and opportunity is mandated - based on factors not relevant to the role. The best leader should be the leader. If in the pool of candidates, the best leader is the monkey, the monkey should be appointed. The monkey should not be denied the role, because there was a legal quota for the peacock.
Apart from making women think that their feminine fulfilment lies in becoming as men, and running the rat race among other things, the enforcement of quotas based on this thing called gender will provide the nation with leaders appointed on the irrelevant basis of “gender”, rather than on the bases of suitability, inclination, and competence. This is a great recipe for the downfall of the family, the deconstruction of marriage, and the demise of civilization.
The ”gender” equality bill is not for the benefit (deserved or undeserved) of women, because if it was, it would have been called the “women’s” equality bill. The gender equality bill is not about legislating equal opportunity, but rather for the enforcing of equality of outcomes, by way of mandating quotas in positions of leadership, policy-making and influencing culture. We have talked about equality, but we need to understand next what “gender” is really about.
Will you lobby our politicians and educate our mainstream media?