Thursday, 31 December 2015

Patriarchy is Love

Author: Blaise Wilson

What is Patriarchy?

Patriarchy is the idea that men hold the majority of influence and resources, while women tend to be excluded from it [7].

Patriarchy has several competing theories. These centre on two root causes:
  1. social
  2. biological
Most Third Wave Feminists believe that Patriarchy is 100% a social construct, based on the assumption that gender is 100% a social construct [1]. However, as demonstrated in our Outcome of Outcome Series [2], this assumption has been proven false, indicating that gender is, at least partially, influenced by biology.

The biological advocates often cite Bateman's Principle, which is the idea that females are the biological limiting factors within the human species, and as such are allowed to be much more choosey about their sexual partners.

Wikipedia [3] has this to say on the subject of Patriarchy (as of 31/12/2015):

"Most sociologists reject predominantly biological explanations of patriarchy and contend that social and cultural conditioning are primarily responsible for establishing male and female gender roles… Some opponents of feminism have argued that patriarchy has its origin in biological factors...  The male testosterone hormone is, for instance, known to greatly enhance risk taking behaviour; which can generate increased status in groups if successful (balanced with an equal increase in number of failures, with potential losses of status or death as result)."

Curiosity this implies that that most sociologists agree with Feminist theory (or vice versa) of a social construct and 'opponents of feminism' believe in a biological root cause. However, there are very few advocates that seem take the grey approach, implying it is black or white, either social or biological.

However, the definition of Feminism does not strictly definition patriarchy as a social construct, allowing alternative theories to be explored within the Feminist community.

After reviewing the evidence for both social and biological theories EgaFem has come up with their own concept of patriarchy.

EgaFem Patriarchy Hypothesis: Patriarchy is Love.

This is a HYPOTHESIS, as such no evidence will be provided at this stage. This is put forth as a thought for debate and further evidence will be investigated later to test this concept.

'Patriarchy is Love' is embodied by the phase 'Women and children first.'

This hypothesis arises from patriarchy primarily stemming from a biological root cause, but has a social layer. This is the social construct that female lives are more precious than males. This concepts accepts that there will always be a patriarchy to some degree due to the biological factors, but humans can mould their society to mitigates the biological impacts on perceived modern gender roles, and it can do this by treating male and female suffering with equal value.

Under this theory women's lives are held in higher value than men's due to the biological limitations of childbearing and parental investment. This allows women to be choosy in their sexual partners.

In order to compete for women and spread their genetics, men must take the majority of the risks, and successes or failures as a result. This means more men than women are killed in combat, in violent crimes, are homeless and so forth. However, men are also more likely to be heroes, have ideas outside the box, invent wonders, win prizes, and push human knowledge forward. All this takes risks of time, effort and resources, as they are not guaranteed to succeed.

Successful men are rewarded for taking risks in the form of social influence and resources. Men who are successful have more influence and resources making them more attractive to women as sexual partners. Women gain access to the power and influence through men, without having to take the risk themselves.

And this is Patriarchy. Women do not have direct access to the influence and resources, because they did not earn them. Society discourages women from earning them because women must be protected from risk.

Patriarchy in History

Consider the eras of human development:
  • Hunter Gatherer 
  • Agriculture 
  • Industrial 
  • Modern/Tertiary
Considering this theory throughout these eras. As hunter gatherers, men traditionally did the hunting. This is a high risk endeavour in which many men would not return home. While women kept closer to the community, raising the children in relative safety compared to the risks taken by the males. A heavily pregnant, recently given birth, or nursing Mother cannot hunt. And if a pregnant women hunts, you risk two lives. In order to improve the survival of the species it makes logical sense for women's lives to be protected, and for men to take the risks.

Humans have been hunter/gatherers for about 90% of our history [5], with agriculture only appearing about 11,500 years ago [4]. We are genetically almost identical to when we were hunter gatherers.

The agriculture and industrial ages suffer with similar issues to the hunter/gatherer era, women are safer at home. Although this didn't mean women never took risks, but it was rarely by choice but rather as an imperative to earn enough food or starve. Middle-class and families that could afford for women to stay at home, often did so. Women being able to be protected became a privilege provided by class/money.

It is only in developed, modern society of the last 100 years when safe jobs became commonly available. Even today, when you consider the jobs many Third Wave Feminists are demanding women are given better access too, they are the higher paid, safe, low risk jobs within offices, not high risk roles.

Risk Taking and Women

The biological need to protect women has sprung up in social etiquettes. Women are discouraged from taking risks. The social protection of women is a symptom of biological influence. Men take the risks and gain the rewards, while women are kept safe. This appears as patriarchy.

Patriarchy is the system in which women gain power and influence through their men. In order to break patriarchy women must gain this power and influence directly by taking their own risks and not transferring these risks, and thus the rewards, to men.

Under this theory, patriarchy evolved as a social construct based on biological influences. It was not designed. Men did not get together one day and decide to come up with a system to systematically oppress women. Both men and women continue to perpetuate patriarchy by allowing and encouraging the protection of female lives over that of males.

To break patriarchy, women must be allowed to fail. Women must be allowed to die at the same rate as men. Women must be equally disposable as men.

Either the value of male life must be raised to the same as women's, or women's reduce to the same as men's (or a bit of both). Any inequality of the value of life between men and women will result in either patriarchy or matriarchy through the rewards of risk taking.

Many Outcome/ Third Wave Feminists are, in fact, promoting patriarchy through their demands and actions, particularly the concept that men are eternal oppressors and women are perpetual victims. Ignoring the plight of men, and only focusing on women promotes patriarchy and is damaging to the ability of women to earn their own influence and resources.

Patriarchy is the love of men trying to stop harm from coming to women, in the same way parents control and limit their children from dangerous and risky behaviours and situations in order to protect them.

Addressing the Patriarchy Problem

Patriarchy is beautiful. The sacrifices men have made for women should be celebrated. Without the risks men take, the human race would likely be extinct. But instead we have thrived. We have thrived so much, and developed to a point that women are now able to take the risks men have always taken on their behalf.

But, reducing the social norms that perpetuate patriarchy will be a challenge. In the same way parents must allow their child into the world to make their own lives, men must let women go. And women need to leave the safety of men, and go out into the world to take those risks.

Under the Patriarchy is Love hypothesis,
this is patriarchy in action.
Women are biologically adverse to taking risks. As a result many women will not be comfortable leaving the safety of men and will want to choose to remain in a patriarchal society in which men continue to take risks on their behalf, and women continuing to gain access to these rewards through their men.

This is fine. However, women who choose to continue to live in a patriarchal household do not get to demand direct access to the rewards and privileges without earning them.

If a women wants direct access to influence and resources she must take the risks, she must earn them herself. She must break out from the patriarchy and take responsibility for her own safety, and take risks.

Women must take full responsibility for the risks, if they are to take full responsibility for the rewards. Affirmative action, quotas, men giving women stuff, and other solutions that mitigate women's risks while offering them rewards is patriarchy.


Our definition of Feminism is the empowerment of women to take risks. Risk implies both success and failure. Women must be allowed to fail, and be forced to accept personal responsibility for the consequences of that failure in order for them also be personally responsible for the results of success.

Thus, the Patriarchy is Love hypothesis is the protection of women over men, and can be summed up by the phrase 'women and children first.'

Sunday, 27 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Strategy

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Strategy: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

In order to reach EgaFem's Vision, we will use several strategies.

Lead from the front
We will lead by example. We will be the change we want to see in Feminism. Feminism is defined as fighting for equality, with the emphasis on women's perspective. Under this definition we have EVERY right to call ourselves Feminists.

Change must happen from within. As Feminists, we have every right to try to change Feminism.

This change includes holding Feminism to a higher standard of debate by providing unbiased evidence, avoiding logical fallacies, and practising good debating techniques.

We admit there is a problem with Feminism, and it needs to change. Feminism should change to fit women, it should not demand women change to fit Feminism.

Promote Principles
The rejection of basic principles and human rights by Outcome Feminism is problematic.

EgaFem will promote the basic principles of:
  • Equality of Opportunity
  • Personal Liberty
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Equality before the Law
  • Freedom of Assembly
  • Freedom of the Press
  • Freedom of Speech 
  • Freedom of Thought
These principle apply to adult humans who are mentally able to make decisions. Children and those who are incapability of decision making cannot be held to the same level of responsibility.

EgaFem will promote these principles, even for those who disagree with us. We will criticise those who break these principles.

Freedom of Thought allows women to choose to be #WomenAgainstFeminism, or even Men's Rights Activists. Women (and men) are free to choose which labels they apply to themselves. Feminism should not demand everyone be feminists. Feminism should be something individuals wish to be a part of, something to be proud of. However, we respect the choices of others to choose whatever label they wish. Feminism is an Ideology . Within the Free Market Feminism must compete with other label to attract people.

The test for the principles will be the #NounSwap test. In this a statement will be made and then the nouns swapped out for gender, race, religion and so forth. The opportunities, principles, and social reaction should not change when the noun changes.

Where changing the noun has an impact, it should be investigated to discover why this is the case. Suggestions on how to fix it can then be investigated.

Caveat: The only time these principles could be broken is when human lives will be lost as a result, although every effort should be in place to ensure the equality based on ability. An example of this is careers in which physical ability has an impact on saving lives such as the military and emergency services.

We reject the dehumanization of humans, including men and of those who disagree with Feminism.

We reject the assumptions that gender is 100% a social construct, however, we recognise that social pressures do play a role in 'acceptable' gender behaviours and that this can change over time. But biology has a lot to answer for, including men and women, on average, having different 'norms'. Men and women are different. And this is ok.

EgaFem will explore the differences of gender from physical and physiological perspectives in order to apply this knowledge to different issues.

Woman's Accountability, Empowerment, and Patriarchy

Equal rights come with equal responsibilities. In order for women to be truly equal they must have equal responsibilities to men, this includes taking equal risks. Women are adults, and should be treated as such.

We define Patriarchy as the system of society in which men hold the majority of power and resources. However, unlike most Feminists we go one further and explain why this happens.

We believe Patriarchy stems from a society that protects women over men. Men take the risks, and are rewarded for it through the power and resources they (rightfully deserve to) earn. This is perceived as Patriarchy. Historically, this has allowed our species to grow. Women are the biological limiting factor in our genetics (consider how many babies a women can have in her lifetime versus a man). However, the human species has been remarkably successful and it is time women stepped up and begin to take the risks that previously fell to men, and earn the associated rewards. It is time for women to take the responsibility for their own safety away from men, and to do it for themselves. This is EgaFem's interpretation of Feminism.

Thus, any attempt to provide increased protection and safety to women, but not men, is damaging to women. This is the essence of Patriarchy, in which men face the dangers of the world and are rewarded for it, while women are protected, kept at home and denied opportunities of social rewards such as resources and influence.

In order for women to be equal to men, male and female lives must be equally sacrosanct. Women's lives should no longer be considered more precious than a man's.

A victim is a victim. Everyone deserves help and support, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the ratio of the gender of victims within the issue.

Going hand in hand with this, a perpetrator is a perpetrator. Women are human, as such are capable of evil. Their atrocities will not be glossed over and ignored. This includes supporting for provable false rape allocations to be pursued under the law, and the recognition of female perpetrators of domestic violence, and rape.

EgaFem will encourage women to get out of the victim loop, and accept personal accountability. This starts with recognising women's actions. Women's action will not be ignored, denied or blamed on others. Women are responsible for their actions, to deny this is to deny women's agency. It disempowers them.

However, we recognise that biology will still play a role within Patriarchy and it will never be completely removed. The aim is to explore what changes within society we can make in order to reduce the social influences of Patriarchy, for example the reporting of tragedy within the media should no longer focus on the female casualties, but on all casualties. Male and female lives should be given equal weight within a story.

We also recognise that the concepts of Patriarchy and Gynocentrism are interlinked, with heavy emphasis on attraction of individuals being linked to health and resources.

Misogyny and Disempowerment

EgaFem will criticise those who claim women are psychologically weak, such as claims women are only capability of following a crowd and unable to think for themselves.

EgaFem will criticise those who claim women are incapable of success without additional help and support. However, if there is true discrimination this should be sought out and addressed on a case by case basis and those responsible be held accountable. But equality of opportunity does not create equal outcomes.

EgaFem will provide unbiased evidence to shatter illusions put forth by Outcome Feminists to further their agenda.

EgaFem will address the unjustified levels of fear of Outcome Feminism's narrative that keep women in fear and disempowered.

EgaFem will call out misandry and misogyny within Feminism, when we see it.

Through feedback, research, and connecting with others EgaFem will grow and change. All aspects of EgaFem, including the Vision will be reviewed periodically and changed as new thinking and perspectives arise.

Because of this EgaFem welcomes feedback, constructive criticism and engagement with everyone. This includes talking to those with different views, including Men's Rights Activists.

Where inequality is found, campaigns and action may be recommended. These can be found at:

Saturday, 19 December 2015

A sample of domestic violence research - UK figures

Author - Drew Roan.

Part 1: The Duluth Model -
Part 2: The Conflict Tactics Scale -
Part 3: UK figure of DV - This article

Summary: This entry takes a look at data on the scale of domestic violence suffered by men and women in the UK, estimates for male and female victimisation, differences in the estimates, and availability of emergency shelters for men and women within the UK.

Data provide by domestic violence advocacy services is often missing, incomplete or out of date. It becomes clear that whilst help for both men and women is chronically under-funded, the issue of funding for male victims is even more extreme.


It is no secret to anyone who has looked at domestic violence research in depth that different advocates can produce radically different evidence.

In part 1 [12] of our domestic violence series, we observed that feminist researchers and advocates often use the Duluth Model when understanding and working to end domestic violence. Meanwhile, many independent sources (including multiple Government research bodies) use the Conflict Tactics scale [16].

It’s important to understand where advocates obtain their data from and how it can affect policies, public opinion and advocacy. For the sake of simplicity, we will be focusing on the UK at this time, more specifically England and Wales.

Domestic Violence shelter claims:

When it comes to understanding the scale of domestic violence, many individuals pay close attention to what domestic violence shelters claim on the scale of partner violence. So it’s worth understanding exactly what data they use.

The domestic violence group Refuge make broad claims that “1 in 4” women will experience domestic violence in their lifetimes. However, for solid statistics the nearest they cite is the British Crime Survey (later renamed the Crime Survey for England and Wales) 2001/02 where they claim there were “635,000 domestic violence incidences” with “81% of victims who were women”. [1]

It should also be noted that Refuge repeated the claim by Women’s Aid UK that “two women a week will be killed by male partners or ex partners of violence”. However, this claim is based on a poorly informed understanding of data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales and is not accurate at all. [2]

At this time, Women’s Aid UK have recently switched over their website format, so current stats are unavailable. But in their submission to the UK Parliament in 2012, they state that over “1 million” women are victims of domestic abuse each year. No mention is made in regards to male victims of domestic violence. [3]

In 2014, the Guardian reported that numerous services were at breaking point because they had refused to offer their services to male victims of domestic violence, which was in violation of the 2010 Equality Act. [4]

It is alarming that specialists in helping with domestic violence against people in society do not appear to be using the full facts available or even up to date figures in some cases.

What do UK Government statistics say?

Based off Government data collected over a recent three year period, estimates range between 1.9 and 2.1 million victims of domestic abuse. By gender, these break down as:

Between 1.2 and 1.4 million women estimated to have been victims of domestic violence between 2011-2014. [5][6][7]

Meanwhile, male victims are estimated to have accounted for between 0.7 and 0.8 million victims of domestic abuse between 2011-2014. [5][6][7]

This averages out at around 37.5% men, and 65% women (2 million victims, 1.3 women and 0.75 men). As such women are (a very rough estimated, rounded to the nearest whole number) twice as likely to be a victim of domestic violence than men. Taking these statistics into account we would expect to see roughly an order of twice as many refuges available for women than men.

It’s worth remembering that these are only estimates based off Government surveys and as such may be prone to under-reporting or potential inaccuracies in total estimates.

Further care should be taken when interpreting these stats as to what the definition of “partner/ex-partner” is as the definition can be particularly broad. For example, the ONS document Chapter 2: Violent Crime and Sexual Offences – Homicide define partner/ex-partner as this:

Partner/ex-partner includes the sub-categories 'spouse, cohabiting partner,boyfriend/girlfriend, ex-spouse/ex-cohabiting partner/ex-boyfriend/girlfriend, adulterous relationship, lover’s spouse or emotional rival'. [2]

The ONS definition of “partner/ex-partner” includes people you are not actually in a relationship with or have ever been in a relationship with, so some care should be taken when interpreting ONS data on “partner/ex-partner violence”.

In 2010, the Guardian reported that there were 7,500 shelter placements for women but just 60 for men. However, this total at the time included all dedicated spaces for men and women as well as places that were considered “multi-purpose”. [8] This is a ratio of one space for men, for every 125 for women.

In 2014, the Plymouth Herald reported that the number of shelter spaces dedicated for helping women was actually 4,000, whereas for men is was just 39. [9] this is a ratio of one space for men, for every 102 for women.

What about family research?

Family research is research conducted by researchers about the family environment that can often take a slightly more informal approach.

Family research pieces can vary dramatically between researchers and their motivations. For example, the research piece “Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations” by Murray Straus interviewed 13,601 university students from 32 nations and found there were equivalent levels of partner violence perpetrated by both men and women. [10]

Meanwhile, a piece called “Gender Symmetry” in Domestic Violence A Substantive and Methodological Research Review by Michael Kimmel proposed that researchers who find gender symmetry are doing so from an “ideological” basis than what he considers a “factual” one. [11] It’s worth remembering though that Michael Kimmel is an advocate of the Duluth model, which as we have covered previously is immensely discriminatory. [12]

It cannot be ignored that the largest studies of their kind have all reported gender symmetry in Partner Violence. PASK (Partner Abuse State of Knowledge) is one such example. No less than 42 scholars and 70 research assistants across 20 universities reviewed submissions by thousands of people to find that partner violence did display symmetry. [13]

Martin Fiebert, who as of March 2nd (2015) had reviewed 270 empirical studies and 73 scholarly reviews, has also found that partner violence displays a great deal of gender symmetry. [14]

Why the difference?

The main reason that family research pieces can often produce dramatically different results to criminal research pieces is because of the pool of data used. Criminal research pieces, whilst often being considered less open to researcher bias, only focus on reports to the police, court records and so forth. Subsequently, they only deal with a relative minority of all potential victims.

It is worth noting that there is substantial research which demonstrates men are not only less likely to be believed (and less likely to come forward), but are also more likely to consider violence against them to be "wrong, but not a crime." [15]

Family research allows researchers to interview people about their experiences that they may not have reported to the police. Thus they can be useful for indicating the scale and depth of behaviour that can go on behind closed doors which might otherwise escape criminal research pieces.

In all cases, it is absolutely essential to read the research piece in detail and try to understand their methodology before repeating their findings, including their definition of DV as this can have a significant impact on the numbers.


Our conclusion is that domestic violence research is clearly difficult to navigate and, at times, poorly represented. Whilst official government data does not show "gender symmetry" in domestic violence, although an estimated 40/60ish split is still significant, independent family research does. We cannot ignore the possibility that in fact partner violence may actually be mutual in nature in the overwhelming majority of cases.

With 1.9 to 2.1 million cases the number of shelters is woefully inadquate. Although from the Government's own estimates we would expect to see around a 2:1 ratio of gendered shelters in favour of women. The reported reality is closer to 100 women's spaces for every space for a man.

It is obvious that funding for shelters is much lower than it should be, though this issue has clearly not been helped by the refusal of many services to offer help for male victims of domestic violence as the law requires.

Many of these numbers are estimates, with an unknown amount of error. The true figures are very difficult to gauge. As such any decisions based on these numbers should also consider the low fidelity of them and plan for the risk of a wildly different reality.

Saturday, 12 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Vision

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Vision: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

Egalitarian Feminism is a community dedicated to instilling basic principles into Feminism.

At the moment the dominate form of Feminism believes in equality of outcome. Outcome Feminists do not believe in principles. They demand freedoms are restricted in order to 'protect' women physically and psychologically. This is dangerous, as without these freedoms men and women are at risk of losing their basic human rights and the ability to challenge dangerous ideals. Lessons from history have demonstrated the risks of societies without principles.

In order to protect these rights, our goal is to instil basic principles into Feminism. We intend to be the positive change we want to see in Feminism. We plan to grow to become the mainstream version of Feminism. With enough people, enough of a voice Opportunity Feminists can become the dominate voice, drowning out Outcome Feminism. Once Outcome Feminism has been subverted, Opportunity Feminism can use the power of Feminism to protect basic humans rights and principles.

These principles are:
  • Personal Liberty 
  • Personal Responsibility 
  • Equality before the Law 
  • Freedom of Assembly 
  • Freedom of the Press 
  • Freedom of Speech 
  • Freedom of Thought 
What does 'good' look like?

How will we know when we've achieved the vision? When the majority of Feminists defend principles, rather than attack them. When Feminism stop silencing others. When Feminism can stand on evidence and debate rather than use logical fallacies as common tactics. The fight will be won when Feminism defines equality as Equality of Opportunity for the Individual.

Our measurement will be influential feminists. Those with a voice, in positions of influence and power such as the UN Women. When they fight for principles, when their measure is Equality of Opportunity as their vision of Feminism, not Equality of Outcome. We will have won when the majority of influential Feminist voices are Opportunity Feminists.


For this to happen people need to understand the different definitions of equality and their impact on society. A distinction must be made between Outcome and Opportunity Feminists.

Simply by laying down this foundational step by discussing these ideas and raising awareness will help the fight.

Constraints and Boundaries

Although one day the aim will be for Opportunity Feminism to spread about the world, we are only small. We need to target one area and then grow. Perhaps one day we will be able to target additional locations, but for now the UK and US will be the primary locations of interest.

As the community grows we may have enough dedicated individuals to start a second target area. And a third, and so forth.

A key constraint is resources. As EgaFem grows it will be able to take on more, do more and spread faster and further. We will start small and grow. Develop over time into a strong voice.

Manpower is the most important limiting factor, more than money. Even with plenty of money, without the time and effort of people EgaFem cannot grow.

Lifecycle and Framework

EgaFem will use an evolutionary lifecycle model. This means it will change over time, update and re-evaluate itself after receiving feedback from the community and stakeholders.

The Zachman Framework and Viable System Model will be used to support the creation of the enterprise.

Saturday, 5 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Introduction

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Introduction: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

After investigating the definition of 'equality' [1], establishing a campaign to differentiate Outcome and Opportunity Feminism [2], and then discussing the problems with Outcome Feminism, concluding that the root cause issue of modern feminism is a lack of basic principles within mainstream feminism [3] this has given Egalitarian Feminism a much greater focus on what it wants to achieve.

Step one: Admit there is a problem.

There is a problem with Feminism. A huge problem. The lack of principles is causing demands for human rights to be restricted to protect women's feelings. A society without principles is dangerous - just look at the holocaust in which Jews were dehumanized to a point of concentration camps. No one could speak out against that evil.

Principles within a society protect women. Principles are a social imperative.

The loss of principles would allow men and women to be silenced, to be dehumanized and to be treated with inequality. This would be a huge step backwards in our history.

And it must be stopped. These are fighting words.

EgaFem, as an Opportunity Feminist, declares war on Outcome Feminism.

Feminism means Equality - but outcome or opportunity?

Challenging the current status quo stranglehold that Outcome Feminism has on our society will be hard. It will be a struggle. It will take time, effort, and a lot of voices. We need to come together as one voice. We have a plan.

The plan is to build a community. A strong voice . However, people are difficult. People are annoying . People make things complicated.

Our new mantra: People, Patience, and Politics.

In order to provide some structure and firm foundations, to allow the EgaFem community to work together towards a common goal of instilling basic principles back into Feminism to save our society, EgaFem is going to be treated as an enterprise.

No, not the Kirk kind.

EgaFem will be treated like a huge organisation. Although we are only tiny now, the plan is to grow - and grow fast. We're not picky - we don't care what label you use. If you believe that Feminism should have basic principles then you are our ally. You can help, even without using the Feminist label yourself.

Even, brace for the shocker - Men's Rights Activists and #WomenAgainstFeminism.

Yes, we don’t CARE what you label yourself as. All labels are wrong, but some are useful. What we care about is your beliefs, your actions, and your words. We respect you, please show us the same courtesy. Joining this community DOES NOT make you a Feminist. What you choose to label yourself as is no one's business but your own.

But if you believe we can do some good in this world. Then join us, lend us your support. Spread the news.

Feminism will never die - but it's course can be changed. It happened from 1st to 2nd Wave. We can do it again. We can #TakeBackFeminism.

So why use the Feminist label at all?

We get this question a lot. There are several reasons but the important one right this second is 'change is internal'.

You cannot change something by standing on the outside, yelling at it.

Change must come from within.

It is hugely important that we are Feminists. And by the dictionary definition we have EVERY right to call ourselves Feminists. Either Feminism needs to change the dictionary definition to exclude Opportunity Feminists or accept us as Feminists.

If they choose to redefine Feminism to mean Outcome Feminism, this not only excludes 1st Wave Feminism as being 'true' feminism but would reveal to the world their true face.

Overnight people would see Outcome Feminism for what it is.

No more NAFALT (Not All Feminists Are Like That), no more using Opportunity Feminism as a shield.


Why treat EgaFem as an Enterprise?

In order to build a strong community, we must have strong foundations. We must know where we stand. We need to work together, not against each other. This will be our biggest strength. Outcome Feminism is unorganised, disparate, and has plenty of in-fighting. This is its greatest weakness. One we mean to exploit, because only by them coming together and re-defining Feminism can they win. But that very act of being clear about their aims will be their downfall. No more hiding.

By laying down firm ground rules, processes, and strategies we can build that firm foundation needed.

Using an Enterprise Architectural Framework. Wait… don't run away! Come back!

It's not scary. It’s all being taken care of. Blaise Wilson is a strange creature who does this kind of thing for fun, and as a founder of EgaFem will take care of everything.

Over the next few weeks articles will appear and grow. They will change as time goes on as new thinking updates the strategies, but think of this as the 'behind the scenes' of a film.

Here is an idea of some of the topics to be covered:
  • Vision 
  • Strategies 
    • Vision Strategy 
    • Decision Strategy 
    • Information Strategy 
    • Resource Strategy 
    • A bunch of other strategies 
  • Governance 
  • Organisation Role and Responsibilities 
  • Stakeholders 
  • Taxonomy
This might seem a bit of over kill. But we plan to grow, and grow fast. By putting things in place now, it will be far easier than attempting to do this later. And it keeps Blaise amused and out of trouble for a few weeks.




Saturday, 28 November 2015

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism – Part 9 – Campaigns and Action

Author: Blaise Wilson

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Series:

Part 1 – Factors to be Controlled:
Part 2- Assumptions:
Part 3 – Freeing Women's Time and Money:
Part 4 – Cultural Pressure :
Part 5 – Discrimination:
Part 6 – Discussion of Assumption 6:
Part 7 - Discussion of Assumption 1:
Part 8 - The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion:
Part 9 – Campaigns and Action: This article.

This is a summary of the Outcome of Outcome Feminism series. It includes campaigns and action that can be taken forward. In addition it highlights further work for EgaFem to do.

Lastly, it provides some suggestions to empower individuals on actions they can take if they have been discriminated against, or what they can personally do to improve the Gender Wage Gap.


These will need further development, and a champion. These will be captured here:
  • Dear White House – US centric suggestions to improve the Gender Wage Gap
  • Make the Gender Wage Gap measure more appropriate, or replace with a better measure of opportunity and discrimination
  • Investigate the suggested, and additional, solutions in a wider context. After a trade-offs and a balance of investment, implement the ones worth implementing
  • Stop using solutions that break the basic principles such as Positive Action and Quotas
Further Work

During this series some wider topics have come to light. Further investigation and evidence into these topics may prove insightful when addressing Feminist issues.

During this investigation it was suggested that Outcome Feminism does not comply with basic Principles. An investigation should establish what evidence there is to support or disprove this claim.

Discrimination: Empower the Individual

If you think you have been discriminated against, here are some suggestions on what you could do:

We do not give legal advice. You must take personal responsibility for your own choices, these are just some ideas.

Reduce the Wage Gap: Empower the Individual

There are some actions every individual could take in order to be more aware of, and support the reduction of the Gender Wage Gap.
  • Improve your own self-confidence
  • Improve the self-confidence of others, including dependants
  • Join a campaign
  • Encourage others to join a union
  • Join a union
  • Research and empower though knowledge e.g. a philosophy course, critical thinking course, self-empowering course, self-confidence course. Read up on the Gender Wage Gap
  • Celebrate stay at home parents
  • Celebrate people who love their chosen careers regardless of pay
  • Help people who are not happy in their current role by helping them work out what they want, and how to get there
  • Encourage a culture of openness about terms and conditions within your own company
  • Ensure you always uphold the basic principles
  • When basic principles are broken, call it out
  • Do not use the Gender Wage Gap as evidence of discrimination or opportunity
These lists are not exhaustive, but hare a good starting point.

Saturday, 21 November 2015

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism – Part 8 – The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion

Author: Blaise Wilson

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Series:

Part 1 – Factors to be Controlled:
Part 2- Assumptions:
Part 3 – Freeing Women's Time and Money:
Part 4 – Cultural Pressure :
Part 5 – Discrimination:
Part 6 – Discussion of Assumption 6:
Part 7 – Discussion of Assumptions 1:
Part 8 – The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion: This article
Part 9 - Campaigns and Action:

In the conclusion to the Outcome of Outcome Feminism series, it is established that Third Wave Feminism is a rejection of basic principles, which is an insult to their own historic roots.


The Outcome of Outcome Equality Feminist series concentrated on the Gender Wage Gap as its example. It looked at solutions suggested by Outcome Feminists, including the assumptions those solutions were built on.

Here it is brought back to the main premise of this series - the Outcome of Outcome Feminism.

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion

As discussed previously [1], the Gender Wage Gap is an unsuitable measure of discrimination and opportunity, based on false assumptions [2]. The first suggestion is to find a more suitable measure of equality of opportunity. This test must respect that men and women are physically, mentally and chemically different and thus tend to make different choices in life – and thus will have different outcomes when considered as a whole.

This respect should include the choice to be a stay at home parent. Being forced into any role should be fought, but for those who volunteer to raise the next generation or to look after a loved ones should be celebrated, not berated.

The Gender Wage Gap in the UK compares oranges and apples – full to part time workers. If the Gender Wage Gap is continued to be used it should always be represented the components of full and part time workers separately. It should include all sources of income, including benefits.

Although all these solutions may work to reduce the Gender Wage Gap, EgaFem believes in Principles that should never be broken. These principles are more important than the Gender Wage Gap, and so solutions that break them will be rejected.

EgaFem’s core principles are:
  • Equal Opportunity – The #NounSwap Test
  • Personal Liberty
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Rule of Law
  • Free Markets
  • Freedom of Assembly
  • Freedom of the Press
  • Freedom of Speech
  • Freedom of Thought
  • Political Freedom
Rejected Solutions

How solutions are implemented may save them from the rejection list. How they are designed and managed will have a huge impact on their effectiveness on producing equality of opportunity and reducing discrimination.
  • Making preschool education compulsory – Personal Liberty
  • Pay individuals to raise their own kids – Personal Responsibility
    • UK Benefits
    • Welfare
    • Laws
    • Government schemes
  • Force on-site childcare facilities – Free Market
  • Tax men and women differently – Equality of Opportunity
  • Education to encourage women into non-stereotypical career choices – Equality of Opportunity if only provided for women.
    • Encourage women into higher paid jobs - Equality of Opportunity if only provided for women.
    • Provide personal mentors to women - Equality of Opportunity if only provided for women.
    • Scholarships for women in non-stereotypical roles - Equality of Opportunity if only provided for women.
  • Treat men and women differently – Equality of Opportunity 
    • Pay women more – Equality of Opportunity, Free Market,
    • Positive Action to provide additional support to women – Equality of Opportunity
  • Quotas – Equality of Opportunity, Free Markets
  • Create well-paid jobs tailored to women’s needs – Free Markets
  • Improve regulations and standards tailored for women – Equality of Opportunity, Free Markets
  • Improved self-employed woman’s networking opportunities – Equality of Opportunity unless also improved for men
Approved Solutions for Further Investigation

This isn’t to say these approved solutions should be adopted without further consideration! Or that this list is exhaustive. These, and additional options, should be investigated further and a trade-off done. For example raising minimum wage has huge knock on effects and could end up being more detrimental than positive as companies are forced to fire employees to cover increased costs.

These solutions do not break EgaFem’s core principles – however it does not mean these solutions will be effective in reducing the Gender Wage Gap. In addition, these are not personal endorsements of individual EgaFem members, simply solutions that do not break the core principles.

These solutions have been categorised according to personal opinion on how effective they would be in reducing the gender wage gap, considering the discussions of the solutions in the earlier articles:

Least Effective:
  • Raise minimum wage
  • Education on the harms of social norms
  • Force companies to publish gender based statistics
Medium Effectiveness:
  • Shaming and praising (must be done with care, to ensure it does not back fire and damage the Feminist reputation e.g. shame stay at home mothers)
  • Education to encourage everyone into non-stereotypical career choices
  • Provide personal career mentors to everyone
Most Effective:
  • Encourage (not force) men to do more childcare and housework
  • After school programmes
  • High quality, affordable, flexible, and reliable childcare offered from birth
  • Flexi-time
  • Clear advanced work schedules
  • Encourage on-site childcare facilities
  • Transition from part to full time work
  • Improve self-confidence for all
  • Improved punishment for discrimination
  • Equal pay for broadly equal work, with checks in place to ensure this remains
  • Encourage a culture of openness about pay and benefits
  • Encourage individuals to join a union
US Centric Note:

The US has a 23% full time wage gap, compared to the UK’s 10%. Some of the solutions highlighted in this series have been implemented by the UK but not the US. These may explain some of the difference in Gender Wage Gap. If the White House is serious about reducing the Gender Wage Gap, they should consider their position on:
  • Allowing employees to join a union
  • Paycheck Fairness Act – allow individuals to discuss their work contracts and benefits
  • Paid leave, including paid sick leave
  • Where benefits are given, provide it on an individual entitlement, not household
  • Scrap higher tax on second family earners
  • Paid new parent leave
Discussion of this Series

This series discussed the Outcome of Outcome Feminism. By using outcome as a measure of equality, many of the Outcome Feminist suggestions would have a negative impact on equality of opportunity based on gender. Without principles some of the suggestions they put forth would ultimately cause discrimination based on gender in pursuit of a misguided measurement.

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism is the rejection of core principles – which could have dangerous consequences in the long term. For example, freedom of speech. If the patriarchy theory is correct, then Outcome Feminists should be fighting tooth, nail and claw to ensure principles like freedom of speech are respected to the nth degree.

After all, surely if freedom of speech was removed the first thing any true patriarchal society would do is to silence the women? Thus, Feminists who are against basic principles could be doing themselves, and women as a whole, a disservice in the future.

Further investigation into the topic of Outcome Feminism and Basic Principles is needed.


To summaries EgaFem recommends:
  1. Investigating a more suitable measure of effectiveness for opportunity and discrimination that respects men and women are different, including different average outcomes.
  2. Investigate current solutions and consider stopping those that break the basic principles, use the funds to put into more suitable solutions.
  3. When the Gender Wage Gap is used, always segregate full and part time workers. It should include all incomes, including benefits.
  4. Respecting and celebrating stay at home parents, they have the greatest influence over the future. Celebrate individual’s choice of career, stereotypical or not.
  5. Where individuals are forced into roles, ensure they have the support to be able to escape.
  6. Investigate additional solutions and those suggested above, implementing the ones that are worthy after trade-off analyse and have evidence it would improve equality of opportunity and/or lower discrimination.
  7. Ensuring principles are upheld at all times, for everyone, to ensure the long term freedoms of all - including women.
The conclusion to the Outcome of Outcome Feminist series found that Feminists who seek Equality of Outcome at the determent of Equality of Opportunity believe principles should not apply to everyone. This puts them at risk of denying other principles such as Personal Responsibility, Freedom of Assembly, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Thought and so forth.

The loss of principles could have a devastating impact on women (and men) as they loss the rights fought for by First Wave Feminism. As such Third Wave Feminism is an insult to their own history.

Egalitarian Feminism believes in principles. We are a throwback to First Wave Feminism’s core believes of Equality of Opportunity. Thus, we reject Third Wave Outcome Feminism and we reject the concept that Gender is a Social Concept - a false assumption [2] that must be made for Outcome Feminism to justify its actions.


[1] EgaFem discussion on Assumption 1 – the Gender Wage Gap is a problem that needs to be fixed: accessed 21/11/2015

[2] EgaFem discussion on Assumption 6 – Gender is a Social Construct: accessed 21/11/2015

Friday, 6 November 2015

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism – Part 7 – Discussion of Assumption 1

Author: Blaise Wilson

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Series:

Part 1 – Factors to be Controlled:
Part 2- Assumptions:
Part 3 – Freeing Women's Time and Money:
Part 4 – Cultural Pressure :
Part 5 – Discrimination:
Part 6 – Discussion of Assumption 6:
Part 7 – Discussion of Assumptions 1: This article
Part 8 - The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion:
Part 9 - Campaigns and Action:


In this article the assumption that the Gender Wage Gap is a suitable measure of opportunity and discrimination is investigated.

After highlighting 'best practice' from countries with no wage gap, it was discovered that working part-time or not at all is a luxury that should be appreciated rather than condemned.

A survey revealed that most full-time working mothers of young children would prefer to work fewer hours, countering the assertion most women want to have full-time careers over domestic responsibilities.

The conclusion shows the Gender Wage Gap is based on faulty assumptions and is not a suitable measure of discrimination or opportunity. It does not take wider factors into account and should not be used. Alternative measures should be investigated.


In order to keep this series in a reasonable length, only two of the assumptions previously highlighted [4] are analysed. Assumption 6: Gender is a Social Construct was analysed in the previous article [8], this article covers Assumption 1: The Wage Gap is a problem that needs to be solved.

If this assumption proves to be false, it means using the Gender Wage Gap as a measure of effectiveness is inappropriate and alternative measures should be investigated.

“Assumption 1: The Wage Gap is a problem that needs to be fixed [1, 2].

It assumes that the correct result Wage Gap should be zero, and that all women should be earning the same as all men, regardless of any other factors. It also highlights that there is a need to “recognize best practice and success stories” [2] from others that have a minimal wage gap.” [4]

First lets look at an example of 'best practise' in which the wage gap is akin to zero. Such as Rwanda, Burundi and Nicaragua.

Best Practice

“Rwanda receives a perfect score (1.00 = equality) for labour-market participation; 88 per cent of women and 86 per cent of men have some form of paid employment... Although lots of Rwandan women and men work, it seems most barely earn enough to lift them out of poverty. In Britain, with its higher GDP, women in general have far more options open to them and some can even afford the luxury of not working outside the home at all. That most Rwandan women don’t have this choice hardly seems something to celebrate.” [3]

This demonstrates an important point. The option of being a stay at home parent is a privilege. Even the choice of going part-time instead of full-time is a choice many in deprived countries do not have. Such choices should not be taken for granted, and certainly not looked down upon.

Wage Gap Break Down

Breaking down the Gender Wage Gap into full and part-time components provides an interesting picture.

In the UK full time working men earn 10% more than their female counterparts [5, p12]. However, men also work 10% more hours than women: “In 2013 men, on average, worked 40.1 [6, p4] to 44 [6, p19] hours compared to women's 37.4 [5, p4] to 40 [6, p19] hours [5, p4].” [9] (references have been updated to co-inside with the links below).

When considering the part-time scenario women earn more than men, with women not only working an average of 1 hour more than men [5, p5], but also being paid more, with men earning £7.95 to women's £8.40 an hour [5 p5].

Women are far more likely to work part-time than men [6, p1] and it is only by comparing all men to all women, by comparing part-time to full-time work that the gender pay gap comes out at 19.7% in 2013 [7, p4]. The main reason for the discrepancy is hours worked. Thus the main way to reduce the gender pay gap is to ensure the average work done by all men equals that or all women – either by increasing women's work or decreasing men's. However, once children are taken into account, the biological influences of estrogen plays a role in many women prioritising time with their children over their careers, meaning they are less likely to want to work full-time [8].

Netmums released the results of a survey of over 4000 mothers of young children and “the results included the fact that 88% of those working full time would rather work part time or stay at home with their children.” [10]

The concept that men and women are equally likely to be the main caregivers to their children in based in the concept that gender is a social concept, and this assumption was dispelled in the previous post [8].

Is the Wage Gap a Suitable Measure?

The wage gap is a measure of paid working hours, not including benefits which might make a significant difference. It is used to demonstrate discrimination however this is built on faulty assumptions and does not take biology into account. It does not reflect equality of opportunity, as it is only a measure of outcome without considering wider factors or individual choice.


The survey quoted used a self-selected and specific demographic (mothers of young children) and the data highlighted could suffer from the accusation of cherry picked data. Further surveys on men and women's preference for hours worked, especially with children, might provide interesting results. It would either support or refute the idea that all women want to work the same as all men, highlighting if the outcomes of hours worked are choice or if individuals are being forced into their current roles.

Other further work could include the discussion of the other assumptions mentioned in this series, but haven’t been analysed. If anyone would like to take on this role or has discussed similar topics on their own website, please contact us [11].

As the Gender Wage Gap is based on the assumption that women only choose to priorities their families due to social pressure, rather than at least partially by biological influences (gender is a social construct) and this have been proven invalid [8] it shows that there will not be a 50/50 ratio of men and women making identical choices. Thus the Gender Wage Gap is not a suitable measure of discrimination or opportunity.

Although it could be a useful metric as a comparison of the average of all men to the average of all women’s paid work, but should not be used to attempt to force litigation.


In conclusion, the Gender Wage Gap is an unsuitable measure and does not provide useful data on discrimination or opportunity. It does not take individual choice or biological factors into account and is built on the faulty assumption that gender is a social construct.


[1] New Republic – How to Equalize the Female Pay Gap accessed 29/08/2015

[2] New Brunswick: The Wage Gap Action Plan 2005-2010 accessed 29/08/2015

[3] Wage Gap in Rwanda, Burundi and Nicaragua is almost non existent: accessed 29/08/2015

[4] Outcome of Outcome Feminism Assumptions: accessed 17/10/2015

[5] Wage Gap Analysis 1997 – 2013 UK Government: accessed 26/10/2015

[6] UK Women in the labour market 1971 – 2013: accessed 09/08/2015

[7] 2014 UK Gender Wage Analysis: accessed 26/10/2015

[8] EgaFem – Discussion of Assumption 6: accessed 26/10/2015

[9] EgaFem – Factors to be Controlled accessed 02/11/2015

[10] Netmum's survey on the great work debate: accessed 02/11/2015

[11] Contact Us: Details found at the bottom of the page accessed 05/11/2015

Friday, 23 October 2015

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism – Part 6 – Discussion of Assumptions

Author: Blaise Wilson

The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Series:

Part 1 – Factors to be Controlled:
Part 2- Assumptions:
Part 3 – Freeing Women's Time and Money:
Part 4 – Cultural Pressure :
Part 5 – Discrimination:
Part 6 – Discussion of Assumption 6: This article
Part 7 - Discussion of Assumption 1:
Part 8 - The Outcome of Outcome Feminism Conclusion:
Part 9 - Campaigns and Action:

In this article the Outcome Feminist assumption [23] that gender is a purely social construct, and that biology does not play a role in the choices of men and women is investigated. The evidence indicates that there are biological differences which impact men's and women's career choices. These are reflected in the current trends of careers as discussed in the factors of the Wage Gap [22]. Thus many of the suggested solutions will be ineffective and using ratios of gender as indicators of discrimination is invalid.


In this sixth part of the Outcome of Outcome Feminism series assumption 6 from part 2 [23] will be investigated. This was the key assumption which many of the suggested solutions use as a foundation. If this assumption is proved false the ratio of gender as a measurement will not be a suitable indicator of discrimination.

Only assumption 6 (gender is a social construct) is discussed in this article. The next article will discuss Assumption 1. The other assumptions will not be investigated.

“Assumption 6: Gender is a social construct. There is no biological sexual dimorphism in humans [3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10].

This assumes there is no difference between the wants and needs of men and women. All women want the same jobs, and hours as men. Women don't choose to be stay at home mothers or jobs that earn less, or to work less hours – they are forced into these roles though old fashioned cultural pressure and discrimination.” [15]

Despite the large number of Outcome Feminist resources making this assumption [3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10] there was very little evidence of them questioning it's validity. It boils down to a 'nature versus nurture' argument. This complex topic is the focus of ongoing debate. However the only element of interest is 'does nature have any impact on choice?' If gender is purely a social concept we should see no difference between men and women. They should have identical biology which will translate into identical choices. Different biology will indicate a difference in drivers that influence choices, which in turn will affect the Gender Wage Gap.

While looking for the supporting evidence from feminist outlets it became clear there is very little, if any, scientific data behind the assumption. Feminist education on the subject do not touch on the debate between nature and nurture [17]. This puts the students in a dangerous position of being indoctrinated into an ideology without any consideration to alternative views.

From Feminism 101 [18] “Gender is socially instilled rather than biologically determined, but so is religion.” This statement is not supported by any scientific references but makes the statement that gender is akin to money. If we all stopped accepting money it would no longer have any influence on our social structure. Money only works because we all agree it has value and act accordingly. If we all agreed there are no differences between the genders, would this be a reality?

How far is gender a social construct and or a biological one? This is a very interesting question, however it is out of scope for this article. The question we are interested in is 'are there biological differences between men and women that may influence their choices.' We are not interested in 'how much', simply a black and white answer. If biology has any influence at all, then gender can not be 100% socially constructed as the Outcome Feminists put forth.

Although there maybe more differences, for the sake of time only three will be investigated. This will not be a complete comparison – only enough to establish there are some biological differences between men and women that may impact their average choices. The three areas covered are:
  • physical
  • hormonal
  • mental

“The physiological differences between the sexes disadvantage women in strength-based and aerobic fitness tests by 20 to 40%; so for the same output women have to work harder than men. Despite the differences, there will be some women, amongst the physical elite who will achieve the entry tests for [Ground Close Combat] roles. But these women will be more susceptible to acute short term injury than men.” [19, p4]

As demonstrated by the UK Army there is a significant difference between the average man and average women, although there is an overlap between them. Men and women are not physical identical. This will influence the roles they choose to play in society through their career. Women will be less likely to select roles that require physical labour as they are at a disadvantage to their male peers, although this will not deter all women.


In a study on mice at the University of California San Francisco [20] showed a clear link between hormones, genetic expression, and behaviour. By influencing the hormones they could impact the behaviour of the animal:

“Female mice in the laboratory normally exhibit what one might consider classic motherly behaviors—mating with male mice and nurturing their young. But female mice with a genetic trait making them unable to sense the hormone estrogen lose their interest in sex and spend less time caring for their offspring.” A similar experiment on testosterone produced equivalent results for male mice.

Hormonal theory is often used in gender reassignment to influence behaviours of humans, demonstrating a clear link between hormones and behaviour. As men and women have different levels of testosterone and estrogen this provides strong evidence that men and women will have different behaviours, which will impact their choices. The hormone estrogen will influence women to place caring for their offspring as a higher priority than men. This will impact career choices by a biological influence making women more likely than men to choose to be stay at home parents.


“Recent studies highlight a long-held suspicion about the brains of males and females. They're not the same” [21] this website goes on to highlight that women's brains tend to focus on language, indicating the are genetically predisposed to social skills compared to men. There are many other differences, but this key point in itself explains why women have a higher tenancy to prefer social jobs, and this is reflected in their career choices.

Do Current Trends Support Biological Influence?

If biology does play a role in career choices, we would expect these trend to show in  gendered career choices. This can be checked by going back to the first part of this series [22] and reviewing the factor and trends highlighted with the biological pressures in mind. The biological expectation that women avoid dangerous and physical roles and have a preference for social and care careers certainly holds true. As does women being more likely than men to put their children before a career and giving up a full time job to care for them. This provides further real life evidence that gender is biologically influenced and is not purely a social construct.

Why does Sexual Dimorphism Exist?

This section is mostly hypothetical, with logical steps and contains assumptions without citations. If required it will be investigated further at a later date.

Having established that gender cannot be a purely social construct but is one at least partially based in biology, the question arises of why is this so.

One answer is women are the limiting factor of procreation. It takes a women 9 months to make a baby, and then a women isn't ready to reproduce again for a while after the birth. However a man can reproduce not only for an extended part of his lifetime, but more often. Just considering the numbers show that women are the bottleneck of human survival. As such their lives are genetically more precious.

Social structures have sprung up around this notion that women should be protected. A safe working environment is an extremely new concept, especially when compared to the genetic life of homo sapiens.

Thus, gender as a social construct is based in biology, not the other way round. The larger question is does our modern society need this social pressure in order to protect the species, or it is outdated?

The trade-off, if women are no longer protected, is more women will die in the workplace. In order to accept this, male and female lives must be socially equivalent.

Once male and female lives are socially equal, it will improve the gender wage gap by dismissing the social pressures of society for women to stay within the protection of the home. However the biological pressures will remain.

This biological pressure should be respected. Men and women would continue to choose different careers and have different priorities in life, even if all perceived social pressure was removed and the lives of men and women treated with equal reverence.

The impact of proving this assumption as false is dramatic. It throws into question the suitability of using the ratio of men to women as an indicator of discrimination.


[1] UK Government request companies publish gendered wage data: accessed 29/08/2015

[2] Wage Gap in Rwanda, Burundi and Nicaragua is almost non existent: accessed 29/08/2015

[3] UN Women Progess Report 2015 – 2016 accessed 29/08/2015

[4] New Republic – How to Equalize the Female Pay Gap accessed 29/08/2015

[5] New Brunswick: The Wage Gap Action Plan 2005-2010 accessed 29/08/2015

[6] Roosevelt Institute: How to Fix the Gender Wage Gap: Going Far Beyond an App accessed 29/08/2015

[7] American Progress: Seven Actions that could shrink the Gender Wage Gap accessed 29/08/2015

[8] Policy.Mic: Norway Has Found a Solution to the Gender Wage Gap That America Needs to Try accessed 29/08/2015

[9] IMF STAFF DISCUSSION NOTE: Women, Work, and the Economy: Macroeconomic Gains from Gender Equity accessed 29/08/2015

[10] Graduating to a Pay Gap The Earnings of Women and Men One Year after College Graduation: accessed 29/08/2015

[11] Quotas in the EU: accessed 29/08/2015

[12] Pros and Cons of Quotas: accessed 29/08/2015

[13] Gender Wage Gap within the same job: accessed 29/08/2015

[14] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Closing the Gender Gap: Act Now accessed 29/08/2015

[15] Outcome of Outcome Feminism Assumptions: accessed 17/10/2015

[16] Some cultural have 4 types of gender: accessed 17/10/2015

[17] Feminist studies on Gender as a Social construct: accessed 17/10/2015

[18] Feminist questions on gender as a social construct: accessed 17/10/2015


[20] Hormonal changes produce behavioural changes: accssed 17/10/2015

[21] Men and women's brains function differently accessed 17/10/2015

[22] EgaFem, Outcome of Outcome Series: Factors to be controlled: accessed 22/10/2015

[23] EgaFem, Outcome of Outcome Series: Assumptions: accessed 22/10/2015