Gender Equality

[LiNk]

Originally Posted by Salome

It's ok, everybody can have bad moments,

I know, were you having one? This is how it seemed though.

I would still grant you that you have more intelligent comments than these 3 words.

Thanks.

now great for this longer comment, but what are you talking about? are you sure you are in the right thread?

I was teasing you. You know, the usual way men tease women? Too bad some in here were not in the mood..

Anyway, since it has been requested from me to engage in a slightly more serious discussion, here it goes :

I believe that equality between genders would be a first step towards a balanced society. And as disproportions might appear between countries, true equality is still inexistent in today's world - yes, it is not.

You highlighted the point that some women might assume that by adopting a masculine behavior they would be treated as equals. But as Dalzi said, this is not equality, this is called transsexualism. True equality resides in the simple right of men to be men, and women to be women. We are different, but complementary. And what could help us achieve some sort of gender evenness, are two sorts of actions: The first being on the legislative level, and the second being related to civic education. Educational programs should prepare the young to carry out their roles as citizens,while drawing attention to the fact that the law treats us all as equals, while prohibiting from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
And this involves both formal settings (schools) and informal settings (families, houses of worship, workplaces, politics, mass media, and so on).

Males do not have a common inborn pattern of tendency to discriminate females. It is their surrounding society that brainwashes them to do so - a big plus for religion on this one.

Openness and tolerance being a must, modern developed countries have already dedicated a large body of legislative texts to equality between women and men (access to employment, equal pay, maternity protection, parental leave). But the desired results are still not met yet. Many nations and social institutes are still promoting gender mainstreaming though, women are getting more and more involved in the decision-making process as to politics and economy.

Lebanon: Now leboes are surprisingly ahead in this issue. Controversially, while our legislature lacks decades behind, women are far more influential than in many countries where the legislative conditions are met. However this does not mean that we haven't got work to do.
Lebanese women have made great strides in improving their status, since 1953 where they got their right to vote. Nonetheless, it is sadly observed that a woman's status is often determined by her religious affiliation (since personal status laws are governed by religious tribunals).
Legally speaking, women are not sometimes only unequal when facing men, but they also are when facing each other.

Required solution ? A civil marriage law. That would be the first brick in the wall. The second being that of accepting women on the political scene, I am a big fan of Leila el Solh for instance, and I would love to see her lead the country. However, I get laughed at when I say it to some friends (male and female). Aren't they ashamed of such backwardness?

Furthermore, it all begins with a personal initiative. Men should learn how to respect women, and women should understand that their role is different that that of a man, this is how it works, we are different, but we complete each other. Some things are better accomplished when done by a women, others are better when done by a man. There's no harm if we help each other, each one giving her/his best where she/he excels.

Cheers Salome !

[Salome]

Originally Posted by LiNk

I know, were you having one? This is how it seemed though.

nope, didnt this time, why you thought so?

I was teasing you. You know, the usual way men tease women? Too bad some in here were not in the mood..

I thought I shall decode your post which didnt make too much sense, teasing? if you say

Anyway, since it has been requested from me to engage in a slightly more serious discussion, here it goes :

I believe that equality between genders would be a first step towards a balanced society. And as disproportions might appear between countries, true equality is still inexistent in today's world - yes, it is not.

You highlighted the point that some women might assume that by adopting a masculine behavior they would be treated as equals. But as Dalzi said, this is not equality, this is called transsexualism. True equality resides in the simple right of men to be men, and women to be women. We are different, but complementary. And what could help us achieve some sort of gender evenness, are two sorts of actions: The first being on the legislative level, and the second being related to civic education. Educational programs should prepare the young to carry out their roles as citizens,while drawing attention to the fact that the law treats us all as equals, while prohibiting from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
And this involves both formal settings (schools) and informal settings (families, houses of worship, workplaces, politics, mass media, and so on).

Males do not have a common inborn pattern of tendency to discriminate females. It is their surrounding society that brainwashes them to do so - a big plus for religion on this one.

Openness and tolerance being a must, modern developed countries have already dedicated a large body of legislative texts to equality between women and men (access to employment, equal pay, maternity protection, parental leave). But the desired results are still not met yet. Many nations and social institutes are still promoting gender mainstreaming though, women are getting more and more involved in the decision-making process as to politics and economy.

Lebanon: Now leboes are surprisingly ahead in this issue. Controversially, while our legislature lacks decades behind, women are far more influential than in many countries where the legislative conditions are met. However this does not mean that we haven't got work to do.
Lebanese women have made great strides in improving their status, since 1953 where they got their right to vote. Nonetheless, it is sadly observed that a woman's status is often determined by her religious affiliation (since personal status laws are governed by religious tribunals).
Legally speaking, women are not sometimes only unequal when facing men, but they also are when facing each other.

Required solution ? A civil marriage law. That would be the first brick in the wall. The second being that of accepting women on the political scene, I am a big fan of Leila el Solh for instance, and I would love to see her lead the country. However, I get laughed at when I say it to some friends (male and female). Aren't they ashamed of such backwardness?

Furthermore, it all begins with a personal initiative. Men should learn how to respect women, and women should understand that their role is different that that of a man, this is how it works, we are different, but we complete each other. Some things are better accomplished when done by a women, others are better when done by a man. There's no harm if we help each other, each one giving her/his best where she/he excels.

Cheers Salome !

Since you summerized up quite well the issue, I dont have too much to add or comment, only the last passage.

You say the roles are different, what do you mean, can you specify? Might be obvious for some aspects, but not so generally. Like do you mean pre-defined, socially accepted roles imposed on the people in the various cultures? In my view this is one of the obstacle of gender equality, and these "socially accepted" roles are somehow imprinted unconsciously in each cultures, and takes a great deal of effort and open-mindedness to overcome them.

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by LiNk

Required solution ? A civil marriage law. That would be the first brick in the wall. The second being that of accepting women on the political scene, I am a big fan of Leila el Solh for instance, and I would love to see her lead the country. However, I get laughed at when I say it to some friends (male and female). Aren't they ashamed of such backwardness?

Nope, not ashamed at all. It's very masculine of women to want to 'lead'. I would laugh at men who are led by women. Society is like a family. At home who's considered the 'leader'? Regardless of the fact that a family is built on mutual respect and equal rights, who is considered "the man of the house" after whom the family is named? The woman? :P Till now when I hear men called by their mothers names, I assume that their mothers are 'famous' (you know what i mean) or that they have sissy fathers. A nation lead by a woman, to me, is pictured in my mind as a home lead by the wife where the man is the toutou with the chain around his neck ;) Nations that breed real men do not need women to lead. And this I say again, her role is not to lead but rather to mother the greatest of leaders. You addressed the idea of roles and how each is to play his/her role in society in order to complement the other; I believe that certain positions of power are suitable for women, but definitely not

As for civil marriage rights, sensible. But what would make me for example want to go for a civil marriage? It should all go back to personal preference and to what one sees most suitable for his/her conditions/requirements...

[Salome]

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Nope, not ashamed at all. It's very masculine of women to want to 'lead'. I would laugh at men who are led by women. Society is like a family. At home who's considered the 'leader'? Regardless of the fact that a family is built on mutual respect and equal rights, who is considered "the man of the house" after whom the family is named? The woman? :P Till now when I hear men called by their mothers names, I assume that their mothers are 'famous' (you know what i mean) or that they have sissy fathers. A nation lead by a woman, to me, is pictured in my mind as a home lead by the wife where the man is the toutou with the chain around his neck ;) Nations that breed real men do not need women to lead. And this I say again, her role is not to lead but rather to mother the greatest of leaders. You addressed the idea of roles and how each is to play his/her role in society in order to complement the other; I believe that certain positions of power are suitable for women, but definitely not

As for civil marriage rights, sensible. But what would make me for example want to go for a civil marriage? It should all go back to personal preference and to what one sees most suitable for his/her conditions/requirements...

Well a woman shouldnt be depicted by all means as masculine if she is in a leading position. I support all the way being feminine and aspiring for leadership if one wishes so.

I hope you wouldnt shoot the first female president of Lebanon!

Civil marriage has clearly advantages especially when some men turn out to be b@st@rds after a while. You might loose your whole family if you are not protected by the law.
I think civil marriage shall be obligatory and religious optional.

[LiNk]

Originally Posted by Salome

You say the roles are different, what do you mean, can you specify? Might be obvious for some aspects, but not so generally. Like do you mean pre-defined, socially accepted roles imposed on the people in the various cultures?

No, I was speaking at the individual level, regardless of nationality or cultural background.
For example, jobs that require physical strength are more suitable for men (military, construction, heavy industries, even dentistry!). I mean, how much time and pain would I have to endure before a female dentist succeeds in pulling me a tooth off??
On the other hand, other jobs involving patience, creativity, tenderness, artistic taste, find their requirements generally met within female ranks (Scientific research, design, nursing, child care, etc..).

This is not a predefined rule, it is however based on a global observation. Some jobs are better done by men, others are better done by women. But this does not annihilate each one's right to chose the job she/he pleases, when she/he meets the needed requirements.

In my view this is one of the obstacle of gender equality, and these "socially accepted" roles are somehow imprinted unconsciously in each cultures, and takes a great deal of effort and open-mindedness to overcome them.

I agree. And those "socially accepted" roles are rarely set on the basis of technical capacity, as much as they are according to a wild history of discrimination that has always existed.

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Nope, not ashamed at all. It's very masculine of women to want to 'lead'. I would laugh at men who are led by women.

You're picturing it as in a military field. Women are undoubtedly not "made" to lead in a terrain of combat. However what has it to do with a Council of Ministers? What do women have less than men when it comes to taking proper decisions that would set a country on the right track? What makes you think that you, Dalzi, cannot adress a stable nation when it comes to economic/social/environmental issues? Testosterone? This doesn't make nations advance towards progress, all it does is give wars to its people.
Now, in a nation at war or in constant instability, maybe testosterone would be more efficient and heard. That might be where a man fits better.

Society is like a family. At home who's considered the 'leader'?

The father, and this is because he's usually more imposing. But both parents have equal responsibilities when it comes to raising children. The mother shouldn't be the working mule everybody abuses and commands. She has the right to achieve great things for herself, just like her husband.

Regardless of the fact that a family is built on mutual respect and equal rights, who is considered "the man of the house" after whom the family is named? The woman? :P Till now when I hear men called by their mothers names, I assume that their mothers are 'famous' (you know what i mean) or that they have sissy fathers. A nation lead by a woman, to me, is pictured in my mind as a home lead by the wife where the man is the toutou with the chain around his neck ;)

Refer to Salome:

Originally Posted by Salome

In my view this is one of the obstacle of gender equality, and these "socially accepted" roles are somehow imprinted unconsciously in each cultures, and takes a great deal of effort and open-mindedness to overcome them.

Don't worry we can help you overcome that

Nations that breed real men do not need women to lead. And this I say again, her role is not to lead but rather to mother the greatest of leaders.

Quoting 300 ?

You addressed the idea of roles and how each is to play his/her role in society in order to complement the other; I believe that certain positions of power are suitable for women, but definitely not

Exactly, men are better when it comes to combat. But women are better when it comes to avoiding wars.

As for civil marriage rights, sensible. But what would make me for example want to go for a civil marriage? It should all go back to personal preference and to what one sees most suitable for his/her conditions/requirements...

Yes, it is a personal preference. What could make you go for it is if one day you fall "by chance" for a guy who wasn't necessarily born from the same sect. Not to mention that from a legislative perspective, all women would be treated equally.

[Salome]

Originally Posted by LiNk

No, I was speaking at the individual level, regardless of nationality or cultural background.
For example, jobs that require physical strength are more suitable for men (military, construction, heavy industries, even dentistry!). I mean, how much time and pain would I have to endure before a female dentist succeeds in pulling me a tooth off??
On the other hand, other jobs involving patience, creativity, tenderness, artistic taste, find their requirements generally met within female ranks (Scientific research, design, nursing, child care, etc..).

This is not a predefined rule, it is however based on a global observation. Some jobs are better done by men, others are better done by women. But this does not annihilate each one's right to chose the job she/he pleases, when she/he meets the needed requirements.

Well in this sense I agree, some type of jobs prefer male while others female qualities, though of course we can not generalize. Nowdays we have ever more male nurses, and they can do as much as a great job as the female nurses.

The father, and this is because he's usually more imposing. But both parents have equal responsibilities when it comes to raising children. The mother shouldn't be the working mule everybody abuses and commands. She has the right to achieve great things for herself, just like her husband.

In an ideal society women would have the freedom to decide which path they prefer, being entirely family orientated or having other aspirations in life too, while not being judged by rigid society expectations.

Yes, it is a personal preference. What could make you go for it is if one day you fall "by chance" for a guy who wasn't necessarily born from the same sect. Not to mention that from a legislative perspective, all women would be treated equally.

Knowing this, in Lebanon it requires a great deal of boldness to marry someone from another sect (like a christian woman a sunni man) without having a civil marriage, knowing that the woman might end up one day without anything. Doesnt it ring all too bad, all too forced and vulnerable?

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by Salome

Well a woman shouldnt be depicted by all means as masculine if she is in a leading position. I support all the way being feminine and aspiring for leadership if one wishes so.

I hope you wouldnt shoot the first female president of Lebanon!

Why would i shoot her? :D I'll just have a good laugh over the nation that put her in power over the sissy men.

Civil marriage has clearly advantages especially when some men turn out to be b@st@rds after a while. You might loose your whole family if you are not protected by the law.
I think civil marriage shall be obligatory and religious optional.

lol possible in a society where the majority have no religion, but not in Lebanon. Maybe more among Christians than Muslims too. You can go for civil marriage Salome and congratulations :D Mine's planned to be religious and I'm not signing those civil papers :D You're not going to be successful in 'obliging' Muslims to 'believe' in a civil marriage over a religious one. Good for atheists but not for us :D Each person should have the right to choose what s/he likes...

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by LiNk

You're picturing it as in a military field. Women are undoubtedly not "made" to lead in a terrain of combat.

The military field is just a portion of what a leader of a nation has do deal with. If she is not fit to lead an army, then by all means she's not fit to lead an entire nation.

However what has it to do with a Council of Ministers? What do women have less than men when it comes to taking proper decisions that would set a country on the right track? What makes you think that you, Dalzi, cannot adress a stable nation when it comes to economic/social/environmental issues? Testosterone? This doesn't make nations advance towards progress, all it does is give wars to its people.

Those positions of power you mentioned (with the exception of economics) are good for women, not to forget education too... Those are the exact roles a woman plays in her own family.

Now, in a nation at war or in constant instability, maybe testosterone would be more efficient and heard. That might be where a man fits better.

Exactly, and to lead you have to be prepared for everything ;) Lebanon is the last nation that could have a woman leading

The father, and this is because he's usually more imposing. But both parents have equal responsibilities when it comes to raising children. The mother shouldn't be the working mule everybody abuses and commands. She has the right to achieve great things for herself, just like her husband.

That up there is a leader of a nation.

And why did you picture the mother as the working mule abused and commanded?

[Salome]

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Why would i shoot her? :D I'll just have a good laugh over the nation that put her in power over the sissy men.

swear I was trying to come up with arguments, but then I thought when you are talking like this it is definitely a waste of time

Nevertheless you can laugh the biggest now I guess, look at the stupid people how they keep electing the same thieves and criminals, dont know if they are sissy too. You will never have a better laugh than this.

lol possible in a society where the majority have no religion, but not in Lebanon. Maybe more among Christians than Muslims too. You can go for civil marriage Salome and congratulations :D Mine's planned to be religious and I'm not signing those civil papers :D You're not going to be successful in 'obliging' Muslims to 'believe' in a civil marriage over a religious one. Good for atheists but not for us :D Each person should have the right to choose what s/he likes...

You dont have to chose civil over religious, you can have both. Dont know how you dont see its advantages? I know you cant imagine your future perfect husband turning into a b@st@rd but if he will? Who will protect you?

(now dont think am endorsing marriage here in first place or something)

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Those positions of power you mentioned (with the exception of economics) are good for women, not to forget education too... Those are the exact roles a woman plays in her own family.

Why not economics? Why shall it be reserved for men only? Did you know majority of economics students are girls?

And why did you picture the mother as the working mule abused and commanded?

Because this is how it is in that society you endorse, where women stay in the background.

What is women's role in your view? Should they have career aspirations, or that would make men look sissy?:D
Would your man look sissy if you aspire for more than being a houswife? What a waste!

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by Salome

swear I was trying to come up with arguments, but then I thought when you are talking like this it is definitely a waste of time

Nevertheless you can laugh the biggest now I guess, look at the stupid people how they keep electing the same thieves and criminals, dont know if they are sissy too. You will never have a better laugh than this.

Trust me I'm laughing There not even electing men, those are a bunch of sissies. Listen to Fatfat talk with your eyes turned away and tell me then if he's a man or a woman. Look at the mother's ducklings we've got too. I hope I live to see a man in power some day

You dont have to chose civil over religious, you can have both. Dont know how you dont see its advantages? I know you cant imagine your future perfect husband turning into a b@st@rd but if he will? Who will protect you?

(now dont think am endorsing marriage here in first place or something)

Yes I know we can have both but I don't like to be forced :) Two marriages will put extra chains on his neck :P But why do we always assume that it's the man that's going to be a b? Who will protect the poor man if she's a big b? So many men live in a marriage hell in countries where women are 'poor her' because of their wives and have to live that hell for fear of loosing what they worked all their lives to achieve while she was shopping.

Why not economics? Why shall it be reserved for men only? Did you know majority of economics students are girls?

I think it's more attractive for a man to hold that position :D

Because this is how it is in that society you endorse, where women stay in the background.

Don't worry about my endorsed society, our women are real men

What is women's role in your view? Should they have career aspirations, or that would make men look sissy?:D

If I say that a woman isn't suitable for the role of a 'president' of a country, it then means she can't pursue a career!

Would your man look sissy if you aspire for more than being a houswife? What a waste!

He doesn't like me to be a good for nothing housewife. And that is definitely what I'm not. I wouldn't meet his selection criteria if that's the only thing that could come of me :D However, I'd also like to be able to relax when I need to :) I beleive that a woman shouldn't be pressured with her career 'if' she wants to have a family. I personaly value the time you spend with your children especially when they are very little. I wouldn't want them to be raised in a childcare by some stranger. And I've got a lot of interests I practice and others I like to pursue outside my career... Therefore my career objectives have to meet my other interests :) I'm no workaholic...

Society started to rot when women divorced family for career. If there's no family, then work day and night. But if you have children one of the parents has to have a more flexible career than the other (woman more than man). Full time jobs morning to dusk are no mother with young children type of jobs. There are kids with no mother or father to at least 'talk' to, and yet we complain about the new generations! There is no balance whatsoever in roles and proof is out there in society. Kids who have parents attending to their needs (mental needs included) are happier (or should I say more stable?), and consequently so are their families.