Thesis Statement- The cedars of inequality serve vitally to construct the vessels of injustice.
The deglaciation of frosty clout of one section results in an inevitable augmentation in ascendency of its conflicting counterpart. The presence of idiosyncrasies to delineate the spheres of genders may amount to detrimental stigmatisation. Conversely, the endowment of peculiarities upon certain gender which wields socio-economic agency constitutes the complacent retention of fructuous power within the pre-ordained theoretical citadels of masses affiliated to that faction. Although the restricted phrasing of English playwright Shakespeare is immortalized within the chambers of academia, the social stagnation and cultural pedagogy attuned to symmetrical notions have abjectly remained unscathed.
One must discern that the entrails of any social system comprise of tenets infused within its systematic function by confluence of historic retention and objectives of power groups reaping the yields of continuation of the status-quo. So, where the social, legal and moral responsibilities in any political enclave -state- are applicable ‘erga omnes’ (towards all), the axiomatic inference would be provision of egalitarian opportunities to all the dwellers of the concerned abode. Conversely, society pre-emptively categorises masses and compartmentalises them into myriads factions for asymmetrical provision of resources and progression of certain sections over development of others.
The resultant by-product of this systematic arrangement engenders detrimental ‘dependence’ which paves the way for untenable albeit indiscernible exploitation of the subaltern faction in such orchestrated equations. There are economic, social, political and psychological ramifications which fuels the mobility of binary bifurcations in the society.
Economically, the salience of compartmentation within pecuniary dwellings/spheres of genders allow the compatible sex to inevitably yields utmost relevancy. For instance, the diminution of feminine mobility towards the shores of economic remunerations stems from the orchestrated incompatibility of femininity with the ‘waged’ opportunities of vocational origin. The “frailty” defenestrates women when gauged through the resilience parameters of the employment prospects. The nature of professional prospects preordains resistance and obviation thus inadvertently stupefying and precluding the progression of irreconcilable femininity which is cultivated in synonymity with incongruous frailty. This economic deprivation is consumed with complacent acquiescence.
In essence the “false consciousness” of organic meritocracy is the systematic calibration of centuries which disenfranchises a specific gender through fabrication of notions of equality and fuels the pernicious retention of penurious femininity. Although the moral veracity of equality trivialises relevancy of women when compared to their successful counterparts, the trenchant scrutinization of the retrofitting in retrospective realms of time illuminates the undercurrents of insubstantial parameters and preferential arrangements of financial markets for systematic incapacitation of women. The deficit of women’s ability to satiate the requirements of masculinity-riddled vocational citadels doesn’t accentuate the inveterate or innate incompatibility of the gender but this inconsistency patently insinuates the stratagems of perfidious patriarchy.
To substantiate, occupational segregation which divorces and alienates women from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) restricts their ability to shatter the indiscernible glass ceiling enshrining them within restricted abodes of unwaged reproductive labour. Moreover, the yawning deficit of Gender Pay Parameters enervates the proportion of equality as perception of “frailty” triumphing over socially revered “masculinity” pales into axiomatic implausibility. So, to reinforce this financial dichotomy it obligates an insidious retention of gender presumptions and accreditation of women with socially and economically subservient inscriptions such as “frailty”.
Socially, the perceptions in their solitary elucidations are infinitesimal and innocuous until substantiated by incessant reinforcements and meticulously tenacious consolidation. Women and their cultivated relevancy with ‘frailty’ is socially advocated and peddled at myriad facades to chisel the perceptions of society and elicit compliance with the primordially canonised nations of gender. The social rituals and communal practices cement the perception by incessant aggrandisement and particular accentuation of gender disparities. By the trenchant autopsy of deceased equality, one may pragmatically locate the strategic rationale behind the notorious propagation of the women by the Literature in an attempt to affiliate their gender with nations of frailty.
The crescendo of patriarchy is the patronage of patrimony.
The chattels bequeathed by generational counterparts not only serve as a symbol of retentive superiority but this orchestrated paramountcy also consolidates historical inequalities. To substantiate, the social miniaturisation of dowry customs and the communally immutable reliance upon “Son preference” inarticulately sustain the days of yore, enshrines the customs of yesteryear and traditions of erstwhile epochs. Thus, the infiltration of hierarchical discourses through perpetuation of “frailty” and its simultaneous fortifications by empirical social examples serve as harbinger of social dichotomies. Thus, categorical compartmentalisation of women within the myopic dungeons of “frailty” especially in a stagnant social order where frailty is synonymous with “inutility”, amounts to the denial of equality, equivalence and gender sustainability. Nevertheless, the path to the systematic derailment of women and their social repudiation is paved by the means of prenatal psychological indoctrinations.
Psychologically, the educationally egalitarian yet socially conflicting beliefs amount to the phenomenon of “Cognitive Dissonance”. The oceans of society advocate for ‘frailty’ of women while the islands of education translucently implicate the presence of neutral traits of genders. Moreover, the “Classical Conditioning” of the domesticity and the successive progenies of social families predicates the canalization of patronisation with masculinity while galvanisation of subservience becomes inalienably symptomatic of femininity. This axiomatic configuration cements “Implicit biases” which inadvertently paves the way for “Selective Attention” upon frailty of women instead of their concomitant abilities. This obliteration is not only aligned with the masculine perceptions but it also drains the capital of “Emotional Intelligence” from the women. These women, consequentially, remain shrouded within the ambiguities of their socio-political relevancy.
The self-disillusionment by the feminine faction results from the unfettered manoeuvring of their malleable ‘schema’. The breakthrough lies within the dormant and static arrangement of the status-quo by introducing “systematic desensitisation” of masculinity for women and femininity for men. The creation of receptive corridors for the genders and induction of flexibility will generate space for the “Casus Belli” to penetrate into the socially and religiously marginalised dwellings.
Religiously, the incommensurability of women and empirical professionalism and its uncanny reciprocation in the concerned Shakespearean metonymy serves as the brutal cause for generating gulfs and fault lines for this gender for progression.
The cedars of inequality serve vitally to construct vessels of injustice.
The hydrocarbons fuelling the vehicular mobility of patriarchy are funnelled by the receptacles of subservience predicted upon the egalitarian cadavers of gendered identities.
Historically, the systematic alienation of women from the battlegrounds necessarily obligated the accordance of priority in attainment of war spoils to men. The prescriptions accorded for sustenance of social solvency which compartmentalised men within the spheres of pecuniary and economic domestic liabilities must not be adulterated under the manoeuvred ecclesiastical ordains. The cultural exploitation of women’s insularity and the capitalisation upon myopic celestial elucidations detrimentally enervates the attenuated conditionality of this gender.
The selective paramountcy of the physical capital of men is presented to slaughter the specific and androgynous competencies of women which may yield fructuous results for both the genders and lead the anticipations of peaceful co-existence and tranquil co-evolution to fruition. Ostensibly innocuous and productive ‘frailty’ of women in essence devours upon the vitals of collective society and encumbers the prospects of bilateral progression. This ‘auto-immunity’ of society is cannibalistically consuming the potential of global growth and derailing the inalienably imperative retention of stability within the precincts of this terrestrial hominid abode.
To enshrine, amidst the daunting financial straits encountered by every International agent-states-in relative terms, the informational deserts of the world compellingly warrant a trenchant reconfiguration. The subaltern gender from the global peripheries must be brought to the financial fore by supplanting the disingenuous and insubstantial pronouncements and attributions for Dialectical Dispensation. The society may continue to attribute ‘frailty’ to women yet the concomitance of enervation, emasculation and attenuation must be resiled for adoption of remunerative acknowledgements accompanied by ennobling of the intrinsic provenance of feminine gender. These recalculations are incumbent upon the society and the state to dissuade the perennial alienation of a global demographic faction which, if adequately valorised, can be of exponential service to the world.
Incontrovertibly, “frailty” can be retained in the society yet it should be substantiated with astronomically puissant salience that its emulation would be espoused socially en masse for progression. Thus, it would be pragmatically utilitarian if the obviating obscurantism in the global discourse is supplanted by enlightening tenets of gender egalitarianism. The world must lend credence to prudence and sanity as partnerships of proximity bode relatively fructuous than the dividends of dichotomy.