Formal Equity and Women in the Society

This essay makes the case that formal gender equality causes women to continue to experience unfair disadvantage in society. Notably, there are two gender equity philosophies. The first is the formal, where all people are treated equally and are hence capable of doing the same tasks. Formal equity is equality based solely on the letter of the law, disregarding social, personal, and sex-based disparities. Therefore, while dealing with people, this type of equality does not take into account variables like race, sex, ethnicity, age, or ability. It seeks to treat people evenly as equally created by God with same capabilities. On the other hand, there is the substantive equity, which is the equality that recognizes the inherent differences among human beings. Therefore, the disadvantages and weaknesses of a particular group of people are considered in this kind of equity. The substantive equity focuses on the roots of inequality and tries to solve them specifically. Therefore, the substantive equity does accommodate diversity among human beings producing real equality. Truly, women within the society are greatly and unjustly disadvantaged by formal equity laws and practices.

Main Body

Formal equity is not suitable for gender justice, especially considering the perspective of women. This essay asserts that gender justice is only achieved when substantive equity is adopted by a given society. It must be considered that human beings cannot survive in a condition where survival is for the fittest. The formal equity laws that consider all people as equal only entrench the principle of survival for the fittest among humanity (Waring & Steinem, 1988, p.13). In a society where survival is for the fittest, it is given and expected that many men will take up all opportunities to the disadvantage of women.

It is important to note that justice is always considered as rendered when both sexes are given the necessary accommodations so that they can even compete on the leveled playing platform. It is natural that men are stronger than women in many aspects. The physical ability of men is higher than that of women. Moreover, men have psychological strength that is higher than that of women. The way these two sexes view life is quite different. Additionally, the difficulties and stresses of women in life are quite different from that of men. It means these two sexes are not flatly equal as deemed by the formal equity laws.

Gender justice is a case where all sexes including women and girls are equally valued and equitably share resources as well as have equal power. Gender justice means freedom from issues like oppression, unfairness and lack of privileges for both sexes. When talking about gender justice, it implies fairness for both sexes. It may not necessarily mean access to literally equal privileges and opportunities in life. Gender justice does not in any way imply the even distribution of power and resources. In fact, gender justice may mean uneven distribution of power and resources between the two sexes in order to achieve equality. It is the reason formal equity as demanded by the laws may in fact increase gender inequality in a society. Women are unjustly disadvantaged because of the lack of affirmative action. It is important to always remember the fact that the modern society is still dominated by men (Arneson, 1998, p.1). Most parts of the world are still patriarchal, which makes the formal equity laws largely ineffective in terms of the quest to achieve sexual equality.

It is important to note that gender inequality is basically a function of unequal power relations between men and women. This fact must be understood when considering the form of equity to choose in the society. The power differences between men and women are the sole causes of gender inequality experienced widely in the modern society across the world. This unequal power is the origin of gender injustice. It the main reason of the unjust disadvantages felt by women in the society (Squires, 2007, p.23). Moreover, it normally constrains choice as well as agency. It also limits the ability of women to engage in the society and contribute to societal economic and political development. It is the consideration of the people’s unique factors like gender that can lead to a just and equitable relationship between the men and women. Fairness is normally achieved in such an environment.

The feminist critical view towards liberalism is something that always runs parallel to the Marxist questioning of liberal equality and rights. The main objection is always that a set of liberties and rights formally established for all people are highly ineffective in terms of preventing the unjust inequalities. This argument is premised on the fact that people now live in a substantive life, where a formally equal framework of equity cannot work. At this juncture in this paper, it is prudent to introduce the worker-capitalist relationship analogy. This specific analogy is meant to put the issue of formal equity into clear perspective. It can be reasoned that workers and capitalists are normally formally free to trade amongst themselves based on mutually agreeable terms (Goonesekere, 2007, p.3). However, when it comes to the ownership of properties, there are enormous disparities between the two parties that work to the disadvantage of workers and advantage of the capitalists leading to unfairness. In this case, the workers are forced to sell their labor power in exchange for little wages.

In the same terms of the analogy given above, men and women are free to contract with each other within the society. This fact is especially true in the formal equity case supported by the written laws. Men and women are also free to deal with each other based on any mutually agreeable terms set. This framework can be quite effective in bring about equity to all of them if there are no inherent weaknesses on one gender side. However, the extant social norms, the threat advantage that always accrues to men considering the fact that they physically larger and stronger, social inheritance of huge properties by the males and the political power as well as control originally acquired through the brutally misogynist regimes do concert to leave women worse off than men (Durojaye & Owoeye, 2017, p.1). Really, men always have an undue advantage over women in every endeavor within life. It means that in the modern world of stiff competition and struggle to access opportunities, many men will always get them as women remain behind.

It is important to consider the fact that formal equity is normally regarded as the legal equality. It implies that one is free to perform whatever thing that is legal as long as the exercise is in compliance with written laws. However, one must understand that this legal freedom and right to do anything acceptable to the law does not guarantee success in performing it because of the many possible barriers, which are not legal. These non-legal barriers do, in fact, reduce the freedom and right of a person. This concept is observable in the case of women within the society. Although women are allowed by written law to enjoy various freedoms, they fail to successfully access some of the opportunities because of the non-legal barriers they meet (Reddy, Moletsane & Masilela, 2011, p.5). Most of these non-legal barriers are a result of the weaknesses of women and strengths of men who them experience undue advantage.

There is a strong relationship between formal equity and the issue of injustice fort women. In the modern society, formal equity is the cause of unjust lack of success by women no matter how hard they try to make it in life. Formal equity views men and women as totally equal when they are not, in real sense. Notably, formal equity implicitly gives men a head-start ahead of women in everything. It is important to note that most women are not even knowledgeable like men because of the historical injustices perpetrated against then by a largely patriarchal society (Goonesekere, 2014, p.482). As most boys used to attend school, a lot of girls were left at home preparing to get married and be house wives. Women were never engaged in the process of developing the society hence stayed on the periphery of everything. Women never had a voice in virtually every important matter within the society.

At this point in the essay, it is important to consider the basis for support of formal equity by policy makers and other scholars. It is Martin Luther King Jr. who argued that God created all men as equal hence have to be treated equally. This view is a support of the formal equity laws. Policy makers believe that formal equity is the right way to go because it standardizes the rules of competition between men and women. A lot of scholars in support of the formal equity laws do argue that formalized freedoms give every person equal opportunities to succeed in life. It is a view that is also based on the argument that formal equity is key and essential in the quest to eliminate any form of discrimination within the society.

However, such people do not know the real unjust impact of formal equity, especially women. In this essay, it is submitted that there are natural and artificial weaknesses of women relative to men, which make formal equity unable to function (Goonesekere, 2012, p.1). It is true and agreeable that formal equity could be perfect in society if the current social and cultural structures were absent. However, given the high patriarchy within the modern societies, it is not possible to achieve gender justice with formal equity.

It is important to recommend the right form of equity that should be considered in this contemporary society. Notably, this essay suggests the substantive equity in order to eliminate the unjust advantages faced by women. Formal equity does not account for the many non-legal barriers that exist on the path of women struggling to access opportunities and privileges in the society. However, such weaknesses and disadvantages experienced by women are always recognized under the substantive form of equity making it to be quite effective. Substantive form of equity is effective because of it accommodates the inherent weaknesses of women and the ones caused by the existent social and cultural structures (Durojaye, 2013, p.183). Under the substantive equity framework, there is the affirmative action principle that is even legalized. Affirmative action recognizes that the female gender factor may hinder women from achieving success in an environment crowded by men. Affirmative action is specifically applied in the political field. Since women have totally become unable to achieve success in gaining political seats, especially the elective ones, implementation of affirmative action s now deemed as the panacea to the challenge (Fredman & Goldblatt, 2015, p.27). For instance, women are now being given direct nominations into political positions like the parliaments of countries tanks to the affirmative action principle.

It is factual that the creativity of women has never been recognized in the society. Women do contribute a lot to the welfare and development of the society, but their input is often trivialized. It is not only men who fail to recognize them, but even the other females themselves. It is arguable that the main reason women are never recognized for their input in the society is a perverted perception that views them as subordinates to men.

There is a highly perverted perception in the society of the world that views men as the heads that lead women. Therefore, what is done by a woman is thought to be the product of a man’s idea. In fact, output of women’s creativity is often attributed to the men who head them. This perversion was started by an extremely patriarchal society that put females on the periphery of all societal important things. Women were regarded as helpers of men. Their work was to do house chores, give their men conjugal pleasure and cook for them. They also accepted this role and believed they could only enjoy life when married to a man. It is a traditional perception that has evolved into something permanent. Despite the many female movements across the earth, women are yet to occupy leading roles in terms steering of the society.

Examples of instances of female creativity include the inventions in science. A lot of women did invent drugs and technological machines, but never got the due credit like their male counterparts. For instance, it is a woman who invented the penicillin drug (Waring & Steinem, 1988, p.43). This woman is not famous like men who did invent drugs. Women have been steering business corporations to excellence and high performance but they never get this credit.

Conclusion

There is a strong direct relationship between formal equity and unjust disadvantages experienced by women in the society. Formal equity is the cause of the gender injustices experienced by women in the modern society. It is because formal equity fails to recognize the many factors, which work to disadvantage women while giving men undue advantage. These factors include the women’s lack of political power, limited knowledge, little education and weak physical strength relative to men in the society. Therefore, it is argued in this essay that it is true formal equity between the genders leaves women unjustly disadvantaged within the society. Therefore, the essay suggests the adoption of substantive equity. Human beings can be left to live at the mercies of survival for the fittest. Specifically, women cannot survive in such an environment. The substantive equity framework recognizes the gender differences in terms of weaknesses and strengths and provides solutions through accommodating the inherent disadvantages. Therefore, it is only wise to embrace it instead of formal equity for gender justice in the contemporary competitive world.



References

Arneson, R.J. (1998). What sort of sexual equality (if any) should feminists seek? Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 9.

Durojaye, E. (2013). ‘Woman, but not human’: Widowhood practices and Human Rights Violations in Nigeria. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 27(2), 176-196.

Durojaye, E., & Owoeye, Y. (2017). ‘Equally unequal or unequally equal’ Adopting a substantive equality approach to gender discrimination in Nigeria. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 1358229117704039.

Fredman, S., & Goldblatt, B. (2015). Gender equality and human rights. New York: UN Women.

Goonesekere, E. S. (2012). Social Transformation, Gender Inequality and Violence against Women in Contemporary Sri Lanka. Annual Keynote Oration, Centre for Gender Studies, University of Kelaniya, 12.

Goonesekere, S. (2014). From social welfare to human rights for girls–a path to achieving gender equality. International Journal of Law in Context, 10(4), 478-493.

Goonesekere, S. W. (2007). The concept of substantive equality and gender justice in South Asia. Unpublished Paper.

Reddy, V., Moletsane, R., & Masilela, T. (2011). Framing the issues around affirmative action and equity in South Africa: policy, progress, prospects and platitudes. Transformation: Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa, 77(1), 1-10.

Squires, J. (2007). The new politics of gender equality. Palgrave Macmillan.

Waring, M., & Steinem, G. (1988). If women counted: A new feminist economics. San Francisco: Harper & Row.