Gender Equivalidity
People can be deemed equal in worth without any bit of need to adhere to one mold. Crucial is value, not sameness.
Gender equality?
Men and women are not equal at the outside, nor at the inside ― least of all at the mental side. Therefore, the term gender equality sounds forced. The more one goes into genders, the less it makes sense.
Trying to make them somehow equal – for instance, for fear of disrespect – may end in not respecting any individual for what he/she truly and naturally is. This way, any person gets excessively pushed into a mold of equality.
There is little respect in making a circle by breaking a square.
Equivalidity
There is more respect in making a circle by empowering a square (or triangle). This starts by valuing the square for what he is before molding him into something else like a circle.
Seeing equal value in different people is the challenge, not asking them to be the same for the sake of equal value.
Young, old, black, green, male, or any other gender ― these characteristics should not be the source for seeing different value. In equal validity, people have all freedom to be different ― or equal.
Whence the striving for equality?
At least in some cases, this may come from a rather mechanistic view of the human being. If genders can be readily made equal, that means the in-depth differences – including many subtle ones – are not so crucial, and a lot of what people feel to be gender-related can be dismissed.
This feels like making things less or unimportant. In this manner, the equality in value gets realized by making everything less valuable, at the same time more interchangeable.
On the other hand, of course, gender non-equality can also be a mold used by some culture to divide the sexes and subdue one more than the other. A reaction to this molding should not be the installation of another mold. That would be like jumping from one box into another box.
What degree of non-equality is optimal?
The question is not readily answerable.
Well, yes, that’s what I can say about it. I guess the only reasonable answer can be given at an individual level. Here, it is an ethical question. Aurelian ethics may be some guideline.
What is sure – and fascinating – is that it can always remain a challenge.
Wild orchids
Wild orchids have an individually independent attitude concerning gender. That doesn’t mean they strive for equality; quite the contrary.
No two natural orchids – the flowers – are the same. They’re all pretty different, which makes them more beautiful and interesting. It’s the same in the human case.
Wild orchids are free ― no need for any degree of equality to attain natural equivalidity. They are spontaneously themselves, respecting themselves and others plainly as they are.
Nothing human is unimportant.
Everything human is infinitely valuable if only correctly treated.
Related Posts
One Individual’s Euro-Take on US Politics
Democrats are losing in the US and together with them: rationality, empathy, tolerance, equality, freedom…?? I’m a progressive European. So I probably feel more ‘democratic’ than ‘republican’ in US parlance. In any case, it’s unfortunate that the divide between both becomes ever more pronounced. Worse still: This is a divide that more and more becomes Read the full article…
A ‘Good Society’ Strives for Inner Freedom
This blog continues the reflections from Autonomy vs. Inner Freedom — a conversation between Lisa and me about the deep implications of these concepts for both humanity and super-A.I. If you haven’t read it yet, I warmly recommend doing so first. In that dialogue, we explored how Inner Freedom is more than autonomy — it Read the full article…
A Divided World Will be Conquered by A.I.
Seriously. People fighting each other at a geopolitical level will, through competition and strife, build a world in which A.I. follows suit. There is no doubt about this: IF… THEN. As I write in my book ‘The Journey towards Compassionate A.I.,’ we are entitled to be anxious about A.I. – the real one, soon to Read the full article…