Who is to say what women's needs are if not the women themselves ?
I support the Women's Rights Movement because I believe in equality. True equality for all irrespective of gender. I believe that every human being,
male or female, should have the same opportunities to further their own goals. That said, Affirmative Action has no place in a world of true equality
since it merely swings the balance in the other direction and results in animosity.
Not every woman wants to bring children into the world, not every woman wants to be a 'little homemaker'. If they so desire then there should be no
barrier to it, alternatively if they wish to make a world outside of the home and have a career then neither should there be an impediment to
Women are indeed physically different to men, but to say that they are not as capable of performing certain jobs is illogical. Women have proved
themselves in the fields of medicine, computers, farming - you name it, they have done it. Admittedly there are certain physical
jobs that are
more suitable to men, but the fact that there are
women who are capable of performing those tasks yet are denied the right by reason of gender
is one of the reasons that the Women's Rights movement still exists.
To deny all women the right to work in whatever employment they choose is unacceptable. If a woman is capable of doing the job, then why should she be
denied the opportunity purely because some men believe that women should stick to being the 'little housemaker'. Equally not every man
capable of doing manual labour. It is my opinion that employment should be dependant on the ability of the prospective employee rather than on gender.
The denial of rights in the workplace, including the fact that women in general are paid less than a man in the same circumstances, is just one reason
that the Women's Rights Movement still exists.
We no longer live in the Middle Ages when marriages were made to further Royal dynasties. In those times alliances were often made by the heads of the
respective households who gave their offspring in marriage to like-minded people of the same social class. The mediaeval monarchs of Europe, for
example, would marry their children off like commodities in order to consolidate power. Needless to say, often these marriages failed due to lack of
love and respect between the parties. Husband and wife would stay married in name only, taking lovers in order to obtain some modicum of tenderness.
To suggest that women return to the times when they were merely chattels to be disposed of by their fathers is not acceptable, in fact it borders on
the barbaric. Certain cultures, even now, believe in Arrange Marriages, but it is my contention that they rarely result in love matches and that many
women of such joinings stay married purely due to fear. For them to refuse their father's wishes can even result in their deaths. So called 'Honour
Killings' are invariably due to women attempting to avoid the archaic custom of Arranged Marriages.
Yes, women should be cherished by their families, but that love should be unconditional. Women deserve the same opportunities as their male
counterparts. They deserve to be treated with the same respect as men. They should never fear for their lives due to some antiquated laws and beliefs.
That is what the Women's Rights Movement is all about. The rights of woman to be her own person.
BBC UK - Women still paid less than men