A Woman is a Female Body with any Personality, not any Body with a Feminin Personality.

This line above stroke me. Something is wrong with the idea of gender equality.

What if the idea of gender equality is the thing boys and girls nowadays internalise in Western societies because of cultural imprint, not the traditional gender roles the so called gender mainstreaming aims to overcome?

Gender mainstreaming politics are based on the presumption that traditional gender roles are imprinted on us by a culture and society which is based on these patterns and this is how this culture and society keeps us bond and unfree.

Considering the educational efforts of gender mainstreaming and the mindset of mainstream media and public opinion, the idea of gender equality is more likely to be taught and imprinted into our children’s minds than traditional gender roles, behaviours and identities, which are widely depicted as outdated and unhealthy remnants of a dark past. The idea to overcome traditional gender roles became widespread in the 1960s with flower power and feminism. Now we are in the 2020s. More than half a century and two generations later. It is widely expected that we should not make any difference in how to treat and deal with boys and girls, with men and women. It is even considered evil. How could this not have an effect on the cultural imprint our society puts on us?

To me, the assumption that traditional gender roles and behaviour, the way we feel about and identify with our sex are cultural imprints, but the idea of gender equality, the idea that there is no intrinsic difference between men and women except for their reproductive body parts, this seems odd to me. Even these parts of the body, traditionally considered a clear differentiator of the sexes, are replaced by the bare identification to a social construct. Why should we prefer the identification with a social construct over physical facts while we actually fighting the assumed social construct of gender roles?

If we think the idea of gender equality to an end, it means the denial of genders at all. However, if there are no genders, why would we care about it at all?

The denial of gender, or at least the denial of its importance, plays into the pocket of dehumanisation and transhumanism. If you see human beings just as machines, if you do not recognise any soul or spirit, in this case, people are just a resource, human capital.

If you want to use people for labour only, you do not need genders. Bonds between people which are based on traditional gender roles, the families, are actually hindering the use of human capital. Traditionally a man’s workforce would feed a whole family. Without this bond, his wife would go to work herself. Childcare becomes a new business branch. As the women go to work, children are taken care of by others and thereby this job, originally based on the bond between mother and child, is commercialized.

Is this the freedom men and women are striving for?

It reminds me of Aldous Huxley’s dystopian Brave New World.