The term gender equality has appeared in newspapers and on television recently. No neologism can surprise Ukrainians, especially those who lived in the Socialist era. We treat new foreign words with caution but imperatives to support gender equality make us wonder what it means.
Although gender sounds like the Ukrainian word gendel, which is defined as a market pub, we intuitively feel it is something absolutely different. Unfortunately, our feminists never explained clearly enough that gender equality was equality of rights and opportunities of men and women in social and family life, and in politics.
In Ukraine, such terms prompt a question: "Does our constitution, which was copied from the Soviet Union's supreme law, limit women's rights in any way?"
When the Soviet Union was founded, women were given so many rights and freedoms, particularly in family relations and marriage that the government had to step back and slow down before World War II. The government recognized family as a primary and fundamental element of society and passed many nuptial amendments resembling conservative laws of imperial Russia.
The changes gave women more family rights but failed to improve their social status. Some legislation made their life even harder, such as an abortion ban or refusal to recognize unmarried couples and register their children, as well as many other restrictions that were revised and mostly revoked after Stalin's death.
Supporters of gender equality quickly realized that Ukraine is neither Asia, nor Africa as far as social and political rights of women are concerned. We are not yet truly European but women's rights and gender equality are stipulated and guaranteed by our laws and have already penetrated our social attitudes.
There are and will always be family problems, however, for marriage is a union of two independent individuals, two opposites, a man and a woman, with often separate incomes and similar educational background. Thus there is almost no way one of them will obey or be inferior.
Gender issue advocates in Ukraine bid to achieve equality in families. This niche is as eternal as monogamy, so there is no doubt that, like family advisors and spiritual pastors, gender equality promoters will always find followers.
No society, however civilized it is, can bridge differences between men and women in families because inequality and incompatibility of sexes is natural and instinctive.
Having no counterparts for comparison, uniqueness is self-sufficient. Ukrainians often bitterly joke that they cannot understand where vicious wives and despotic husbands come from if they are all wonderful, kind, intelligent and tolerant before their weddings.
The fact is that a married couple is a binary category and so someone should lead and someone be led. Such is the rule of binary categories upon which Karl Marx's law on monetary evolution is based. (No scientist has dared to question its validity in the past two hundred years!) It means there can be no absolute equality. In all families someone always seeks dominance, either deliberately or subconsciously.
In some civilizations and religions men are regarded as leaders, which is believed to ensure that families live in peace and harmony.
Women are not always obedient. History proves that even in patriarchal societies there are women like Roksolana who fulfill their leadership instinct despite religious restrictions and traditions.
I am speaking about their natural desire to be first and attract attention. Professional psychologists say this instinct is for self-affirmation. It may have been inherited by humans from the animal world or is a product of our civilization and mentality. This desire causes family conflicts and misunderstandings, so claim psychologists and judges registering divorces. In fact, there are more rows, divorces and breakups in families whose members are well educated and enjoy high social status. Attempts to appeal to psychologists, religious leaders or party organizations do not help restore family stability.
How can we reduce the growing number of divorces? There are hundreds and thousands of recommendations, as well as there are hundreds and thousands of family situations, which can be used as precedents to resolve this or that problem.
It is important to simply discover the major cause of the conflicts.
The main cause is our craving for leadership. Egoism makes him/her think he/she does more for the family and so deserves more attention and money.
Those married for more than fifty years believe it is necessary to use this instinct cleverly. In other words, each partner should lead in areas in which he/she is better than his/her spouse. Someone loves cooking, someone wakes up early to do lots of things in the morning, and someone has better education or experience to perform some function. One must do what he/she can do.
The Ukrainian philosopher Grygoriy Skovoroda believed doing what one enjoys doing made people happy and their work easy and pleasurable.
I am speaking about the need to balance rights and functions. A good friend of mine, who has been married for fifty years, says he is happily married because he properly distributed family duties. He is a breadwinner and his wife spends what he earns. I first laughed at his story but he told me spending money was a talent requiring the knowledge and love to manage money in a way enabling a family to eat good meals, buy clothes, have savings and never have debts.
He then reminded me that there was an enormous budget deficit in Ukraine when Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko assumed office two years ago. Nonetheless, she legalized the economy, paid off debts, increased revenues and raised social benefits by 40 percent.
No surprise that more and more people want her to return to the governmental Olympus when the government alarmingly announces there is no money in the country's budget.
Gender equality will surely have followers in Ukraine. Hopefully, men will not have to protest in streets to protect their rights but will contribute to the issue in other productive ways.
|
