equal, but different

Made of flesh and blood, endowed with potentially capable brains, men and women are equal.

Look at the main clause: Doesn’t the men’s priority in mentioning them first, which is common practice not only in English language, already imply that we are different? Is it not rather the case that neither our flesh and blood nor our brains are equal?

Take the following instance as being symbolical for the general discrepancy between theoretical equality and practical difference in women and men. The supposedly egalitarian world of academia is not exempt from (implicit) gender segregation. The truth is that although half of the girls in some German states reach higher education entrance qualification compared to only one third of boys, the former make up only five percent of the professorship. This fact is referred to as institutional racism in higher education by Rangasamy, where discrimination is apparently not as implicit as it may be assumed to be. The question that may be immediately raised is that of why? Why are women being discriminated against in a context where equality is cherished, at least theoretically? Is it because of traditional gender roles, which my granddad would bluntly summarize in the long-established idea of women’s duties restricted to the fields of Kinder-Küche-Kirche, meaning that they are confined to a domestic space including their kids, the kitchen, and, as social meeting place, the church? Don’t get me wrong, my gramps is very progressive and egalitarian, particularly when it comes to the unwritten but still manifest gender roles in Poland, a country that is much more traditional than some other Western European country. Still, this mere idea of segregating women into a particular “female” space and thus secluding them from anything that belongs to higher education, critical thinking and higher occupational positions, is worthy of notice. If females do get a good position, they often have to work twice as much and will still earn about twenty percent less although they have exactly the same qualifications and competencies.

Apart from academia, women and men are different when it comes to the pursuit of sex. Even now. From an evolutionary perspective, it appears logical that men are the active part seeking to spread their genes anytime anywhere, whereas females take a more cautionary approach in making sure that their offspring is being cared for by a loving and nurturing partner. This may explain men’s higher desire for sex and women’s emotional involvement in relationships to a certain extent. But this won’t be the whole story about why men have been openly practicing their sexuality since the year one, whereas women’s desire went fairly unnoticed until researchers like Kinsey scientifically investigated female sexuality for the first time in the 50’s. It appears that the whole difference in sexual desire experienced by males and females does not merely rest on some immutable biological factors, but a great deal of it can be traced back to cultural factors, memes, if you will. A logical consequence of cultural segregation of females from their physical selves and sexual desires is their eventual quest for liberation. Since in real life it’s still difficult for a woman to overcome unwritten taboos in this respect particularly when it comes to practices which are deemed deviant, they may seek adventures and fulfillment in alternative spheres, one of which is the virtual. Not surprisingly, scientific studies show that it’s females, a marginalized group with regards to the pursuit of sexual behaviors, who engage in cybersex and who engage in it compulsively. It appears that if there’s no real world outlet, it can be found in some dark corner of a chat room or anything comparable. What may be even more interesting is the scientifically validated fact that it is particularly females who will go and meet their virtual sex partners in real life and they are much more likely (significantly more likely, for that matter) to do this relative to their male counterparts.

To phrase it in the words of a friend, the moment, when women and men are equal appear in mutually experienced and shared love. However, this moment may soon be over when one of them loses their faith in the relationship for however irrelevant the reason may be. And there we are, back again at the imbalance, the difference that appears, viewed from another perspective. The difference may grow in scope and impact because egocentricity, the innate survival instinct, takes the space of commitment.

So why do we claim to be equal, when, in the end, we’re so different? And anything but equal? Let me quote again: “because in love at some point in space and time we are equal”. Possibly that’s exactly the equality that both men and women are seeking, without compromises, without established gender roles, beyond the transcendentality of academia, the profanity of life and physical desires.