"Male" and "female": is there no difference?

When the "masculine" and "feminine" principles are discussed in society, it must be understood that this is not about men and women.

We are talking about control and submission, about aggression and about acceptance, about rigidity and about softness.

Not about members and vaginas.

Men, of course, were very happy that the Universe had prepared for them the role of dominators and conquerors. But I hasten to upset you! The same role may be in women.

Because the roles do not depend on the genitals, but on personal qualities.


Nala, The lion King

To make it clearer, you should generally stop calling masculine and feminine masculine and feminine, and call it, for example, Alpha and Beta. Or Black and White. Or Dog and Cat.

By the way, to talk about cats.
In some lion pack, the roles of males and females can be clearly distributed. They can afford to have rigid gender roles limited by their nature.

But people are not lions.

All of us are incredibly complex creatures. There is a huge difference between us and the lions, so it is useless for us to cling to the functions prepared by Mother Nature, which were relevant a million years ago. Now they are absolutely dissolved in our multiplicity and development.Now we are much more complicated.

So much more complicated that we can try on both traditionally masculine and traditionally feminine. We can subjugate, and obey, and love, and be loved, and accept ourselves, and hate.

Lions do not know how, but we do. And we need to rejoice in this and endlessly celebrate our opportunity to be versatile, and not to bring the pseudo-scientific base under the limitations, pointing men to the masculine place, and women to the female.

We ourselves can choose a place. I think that it is impossible to allow conversations about "masculine" and "feminine" to lead us astray.

H2
H3
H4
3 columns
2 columns
1 column
6 Comments
Ecency