Gender Inequities at Different Levels of the Career Path

I recently had a conversation with a close female whilst in the middle of an academic crisis. In what she would have considered gracious words for herself, she said that in her job as a supervisor it was usually males who she had to nurture more, or supervise more closely. She said it in a derogatory tone and implied that males are spoon-fed while growing up, thus giving them a lack of initiative and self-reliance when thrust into the workforce. Her implications may be true. This woman is less reflective and more defensive than me, so I said nothing, but thought, "Listen to yourself".

When we look at gender disparities in workplace pay - in which females usually come out second best - we have decided that the problem is with the system, not with females.

According to the WHO, in 2004 males committed suicide at around four times the rate of females.

When males "underperform", scarce thought is given to the fact that there may actually be systemic, cultural or environmental factors at play.

As an axiom, it should be held that no gender is superior or inferior to the other. Any propositions that conflict with this axiom should be given scrutiny and should be red flagged as suspect. There are differences in physical makeup, emotionality and intellect between the genders. We should recognise such differences, and if we think it appropriate, institute programs to make up for such differences. Affirmative action is an example of such a program.

Society doesn't expect men and women to compete against each other in sport.

There are obvious differences between the two genders.

But thinking that one gender is superior to another reflects a type of bigotry or lack of philosophy.