The Equality Inquest

Who is afraid of her?
Who is terrified that she will take their place, play their games and usurp their names?

It can’t be a superior
Superiors delight in the glow of a lesser as it casts light up on them.

Not a peer
An equal finds pleasure in a sparring partner worthy of the encounter.

We know now
Who it is.

It is a being unsure of their identity,
A creature of fear.
A dread of what might indeed be,
A jealousy deeper than the Red Sea,
A loser’s war,

as she surges onward
Winning more


One thought on “The Equality Inquest

  1. I admire your opinion on this point. I see where you are coming from. I also followed your arguments the other day on your TL and Iaappreciate them. But like I argued the other day, this debate of equality between the sexes is unfair in all ramifications to the male folks. If women are asking for true equality, they should be willing to pay same price the men pay to achieve the same goal. The equality concept does not envisage one party accommodating the other just because of their gender. For true equality to exist, both parties must toil (in a broad sense) in equal measures.As long as one party is either not willing or unable to match the pre-conditions for equal opportunities, then there will never be equal benefits.Atleast we both agree on one thing which is that both sexes naturally have unequal strengths and weaknesses. This alone, is the very basis why both sexes can never have equal roles or choices. It would be unnatural.

    It is not a question of one party being afraid ofthe other. Far from it. Your argument on your TL the other day was that ‘feminism presupposes equality of choices.’ In other words, both sexes should be given opportunity to have the same choices. My simple response would be, to what end would having equal choices be it it’s not to achieve the same goals or occupy the same roles. And this is where I’m trying to make my point that as long as our natural strengths, weaknesses, wirings are unequal, we can really, not achieve the same roles. Don’t misunderstand me. This is not a typical male chauvinistic or mysogynistic viewpoint. It’s a simple natural argument. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander, however one party should not be expected to pay a higher price to achieve the same ‘goodness’.

    Whew! Dear St. Naija, I admire your viewpoints. I don’t expect us to agree on same thing. That’s why we are humans afterall. Our opinions should differ for the sake of a better humanity.

    Thanks for accommodating this comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s