MEN AGAISNT THREAT TO GENDER INEQUALITY

I am not a chauvinist but I find the issue of empowering one child ridiculous. Never have I been against gender equality, I am very much for it, but truly, the effect of concentrating so much on empowering the girl child is likely to tilt the entire system against the boy child. Policies that enhance equality should be implemented while those propelling inequality should be abandoned immediately. The laws against F.G.M, wife battery are progressive. Each of us should have that right to be safe and not be threatened by the other in any way; be it by physical injury or by death. After eliminating traditions that prevent the girl child from performing equally to the boy child, there is no need to put other institutional frameworks that are made to accelerate equality. The law after abolishing barriers to equal access to economic, social, and political opportunities should let nature take its course. Eventually, things would balance. We would have equal representation by both genders in every aspect of life. Two institutional frameworks are against the object of gender equality: the two-thirds rule of representation and the other of cut-off points for joining universities.

If we really as a country endeavor to promote gender equality, then why is a requirement that we must have this percentage of this gender necessary? Let us open up competition, and let all humans compete equally. Much as the policy does well to rank us as more gender-sensitive internationally, it has nothing to do with gender equality. We must not get women from home, or other works they feel comfortable with so that we fulfill a majority requirement. Free access of education by both genders was enough to bring those changes in future. It serves no purpose, even to the women to create unnecessary political positions so that the world may see us as gender sensitive. Evidently, what is it that the numerous women representatives have done to women that was not done to them before? In fact, we see the same passionate women leaders we have been with before doing the noble work of women empowerment as they have always done. In addition, the experienced women leaders know what has to be fought; issues that bring equality to both genders. Few of the newly elected leaders know what it is that is to be fought for women to get. If we were genuine to ourselves, then we would unanimously agree that, other than decorating our figures regarding gender sensitivity, the issue of women representatives has nothing to do with gender equality.

Secondly, the cut-off points for joining universities are so much biased against the boy child. At one hand, the society has neglected him while still immature. We are told that boys are nurtured to be men and as such should not ask for any assistance. Very few are concerned when a boy is assaulted by an adult. Everybody agrees that the boy should less be protected because he is a future man who should develop his own defensive mechanisms while growing. Boys have quit school, so many of them, and you find them in the streets, others sited in groups around towns because they have a common problem. This neglect alone should serve to equal out the number of boys completing high school. Further, we have an almost equal number of girls and boys schools. It is true to, some extent boys perform better than girls, but that is what competition is for, eliminating those who can from those who cannot. Equality should apply in competition as well. If there are girls beating men in class then it means with proper effort equality can be achieved without resulting to orders. Lowering of cut-off points is forcing things to work your way because you fear to face the reality. If the issue is having nearly equal number of boys and girls joining university, then make the girl child pass as the boy child.