Essay Writing (Mock XAT-2 Essay)

Essay 1: Gender Equality is against nature:

The given statement, at the first reading, can easily be construed to sound patriarchal and
discriminatory. This reaction in the readers mind is understandable, given the socio-political
situation around us, where every day women are increasingly being found to be oppressed
and discriminated against and denied equality vis a vis the other gender. However, a closer
observation reveals that the statement itself is a neutral and objective one, which, of
course, happens to easily lend itself to be coloured by the context. Therefore, to
meaningfully and fruitfully discuss the various dimensions of the given statement, it first
needs to be deconstructed into its basic parts and analyzed objectively sans any bias and
prejudice. The rest of the essay sets out to do this analysis.

To being with, the word nature, means the natural course of things in the world we live in,
which are not influenced by man or civilization. Now, while the word gender has but
limited, i.e. two, connotations (or three, if you wish), the same cannot be said of the word
equality and herein lies the crux of understanding and analyzing given statement. There
could in fact be several contexts for the word equality, primary among which could be
physical, emotional , intellectual, existential, material etc. So the statement would
seem to beg different arguments based on which context is chosen for equality and also, in
some sense, if one is bent upon having any sort of bias or prejudice for or against one
gender at the outset itself. However, if no gender bias is included, a very sound and
meaningful appreciation of the statement and its implications is possible.

Firstly, consider physical dimension of equality. It is very true that across species,
including humans, the male is usually endowed with greater physical size and strength, with
very few exceptions. The males are generally the protectors of the family from external
threats. However, the very same physical inequality is also often reflected in the males of
several species being endowed with special features, like a peacocks tail or a special
voice/call, aimed almost solely at impressing the females. So we see that the physical
inequality which seems biased towards males is actually hinting at the female being at an
existentially higher or more privileged position where the male has the task of impressing a
potential mate. That is, the female is more valued! Similarly, while men generally are
considered to dominate the IQ scores, i.e., intellectually, women are considered
emotionally more mature or capable, thereby lending a balance to the scheme of things in
families and society overall. Hence, we see that genders are indeed unequal in nature if only
individual dimensions are to be considered in isolation. However, these dimensions are not
really independent of each other and their interplay is designed to work out perfectly for a
harmonious existence of both genders. Therefore genders are unequal by design for the
purpose of complementing each other through mutual respect, appreciation and cooperation
in short, inequality in nature is designed to promote equality.

Comments:

Reasonably good essay.

Possible improvements: Paras 1 and 2 could be combined into one crisp introductory
paragraph. Para 3 is relevant and appropriate in focusing on the natural differences between
genders. However, this could also have been shortened a bit. There would then have been
space for a para discussing where the term equality becomes relevant and where natural
differences do not/should not play a role. A brief conclusion could also have been provided
to sum up, overall.

Essay 2: Gender Equality is against nature:

A person's brought-up influences perception most societies and faiths dictate that men are
supposed to be protecting and providing while women are supposed to be nurturing. This
aspect itself acts against creating equality for men and women. While I have reason to
believe that bringing gender equality is possible socially, I also have ample reason to believe
that gender equality is fundamentally against nature because biological and physiological
differences interfere.

'Gender equality' has been the basis for the different waves of feminist movements that
started in the late 19th century in North America and certain parts of Europe. The core of
the movements was different fight for political equality, fight against social and cultural
inequalities and the like in each of the waves. But, what was also common to these
movements is that they fundamentally had to fight the inherent perception in the societies
that gender equality is against nature. The movements proved that providing equal
opportunities for women is possible socially by rewriting state policies that discriminate
people based on gender.

However, equal opportunities should not be confused with equal outcomes that arise in spite
of those opportunities. Equal outcomes not possible because different people working on
equal opportunities do not get the same results biological or physiological differences
interfere. For example, construction work though may provide equal opportunities, the work
itself will inevitably have more men because men are more biologically stronger than
women and hence are more productive in such jobs. Another case in point being providing
opportunities for women in combat forces. While stringent rules and best practices provide
protection for women from internal harassment, the very demands that combat places
physically on women would not result in desired equal outcomes as people are born with
different abilities and strengths. Arguing that the outcomes would be the same is
synonymous to saying that apples and oranges are equal since both are fruits. But, it should
be borne in mind that one fruit is chosen over the other depending on the benefits that one
may have over the other on a particular situation.

Laws themselves do not allow gender equality on outcomes in certain issues. In fact, in such
issues, laws are more skewed towards protecting women, thus creating gender inequality.
For example, cases of violence against women by men have more serious implications than
those against men by women.

In sum, societies cannot have a 'one size fits all' policy when it comes to creating gender
equality and should consider various circumstances, times and places.

Comments:

Not bad. Shows that a quick review could have helped spot small/unintended errors.

Possible improvements: The introduction could have considered the word equality and the
context(s) in which the writer is examining the topic. While the other points are relevant,
they could have been connected thematically, and some space could have been given to
examination of the conditions/context in which equality would be relevant and in the
scheme of things. Such a discussion would have appropriately supported the last para
(conclusion)
Essay 3 - Gender equality goes against nature:

Nature ensures that generations progress through variations (body size, hair color, facial
markings, voice properties), inheritance of traits and differential reproduction. While
biological determinists believe that chromosomal differences ("nature") cause gender
differences, differential socialists cite conditioning/socialization ("nurture") as reasons.
Nature has chiselled the strong bodies of protectors while the feminine gender has less
stronger body forms. Men are supposed to be strong providers and protectors; women, life
givers and nurturers. This role differentiation is also seen in the animal kingdom. Male deer
or wolves lead the pack while females take care of their young. Male penguins take care of
the eggs while females go hunting. Many bird/fish species have females looking after their
offspring while males take no responsibility. The lioness hunts while the male lion relaxes. If
both genders were "equal", how could we differentiate between them or prioritize one over
the other? Can we imagine a tiger pack where females do not protect and males do not
provide food or a bee colony where the queen bee is not protected by the workers? Nature
established the inequality of body forms and mental capacities. Men and women
complement (goes against gender equality) each other based on anatomical/ psychological
differences.

Equality as identical treatment assumes that objective criteria are used to define human
nature. Differential treatment assumes the binary categories of male-female derive from
biological differences. Objective reason is merely a tacit disguise for patriarchal
reinforcement of norms. Also, the female species cannot be said to be more capable at
multitasking or managing their emotional capital better or having stronger listening skills
and better assertive behavior than the entire male species. Some women are adept at
managing mechanical engineering, space research (eg. Sunita Williams), CEO portfolios (eg.
Indra Nooyi), sports. Individual differences make all the difference.

Though nature promotes gender inequalities, "rational" manmade influences sought to
promote equality. The suffragette movement (19th century) allowed European women to
vote and was followed by "equal pay for equal work" policy. Countries permit women to
serve in armed and police forces. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and
Millenium Development goals work towards empowering women in order to reduce poverty
and increase development. We have come a long way from opinions like "Satan deceived
Eve because he made his assault on the weaker part of human alliance", "female sex is
easily mistaken, fallible, fickle", "Adam did not go astray". While gender equality is stressed,
gender asymmetries still exist in entrenched attitudes, societal institutions, market forces,
access to basic rights, control of resources, economic opportunities, reproductive health,
power and politics. In the Middle East, women still wear burkhas to cover their faces and
enter a mosque through a separate door. In China, there is cultural preference for a male
child and sex-selective abortions. Women may have equal dignity but not equal rights.
eg.Ordination of women to priesthood might be forbidden.

Amartya Sen, Nobel Laureate, taking a plural view of gender inequality, cites inequalities of
mortality, natality, basic facilities, access to opportunities, professional employment,
ownership and household division of labour. Some Indian laws reinforce gender inequality.
The Goa polygamy law permits a second marriage for the husband for the lack of a son.
State laws do not allow women to inherit property. We still need to provide
reservations/protections to women (again an inequality in disguise). Issues like
undernourishment of girls over boys, maternal undernourishment, cardiovascular diseases
affect through biological and societal connections (politics, economic and social life), both
women and men, who are "all born of a woman". Inequalities promoted by nature lead to
modern society's appreciation for gender equality, yet gender-inequalities viciously exist in
the man-made orchestra of human life. Further what is natural and the norm can change as
even nature changes and manmade societies evolve and so does this interplay of nature's
gender inequalities versus societies' "gender equality".

Comments:

Not bad. Appealing at first sight because of impressive language

However, the piece presents the state of things and does not venture into opinion as to
whether equality is a desirable objective or not. This thread would have come in if the writer
had, in the introduction, presented his/her contextual understanding of the word 'equality'.
In the absence of an opinion, there isn't an appropriate conclusion.