I wish to analyze the difference between a woman and a female and how the two terms are (mis)used as if they mean the same. We can also discuss the world views, particularly where it matters more, like in constitutions and laws of nations.
Who/what is a female?
A female can be of any age. New-born or too-old-an-age. A girl is not a woman, but she is female. So, that difference is simply put. There might be more detailed and more encompassing differences. Now, who is a female? I think it is a biological term. A female is the one with ‘female organs’ – not only sexual organs, but the general normalized differences between what may be considered as male organs and female organs. A strict definition of these organs may not be possible. For example, “is a person with vagina, but no womb / uterus female?”. All these attributes can be considered only on a statistical normative basis. The anomalies stand out, defined or undefined, classified or unclassified. The question who is a male or who is a female OR whether a person is male or female can be decided only statistically; or to be more scientific, probabilistically, not deterministically.
Who / what is a woman?
A female human being? I think, no. There are a number of biological (like anatomic and physical/ mechanical), psychological (like behavioral), aesthetic (the finer differences in organ morphology!) and social (more of emotional) factors that would decide whether a person is woman or not. It is a very complex. The factor that decides is very complex multi-parametric statistic. Layman’s comments like “that guy is womanish” or “that woman has got a manly body” after casually or seriously observing some person definitely suggest that we have pre-conceived ideas about who can be termed man / woman irrespective of that person is male or female.
What’s your problem?
Well, I have no problem as long as the common day-today purposes are concerned. However, I start having problems when it comes to science and governance / administration / law is involved. Because it affects one and all; the normal and the anomalous. Like the ‘Women’s Rights Act’ and ‘Domestic Violence Act’ – are they meant for women or for females? I believe that the laws, both of the international organizations like UNO and of individual nations are based on the essential assumption that all females are women and vice versa. HERE LIES THE TROUBLE.
How to differentiate?
(a) Men jump higher / longer than women
(b) Men run faster than women
1. Men are stronger than women
Are all men stronger than all women? Does it mean that a particular man is stronger than all the women? That every husband is stronger than his wife? The question can be asked in a physical strength sense or in a mental strength sense. THE ANSWER IS ‘NO’ OR ‘MAY NOT BE’.
Unfortunately, the laws are based on the assumption that men are stronger than
2. Men abuse women
Does it mean that women don’t abuse men, mentally or physically?
‘NOT AT ALL’
3. Women are more beautiful / women have more beautifull eyes. NO, some men also have.
The observations may go so and so on…….
However,
Females can bear children. She need not be a woman.
Males can father. He need not be a man.
THE ISSUE
The issue is that international organizations and governments make rules / laws / acts based on the assumptions that all females are women or vice versa. The properties of females and women are assumed to be exactly same. Let us look at an example:
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 was brought into force by the Indian government from October 26, 2006.
1) For the purposes of this Act, any conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence if he,— (a) habitually assaults or makes the life of the aggrieved person miserable by cruelty of conduct even if such conduct does not amount to physical ill-treatment; or (b) forces the aggrieved person to lead an immoral life; or (c) otherwise injures or harms the aggrieved person. (2) Nothing contained in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall amount to domestic violence if the pursuit of course of conduct by the respondent was reasonable for his own protection or for the protection of his or another’s property.
Note that the respondent is ‘by default’ taken as a ‘he’. If ‘she’ injures or harms, it is not an offence.
Primarily meant to provide protection to the wife or female live-in partner from domestic violence at the hands of the husband or male live-in partner or his relatives, the law also extends its protection to women who are sisters, widows or mothers. Domestic violence under the act includes actual abuse or the threat of abuse whether physical, sexual, verbal, emotional or economic.
Was it necessary to protect wife/female only? What if the female/wife is manly / dominating / aggressive and the husband / man is submissive and violated. There is no ‘ACT’ to protect him!!
Renuka Chowdhury, the then Minister for Women and Child Development, agreed that "an equal gender law would be ideal. But there is simply too much physical evidence to prove that it is mainly the woman who suffers at the hands of man"
On the one hand the governments give more than due to the minority, while under this law “the minority (if at all it is so) men who suffers at the hands of women”.
One of the most astounding troubles involved in this kind of non-sense / senseless outlook is the case of some of the northeastern states. In some of these states as well as among some tribes of other states, the society is matrilineal and / or matriarchal. The domestic violence bill is applicable there also. Is it not like giving sword in the hands of the Satan?
After all, what harm it will make if the ‘Act’ and for that matter all ‘Acts’ are made gender-equal? Would it have offered fewer powers to the women / females? NO.
THE SOLUTION
It would be desirable to distinguish between “female and women” and “male and man” after carefully devising the definition of these terms. In a world of gender equality, let us first identify the genders – male, female and including trans-sexual and then differentiate between female and woman/girl and also between male and man/boy.
LET US BE CLEAR ABOUT TERMS
LET US NOT SACRIFICE THE MINORITY
LET US NOT KILL THE ABNORMAL,
FOR,
MOST GREAT PEOPLE HAD BEEN ABNORMAL.
No comments:
Post a Comment