Do you think women and men are equal?

[Anonymous]

Do you think women and men are equal?

Yes

No

[mistixs]

I chose "no" because too many people perceive "equal" to mean "the same". Men and women are of equal value (see Galatians 3:28), and to blaspheme either man or woman is to insult the God that created them (see Prov 14:31 & James 3:9 for relevant texts).

But this doesn't mean that they're exactly the same in terms of characteristics, qualities, talents, and roles. God created men and women to be different for a good reason. And it's really a beautiful arrangement, as long as it's not tainted by sin and selfishness.

[HeyThere94]

God is fake news

You were brainwashed by a religion

Religion hates women just look at any holy books

[theHalflife]

Hey there how about you piss off

[mistixs]

@HeyThere94 The Bible literally commands men to provide women with all necessities (Exodus 21:10) and to protect them, even with their lives if necessary (Neh 4:14, Eph 5:25-30).
Women are allowed to have jobs (the "Virtuous Woman" in Prov 31 ran a business) but aren't required to. Women aren't given the obligation to provide for themselves or their children; their fathers or husbands are given that obligation.
And if the woman's husband dies, the Bible has MANY passages commanding men to provide for widows. Exodus 22:22 says that God will KILL men who mistreat widows.
The Bible tells men to treat their wives with respect, honor, and love, and not to be harsh with them (1 Peter 3:7, Eph 5:25, Col 3:19).
If religion hates women, then why does Christianity demand that women be provided with all necessities & be protected by men even at the cost of men's lives?

The Bible gives men the leadership position, but as I demonstrated in another comment, the Bible commands for leaders to seek the interests of others, not their own interests. Biblical leadership is a burden, not a benefit.

I know I'd be more than happy to submit to a man who puts me before himself.

[Exterminatore]

Then what do you make of this scripture:

“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:16‬ ‭ASV‬‬

The woman is to be ruled over by the husband says God. One must submit to the other. That’s not equality. Women couldn’t serve in the temple. That’s not equality. Women can’t be pastors or priests. That’s not equality either.

One does not have more value than the other, and both are eligible for salvation equality, but that’s where the equality ends.

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

No the Bible does not command that. It commands husbands to provide for wives and family, NOT men to provide for women.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore The fact that women are told to submit to their husbands doesn't indicate inferiority. Jesus submitted to his parents (Luke 2:51) yet he was clearly not inferior to them.

Rulership in the Bible is about protection and provision to the person under your authority, not "lording it over" them. The ruler is the servant:

Matt 20:25-28 "But Jesus called them aside and said, “You know that ***the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their superiors exercise authority over them. It shall not be this way among you.***
Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be ***your servant,*** and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave—just as ***the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.”***

Women couldn't serve in the temple because their bodies ARE temples. The word used to refer to the creation of womankind in Gen 2:22 is used elsewhere in Genesis almost exclusively to refer to the creation of a temple for God.[1] (For comparison, the word used for the creation of Adam was used only to refer to the creation of animals.)[2]

So women's bodies already are temples. Men needed external temples to get as close to God as women already were, by virtue of their bodies.
How fair would it have been for women to be temples in themselves, but also hog the external temples, so men have no connection to God whatsoever?

[1] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/vaiyiven_1129.htm
[2] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/vaiyitzer_3335.htm

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore Another note: the word used for "helpmeet" to describe women in Gen 2:18 is "ezer"[1], which is used almost exclusively to refer to help given by God.[2] Not a single time is the term used to refer to an inferior. It's always used to refer to an equal or a superior, & refers to vital life-saving help.

[1] https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/2-18.htm
[2] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5828.htm

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

I never said inferiority. I said there is no equality outside of what I mentioned.

The job of the wife is to submit. That is regardless of circumstance unless it violates scripture.

The scriptures you’re citing in Matthew do not apply to the marriage relationship.

What if you married a non believer. He wouldn’t be very Christ like. Must you submit to him? Yes.

Every Christians body is a temple. A temple of the Holy Spirit.

And the women being closer to God and their bodies being temples and all that is rubbish.

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs.

Really, why are husbands told to dwell with their wives with understanding since their the weaker vessel?

You being a help meet is because Adam couldn’t reproduce on his own. Read Gen 2. God said it wasn’t good man should be alone. God also had Adam name the animals, but among them a helper for him was not found. How would he be fruitful and multiply? Hate to say it, the other form of help besides companionship is sex. Yes. That’s partly why women were made. So Adam would have someone to reproduce with. So. In part. Women were made for sex. Sex and companionship. That’s the form of the help we get from you. There is no other help a man needs of a woman.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore "The scriptures you’re citing in Matthew do not apply to the marriage relationship." Yes it does. The Bible designates husbands as rulers, and the scripture in Matthew refers to rulers.
And Jesus used the same logic to command "rulers are servants" as Paul used in Eph 5 to describe the marital relationship: the leader (the man) is to emulate Christ. What does Matthew say that Christ came to do? "Not to be served, but to serve."
That's Christ's illustration of how rulers are to behave. According to Eph 5, that includes husbands.

"Every Christians body is a temple. A temple of the Holy Spirit." Yes. Men are now able to become temples of the Holy Spirit, because Christ enabled that via his sacrifice.
But as per creation itself, only the woman's body was described using the same term as the creation of God's temple. The creation of the man's body used the same term as the creation of animals (the Bible puts it more bluntly as "beasts").

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

Since you like Hebrew word studies so much. Look up woman. The word is ish I believe and it means soft.

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

No they don’t. Wife submits to husband. Weather he loves her, is kind to her, leads as she would have him or not. She submits to him regardless so long as he doesn’t ask her to violate her conscience or God’s word. So, no. It does not apply. Ideally that’s how he should lead and behave, however if he doesn’t you must still submit. So how you’re trying to use it is invalid.

Still not buying the temple stuff. I’ll look into it.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore "among them a helper for him was not found. How would he be fruitful and multiply?"
The Bible says that the animals reproduce according to THEIR KINDS (their own species). So why would God be looking among the animals to find someone for Adam to reproduce with, when God knows that they're not the same species & therefore can't reproduce with him?
Not to mention "be fruitful and multiply" isn't mentioned a single time in Genesis 2.

Regardless, the fact can't be disputed that the term "ezer" to refer to "helpmeet" refers exclusively to vital life-saving help from either an equal or a superior, and almost exclusively to help given by God.

As for the weaker vessel, that's referring to physical strength. God made women physically weaker, probably so that they have a reason to tolerate men (i. e. to be under their protection) and thereby fulfill their role as an ezer.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore And the Bible also tells people to submit to their ruling governmental authorities, even if those authorities don't lead with love and kindness. Even JESUS submitted to unloving, unkind, unjust authorities.
So it's the same in both cases.
And in both cases, the rulers are commanded by God to be the servants.

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

God wasn’t looking there for someone for Adam to reproduce. He had Adam name the animals so Adam would see his need for a help meet. He also named them. A sign of being superior. Wanna know who else he named? Eve. Parents name children. Adam named Eve. Interesting. Meditate on that.

Correct. It’s not mentioned in Gen 2. Clearly God had that in mind so he created Eve so he could say: (paraphrasing) be fruitful and multiply and subdue the earth and have dominion over every living thing.

Ezer is the same Hebrew word for the way God helps us. Yes. Great. It’s the same. And...

Who is to provide for who? Who plays the role of God in the marriage and who the church? You do know marriage is a picture of our own relationship to God. So since the husband plays the role of God, and since the wife is the recipient of provision, whose really helping who?

Only Physical Strength? Hmmmm... I suppose that’s why women can’t be priests. What about weaker in judgement due to primarily emotionally reasoning? What about emotionally weaker? What about unable to sustain as much bodily harm and damage? So structural weaker? Women are literally weaker in every aspect.

See. Listen to you talk.

In Genesis 3:16 it says “thy desire shall be to they husband” why not look up what that means? You then go on to say God made women weaker so they could tolerate men. That’s funny. Maybe to submit to them also. Women are a joke to men. You can literally do nothing without us. We can do everything without you but reproduce. Then you make statements just full of pride like “tolerate” men. It’s is who tolerate you. Go look up Gen 3:16. Your “tolerate” statement already shows me the “thy desire” part in you.

[Exterminatore]

I gotta call it a night. PM me if you wanna continue this. I do enjoy a good debate/conversation about scripture.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore "Parents name children." Yes. Mary and Joseph named Jesus. That doesn't mean they were superior. They had an authority position - the Bible does say that Jesus submitted to his parents - but that means nothing. Jesus was still objectively superior to them.

"You can literally do nothing without us. We can do everything without you but reproduce."
That's why the Bible says that "it's not good for man to be alone" but tells female widows that they'd be happier without getting remarried, right (1 Cor 7:39-40)? Women were made for the sake of men - which indicates men are the ones who need women - not vice versa.
When humanity had solely men, it was "not good" (Gen 2:18) but when women were created, it became "very good" (Gen 1:31).

"Who is to provide for who?" Irrelevant. The word for "ezer" refers to life-saving help, so it is basically equivalent to help given by a doctor. Patients pay and compensate their doctors.

"Only Physical Strength? Hmmmm... I suppose that’s why women can’t be priests."
Women can't be priests because the headship over the church is modeled after the headship over the household: "for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church?" (1 Tim 3:5)
Women can't be priests because it distracts a woman from her role in motherhood: "Women, however, will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control." (1 Timothy 2:15)
1 Tim 5:14 commands that women are to “guide the house”. The original Greek word here is oikodespotein[1]. Oikos means house, and despotes means “Lord” or "master", as utilized in 1 Timothy 6:1-2; 2 Timothy 2:21; Titus 2:9; 1 Peter 2:18; Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Peter 2:1; Jude 4; and Revelation 6:10.
The Greek lexicon confirms that oikodespotein means “master of a house” (my computer is glitching but I can provide a link tomorrow).

[1] biblehub.com/interlinear/1_timothy/5-14.htm

[Gonna post more in another comment]

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore Because of this, how fair would it be to allow women to have the primary influence over children AND the primary influence over the church, as priests? (In fact, women have an indirect influence on the church, as the ones who raised the priests.)

"What about weaker in judgement due to primarily emotionally reasoning?" That's why Jesus chose a woman (Mary Magdalene) to be the first person to alert other people that Jesus had returned, right?
You'll need Biblical sources to support your claim that women are emotionally weaker.

[mistixs]

I reread my comment & realized that I forgot to add my elaboration on this point:

"Women can't be priests because the headship over the church is modeled after the headship over the household: "for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church?" (1 Tim 3:5)"

Here's the elaboration: The position of headship is one of serving & sacrificing the people under your headship. Women are not required to do this. Women have strong emotional/psychological influence in the household, as demonstrated by the word "oikodespotein" that I mentioned, but are not demanded to protect and provide; that obligation is on the husband.
Since men are the ones given more responsibility in the household, they are also given more responsibility in the church.

[Exterminatore]

Yes. It means they were superior. “Honor thy mother and father.” They were in authority even though Jesus was God. Fair enough. Still objectively superior. Doesn’t take away from my point. Men and women aren’t equal. Women submit. Men are superior.

We can live and still do everything without companion ship. Just not reproduce. What it says for men in most cases it goes equally for women.

Prior to those verses Paul says he wishes everyone remained as he was... single. He doesn’t say they’d be happier, he leaves the option there to marry or not.

Yes. I already explained this. For companionship and sex. Soap was made for the sake of humans. Cars, houses. Doesn’t mean anything. I’m going to be very crass to make my point. You were created and function in the capacity of pal, and baby making machine. That’s what you were made for. Like it or not. That’s your function. That does not mean you’re not of incredibly high. value to a man, however you are vastly inferior as a woman. Men needed soap too. That was made for the sake of men. Should the soap walk around thinking “ha... look at me... I was made for people... they need me... that means I am better than them cause they needed me...” No. Think about it. Women. were created as a commodity to be used. Used for companionship and sex. Sex to reproduce and sex for pleasure. That’s your function. Permanent fuck buddy, baby making machine and best pal. I know that’s incredibly crass and brutal to say but when you break down the nuts and bolts that’s what you are to us to put it in the most raw way.

I have a girlfriend. I do in fact live in sin with her, so I won’t claim to be a Christian. Christians do as God says, and clearly I do not. Despite that I believe every last word in the Bible. Now, when I was single what cause me to look for a girlfriend? Hmmm... I needed her to provide security for me? No. I needed help lifting heavy objects? No. I needed her help while on hunting trips to drag deer?

[Exterminatore]

No. I needed steady sex and a companion. But I have my buddies for companions no? I do but there is an element lacking I can only get from a woman. THATS IT. There is nothing else I need. I’m too old for children. I can cook, clean and do every domestic thing by myself and have for years, though admittedly it’s nice when I have someone to do things with. So I needed a companion I fuck regularly to enjoy and share and experience life with. Doesn’t mean to me that she isn’t of immeasurable value. I’d take a bullet for her without thinking twice. I have no greater asset in my life. She also needed and gets the exact same things from me. Now all that said, make no mistake about it, she is still inferior to me in nearly every way. Sorry. That’s the way it is. I know women don’t want to swallow that pill but that’s the truth. Every man sees you in that way and if not he’s a liar or not self aware. You can’t fix my car. You can’t fight off an invading army. You can’t protect me from burglars. I can go on and on. My point is... that’s where your value starts and ends. So women are of incredible worth, but they are a commodity created for man’s use. However, since that’s the case and she is human with her own wants and needs, God has tasked us with providing for her, protecting her, and we are commanded to love her. So, that’s the reciprocity. You get fed and protected and companionship, we also get that and your body and babies from you.

Who is provided for who is not irreverent because yo me I see a hammer, a screwdriver, a car and a woman as all the same. A tool for my use and benefit. You as a woman are a commodity.

Women being priests. Paul addressed this and mentioned “who was deceived first.”

Right. Her role. Role of serving her husband, so it better enables him to serve God. You as a woman are basically a servant. But Christian women love to spin it and make it about “servant leadership” on the man’s part. No. Sorry. The man has the authority.

[Exterminatore]

The woman is really the one who serves the man. He just is supposed to lead in a way that meets her needs for love and affection and security. Think of an animal. I have a cat. Love her to death. In return for affection, I must meet her needs. She is a living creature. Same with a wife. So I hope that really spells out how your a commodity for the use of man. That’s your purpose in creation. But feminism has crept into the church and Christian women want to spin the tables in to the man serving the woman. That is blasphemy. Does God serve us? No. We serve him, he meets our needs. Kinda like... ummmm... I don't know... a marriage. Woman serves man, man cares for woman. See the similarities?

[Exterminatore]

Yes. Women are to be housewives. Hermeneutics. That’s the form of guide. You’re not the leader. You run it. Make food, but food, clean it ect? Why? Because mans to serve God and you enable us to do that better in that role.

Who Jesus alerted first has nothing to do with lack of discernment.

I don’t need biblical sources to cite women are emotionally weaker. It’s observable. Who cries and has outbursts of emotion? Women. Who is also turned off by this in the opposite sex? Women. Why? Because it’s not a sign of strength to emote but rather control your emotions and women are attracted to strength... the very thing they lack.

[Exterminatore]

No, you’re the server, we’re the sacrificer. That’s how it works. Soon a Christian women here the man is the server, then SHE is in authority because of Genesis 3:16. That is an errant teaching. Servant leadership. Ha. Very poor choice of words used by our teachers and leaders.

So maybe Christian women should stop focusing on how strong they are or this idea of husbands serving them and rather focus on serving their husbands. That’s what you were created for. The natural byproduct of this is the man will love you, unless he’s a very bad man and is tyrannical and insanely self centered. It’s natural for a man to love and adore his wife who meets his sexual needs, and cooks his dinner and cleans his house. However he will disdain the woman who doesn’t do these things... AND tries to lead via manipulation. It is how we were created.

[HeyThere94]

@Exterminatore Get your backwards religious views out of there

This is not Saudi Arabia or the Christian version of Saudi Arabia

[mistixs]

Eph 5 tells men to treat their wives like Christ treated the church. Matt 20 says "... the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many."

"Soon a Christian women here the man is the server, then SHE is in authority because of Genesis 3:16." Was the church in authority over Christ?

Servitude is an element of biblical authority.

Yes, 1 Cor 7 DOES say widows would be happier without remarriage: "In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is-and I think that I too have the Spirit of God."

It never says that about men. It says it's good for both men and women to be unmarried so they can focus on God, but only says women would be happier that way.

And if women were created solely to be sex-havers and child bearers, then why does Paul say it would be good for a man to remain unmarried to focus on God? It doesn't contradict "it's not good for man to be alone" prior to woman's creation, because God's word never changes. It's because women have functions outside of being a sex-haver and child bearer. Women benefit men even outside the marital relationship.

But not a single time does it say that it's not good for women to be alone, without men

"Women are to be housewives. Hermeneutics. That’s the form of guide" that's why the same word was used as for the word Lord and Master right?

"Every wise woman builds her house, but a foolish one tears it down with her own hands." (Prov 14:1)
This demonstrates the amount of power women have in guiding her home. It can't be about housework because another verse uses the same terminology in reference to wisdom itself:
"By wisdom a house is built and by understanding it is established;" (Prov 24:3)
Does wisdom do housework?
Yes, women are to do housework, but that's not what "guide the home" means.

Yes, Eve was deceived & Adam sinned deliberately. That must be why woman was made primary influence over kids. She didn't sin deliberately.

[Exterminatore]

@Heythere94

Stay in your own lane.

[Exterminatore]

@mistxs

Christ’s ministry and a husbands is different. Husbands don’t serve wives but vice versa. Who is called to submit to who?

Yes. Servitude is a Biblical element. Not of authority. Will Christ be our servant. The point Jesus was making is no one can save themselves. As scripture says by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified. We can’t save ourselves. We need Jesus. You need proper biblical interpretation. You can’t apply Jesus teachings about salvation to marriage. Wives submit to husbands, not husbands serving the wife’s demands and expectations, and if not calling it improper leadership based on biblical standards.

“Stays as she is” - Single. She’s a WIDOW.

No it’s says (paraphrasing) “in Paul’s opinion both would be happier that way but each man his his gift (the gift of celibacy or not). Women would not be happier. No security for them. They want that, they must submit to a husband who will provide it. Does the husband labor hard to do that for nothing? Does a man sit in his home and think “you know, I don’t have enough responsibility in life. I want to be responsible for providing for another adult.” I think not! The price of security is submission and sex. That’s what men who aren’t feminizes indoctrinated panzies want.

I never said they were solely created for that.

He says that so the man can focus solely on serving God, instead of concerning himself with his wife’s needs.

Women are NOT a benefit outside of marriage to men and outside of family. They are a burden.

Ok, it’s implied it’s also not good to be alone, for most women. Why do you seek a husband? Is it good for you to be single? No. Obviously.

Same word, not same usage or meaning. 2nd Timothy instructs women to be “workers at home”

Women have power? Haha. The only power you have over a man is between your legs. In fact I even said that a month ago to my girlfriend and she fully agreed. That’s the only power you have.

Wisdom instructs women to know their place.

[Exterminatore]

@mistixs

I know it’s hard to accept. You don’t have power, you serve men vice versa, and you are servants to men, who in term meet your needs NOT vice versa. Women were created for men.

When you get married... get him to serve you. Watch 2 things happen. 1. He’ll realize there’s something wrong with the picture and not be happy. 2. He’ll serve you. You’ll see he’s a wimp who you can put a ring through his nose and drag him around. What then? You will have no respect for him, no love for him because love is based on respect, and you won’t have sexual desire for him. How could you? He’s a giant pussy and not acting in accordance with his nature, which is to rule over you.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore Servitude and submission are 2 different things. The man serves, the woman submits.

It doesn't matter if Christ WILL serve us, because Eph 5 uses part-time "as Christ LOVED the church." So it was referring to his lifetime in human incarnation in which he died for the church, and Christ said in Matthew that was a matter of servitude.

"Is it good for you to be single? No. Obviously."
Actually 1 Cor 7 says yes. "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do." This includes women because in v34 it elaborates "... An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit"

it says the same thing for men. For this reason, since the Bible says it's good to remain unmarried, God saying "it's not good for man to be alone" prior to the creation of women, CANNOT be referring to marriage, sex, and procreation. Unless you think the Bible is contradicting itself?

Yes, women are told to do housework. That's not the only thing they do. Is housework what is meant when the Bible says that women build their home? Does Wisdom do housework? Because Wisdom builds the home, too.

Women have power because they're the primary influencers of the next generation of men and women. Men in the bible worked by the sweat of their brow from sunrise to sundown - 12 hours a day, 6 days a week. And then they needed 7 hours to sleep. So men only had a few hours per day with their kids.
You really think men have as strong an influence on the next generation of they're spending only a few hours per day with their kids, compared to their wife spending most of the day with the kids?
Only a few men were priests, but most women were mothers raising the next generation, which gave them a lot of power.

[mistixs]

@Exterminatore "not acting in accordance with his nature, which is to rule over you." Biblical rulership IS servitude. I've already provided evidence

[mistixs]

Past-tense* not part-time

[Exterminatore]

@mistxs

I gotta let this one go and we will have to agree to disagree. We’re just going to have a circular argument.

[itsmicaelaxo]

We deserve the same treatment and we each have the same rights. But no, we're not equal. And that's perfectly okay. We complement each other. And I'm not talking only in a 'loving' way, but in all senses. We have different view points so I think it's good to have both female and male friends/co workers cause they teach us different aspects of life. Too deep? Haha

[Mollynotgemma]

We can never be equal as we have different strengths and weaknesses... we need one another and when you meet that person you become equal!

[BrexitAteMyHamster]

No, they're fundamentally different. There is no need for them to be equal and we wouldn't have survived as a species if they were. Is one of less value? No. So they are equal in value to the species, but not equal in any other respect. There can be no true equality of rights for two fundamentally different sexes.

[CoffeeWC]

Women and men are not born to be equal. No matter what, men and women will never be 100% equal. The biological differences are there for a reason. Societal differences are also there for a reason.

[MrOracle]

Legally, we are pretty close, though some fine-tuning is still needed.

But physically, mentally, and emotionally, we will always be different, each having strengths and weaknesses compared to the other. There can never be perfect equality, though we (in Western society) are about as close as possible, and much closer than at any other time in history.

[BeMuse]

No one is equal to one another. The goal is to treat all people equal under the law and then let people figure out the rest on their own. Then fitness comes into play and people’s inherent abilities and practiced skills give them an advantage over those around them.

[GuidoThePizzaMaker]

It is foolish to ask whether men or women are inferior. It is like asking if water is superior to fire. A perfect woman is superior to an imperfect man, just as a king who can't rule is inferior to a farmer who manages a perfect crop.

Women and men are not equals, but that doesn't mean that either lacks dignity.

[LogicBomber]

NO, western women are far more privileged than men.
Western women are the most privileged group of humans to ever exist on planet earth.
That privilege increases if you are: Pretty, white, wealthy, Or all of the above.

[Xoirwinkan]

Well I guess people really have different views on what 'equal' means, since so many voted for B, including women. I thought it meant equal in innate value, as in the value of the person's soul, etc. In that sense I say they're equal. However, the characteristics of each are rather different, so they are not equal in skills/abilities and suited roles.

[Wharvey98]

Physically, no. Mentally comes down to the individual. Legally depends on where you are. I’m not entirely certain what context your asking this question in, as such it makes it difficult to answer properly.

[ShortCircuit]

Equal in what? Intrinsic value? Of course. Opportunity for economic advancement? That too.

As far as I'm concerned, the only area in which women are not equal to men is physical strength/athleticism.

[NineBreaker]

Men and women are not equal; never have, and never will be. However, they should have equal rights and treatment under the law. That is not our reality right now either generally, but it's something we should all aim for.

[Anonymous]

It completely depends on your definition of "equal".

The fact is that men and women are different and they will never be truly equal. Women have more rights and privileges today in the western world today but most only seem able to see their own challenges and are incapable of seeing men's.

[Anonymous]

We are equal under the law, and in value to the human race. But physically men generally have more upper body strength than women, but women are also much more emotionally intelligent than men generally. We need one another to function, and move forwards for sure.

[JohnAlaska43]

No thats why transgenderism can't work.
We can do a lot of the same things but no dr or science can make us equal. Plus men dont get pregnant. A woman still needs a mans sperm to get pregnant.

[Sadly_it_Grew_Back]

Equal in legislation (for most countries) but not in reality.

[Anonymous]

Depends on where the person you ask lives. In the US I’d say women are “more equal” than men under the law. Socially; however, there exists so many biological differences between the male and female brain that it is kind of impossible to truly treat them the same as men. I am always for treating them as equal as we can though.

[AuroraRoseat]

No, we are not. And there shouldn't be any societal differences that gives men privileges that women do not have and vice versa.

[Lord_of_Penguins]

Unpopular opinion but NO.
They are of equal worth but each sex has its own advantages and disadvantages and therefore men and women shouldn't be treated the same BUT like they are worth the same. *if i formed a sentence people understand*

[TadCurious]

Men and women are not the same (obviously) but both sexes are equal in worth and importance and complement each other.

[chriscdi]

uh no, men have pingas and women have boobs, dont forget about periods or the differences in puberty, girls have higher metabolism naturally I've heard too so yep pretty different 😀

[A-man-22]

Physically, no and we shouldn't be
Mentally, no men and women think differently.
Rights wise, we are close but both sides need still need a few key parts more.

[sasukeuchiha7]

They're not equal but one is not superior to the other.
Men are better at certain things and women are better at others.

[Fliese]

No men have penises and balls (some) and woman have something that nobody in the internet is allowed to say or show