Active Participation NOT Acceptance

Artist: Laura Breiling,

Hi everyone!

Hope you're keeping safe during this period and staying home.

I've had this post for a while, since January 31st to be exact, but it didn't feel ready, but better late than never right?

Please enjoy.

Active Participation NOT acceptance.

Women are not shells which are only useful for tasks, then to be disregarded and regulated to the background. 

How can a woman aspire for leadership and active participation in life when there is a belief system imbibed in both men and women alike shaming the working class woman, as well as an ideology glorifying paths which must lead to one outcome?

The dawn of the 21st century has equipped us with the knowledge that stable economic growth is further achievable through active participation by all genders in the labour/work force. Gone are the days when women were seen as housewives, making little to no financial contribution to the family purse save their management and bargaining skills.It has been more than a century since the first feminist wave and we are a generation apart from the last, which was clearly organized to break barriers and push inclusion into our society. 

Artist: Sara Andreasson

But even with all this profound knowledge floating around, there is still a stigma attached to women who put work at the forefront of their lives, choosing to partake in jobs and hours equivalent to their male counterparts.

These women are still subject to discrimination and prejudice and seen as unfeminine and money lovers. 

What is the truth in this, or is this not the prejudice attached to refusal to conform to gender normative standards? 

Traditional gender roles impose women as the care giver, and aforementioned, society is now forced to adjust their lenses to accommodate the needs of a modern family; where nice things involve mom and dad working. 

Since we have come to understand that this adjustments are needed for society to move forward, not only in terms of financial sustainability, but to encourage fulfilment of passion, as people are no longer seen as monotonous, why is there still a subtle discrimination attached to these women?

Why is there so much insensitivity placed on the female, both from the outside as well as on the inside.

The external side: Oblivious of the rigour attached to the daily tasks which involve a regular job as well as the management and organizational of the family.

The internal side: Constitutes of women who even though have some exposure to the rigour of what balancing jobs and family entail, are still unforgiving and unappreciative of women who set career at the fore front of their lives, because they term it to be unnatural.

But what in fact is natural by human standards? 

Society? 

The knowledge that society and its standards are subject to change over years is a testament to the notion that rules which are held sacrosanct and delighted upon are not always the actuality of life.

After all, the earth was once considered flat.

So why hold steadfast to ideologies which have been proved to hold back development?

We want active participation from everyone, but we are not accepting of this participation. Seeing women as shells which serve a purpose, but can be easily disregarded or  be told to go back to their places, even though they are catalysts to the change. 

Only useful for work, but accommodations do not need to be made, because their ‘super-powers’ mean that the time put into work will not affect their family time.

It is very unrealistic, there is no way that a family with both partners actively working will not differ from that of one which only involves one parent working or part time. Individuals vary and while some women might be able to effortlessly balance this and go throw the day, some cannot, a lot will not. A family is started by a man and a woman and the responsibility ought to be shared. Family is not supposed to be a power struggle on each side. 

So, what do you think?