Why can't there be male-female equality in ALL religions?

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by Molearner

I do not see formulas/ratios as the panacea we might think they are.

according to the Tao Te Ching that never works; it only leads to confusion and strife. Anyway, it isn't like those females that actually WANT to be gurus aren't... and why is it so important to make it easier for people who aren't really suited to be like others anyway?

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 68 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by Altair

It's an ideal to strive for.

My teacher always directed us to aim for the ideal which is certainly possible ... but too many people focus on all the reasons why the ideal can't be realized.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Madamedude

Indeed, instead of trying to reach for equality, we could simply let it be, through tolerance and open mindedness. So simpler than trying to establish codes/rules that cannot satisfy everyone.

Precisely. Rules have been established to prevent female equality ... just drop those silly man-made rules and "simply let it be".

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 70 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by Molearner

Is not there a feminine/masculine aspect in each of us ? The ‘battle of the sexes’ might not be as clearly defined as we might think. I do not see formulas/ratios as the panacea we might think they are.

Yes. There is "a feminine/masculine aspect in each of us".

Ratios are not a panacea.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

My teacher always directed us to aim for the ideal which is certainly possible ... but too many people focus on all the reasons why the ideal can't be realized.

We have to understand those reasons first!

For example, there are general differences in strength. There are hormonal differences also, which impact interests to an extent. This is not black and white, but there are generalizations that are simply there. Refusing to understand this will create blind spots.

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Precisely. Rules have been established to prevent female equality ... just drop those silly man-made rules and "simply let it be".

I partly disagree, rules were established to follow a vision someone had. I also think that, even if of course it's totally possible that it was indeed against women particularly, maybe the people that came up with that had no particular intention of being harmful towards one gender or the other. I don't think it is an important concern to start being more open now but more a distraction for the mind.

Now, about women having less strengh naturally, sure, you think she'd have a harder time working a physical job. But, let's say, Jessica when she was eight, decided she wanted to work on construction sites. She studied it all and so on and so forth, but she also knows as a girl she has less strengh. So, now that she's all grown up, she keeps a weekly routine of excercising to stay in shape and as strong or even more as a man. She likes living like that. She is not choosing the easy way, just doing what she loves. I mean, why the hell not?

And Hector, who never particularly like trucks and that kind of stuff but likes the idea of making clothes? You'd say a boy rather lacks the characteristics to sew and tailor when he grows up. Men are stronger but physically rigid and have bigger hands, not always great for precision work. But dexterity can also be trained.

It's not all about being gifted, but also the work we put in.

All in all, judging others is a survival mechanism we all have. That doesn't mean we have to act upon it. So let's not, and give a chance to new ideas, since no one is content with what we have anyway.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Altair

We have to understand those reasons first!
For example, there are general differences in strength. There are hormonal differences also, which impact interests to an extent. ... Refusing to understand this will create blind spots.

That is precisely why I posted previously:

"All I am saying is that those who are objectively best suited to a particular task/position should be considered EQUALLY QUALIFIED for consideration regardless of gender (or any other difference for that matter)."

Strength differences, for example, clearly do not make all people equally qualified for strength-related tasks. That is obvious.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 76 EXCEPT:

Originally Posted by Madamedude

I partly disagree, rules were established to follow a vision someone had. I also think that, even if of course it's totally possible that it was indeed against women particularly, maybe the people that came up with that had no particular intention of being harmful towards one gender or the other.

Your point, of course, is very valid ... though no one knows with certainty exactly what was in the mind (or the "vision" as you put it) of the "rule makers". The restrictive rules on women in the past could have been protective of the so-called "weaker sex". They could also have been cultural. They could also have been denigrating with little respect for women. There could be many reasons for such "rules".

In any case, the point I am making NOW is that the person best suited for a particular task/position should be considered regardless of gender or any other discriminatory criteria.

I think that our positions are essentially in agreement.

Of course we are in agreement! I too, have enough of seeing discrimination, ever since I was a kid. Not even just in a work environment but everywhere.

I was just nitpicky about the details

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 76 EXCEPT: though no one knows with certainty exactly what was in the mind (or the "vision" as you put it) of the "rule makers". The restrictive rules on women in the past could have been protective of the so-called "weaker sex". They could also have been cultural. They could also have been denigrating with little respect for women. There could be many reasons for such "rules".

I think all the points made here are valid and I too agree with it. Many a times males have taken physical strength to be a point of superiority over females and that's absolutely wrong.

My GUESS what may be on rule maker's mind.
1. They have a perception of things as they are and they have a perception of how the experience of life can be better.
2. They dont have bias towards to females.
3. Today's most allegation stems from the view that money is the single most factor to make life better and money earning role for males make males more important. While money is very important but there are equally more important matters in life for its enrichment like

Quality of money spending/investing

Work-life balance allowing for enough play

Child education

Elderly care

Healthy friendships/relationships/hobbies development

Love life of couples

Harmony, peace ,co-operation and growth in life

Today's idea is to become 'independent'. That is fair and valid. No one needs other to live their life. Every one can and should easily be self sustaining if and when required . However idea and fun of life is not just being independent. Independents have lot of restrictions/strictures/rules / permission /audit . So naturally 'independents' dont have smoother interactions and which is not life nourishing. With excessive stress on independence , idea of family is lost and couples never really bond and finally they separate very easily . But after separation also their life is still incomplete and they search for another one.

Probably scripture writers want inter-dependence which is good combination of independence and dependence. Any sex enslaving other or treating other as inferior is not permissible. Males physical strength is to do more work and protect weaker and NOT to abuse it against weaker. Even females exploit males psychologically at times . That also is deplorable. Interdependence makes life smoother and enjoyable.

Also rule makers allow all the freedom for male-female to do whatever they want if they are able to devise their life improve upon all important parameters of life as aforesaid and their life flow is fun-filled enjoyable stress-free smooth.

According to me females have more freedom than man . We can see this in the game of Chess where Queen has more movement freedom and when Queen is gone king's defeat is almost certain . And if we examine the state laws of almost any country regarding marriage/divorce , its based on these premises . Females are really king-makers . King alone by himself is nothing.