For two decades, at least, the social focus has been honed on what women want, how much they can achieve comparative to men, how women's skills can be improved, how they can break away from the male sphere of influence. The phrase "be a man" is tossed around as verbal ammunition, yet no one can define exactly what that means. There is nothing left to hunt except the Friday paycheck, nothing to protect against except creditors, and no initiation into adulthood. That's a gradually depressing state few want to live, yet many men have been relegated to exactly that role.
Where the cultural role of females has greatly evolved, the equal evolution of male purpose has stunted and we experience the social imbalance everywhere. Maryelyn, your comment of man's "I'm the boss, or I'm outta here" is a perfect reactionary example of feeling frustrated (not threatened), yet unable to express the core intent of their feelings because no one taught them how (or even that it's perfectly "male") to express it. I wholeheartedly support any attempt to "guide" young men along a path of self-discovery and purpose, in a way that doesn't hinder their female counterpart's "progress", yet helps him feel wanting and appreciated for their unique contributions.
So that leads us back to the original question, "why can't women do what men are supposed to do?" Because women aren't men. Women have a unique gender role, just like men, that can only enhance their purpose whatever that may be. Any man who's lived with a women (other than their mother) for any length of time can attest to the fact women are naturally adept with empathy and compassion, and when they feel loved, supported and secure they make life for others quite joyful. I can't imagine how this could be discounted. This doesn't mean that women shouldn't be denied opportunities because their only purpose is to "love others". That's an ignorance that will only perpetuate this gender debate instead of working beyond it.  |