Thanks hifza for your comments, the first point you highlighted is that the question contradictory, the reason behind raising this question is that when we talk about gender equality we need to see how gender is been defined in academia so on basis of that we can analyze that is the equality of gender is possible. the gender mean roles and aspiration associated with male and female therefore i highlighted it can the nature and extant of roles and aspirations can be equal or same in nature and extent to equate my stance that it cant. the right and opportunities are also associated with it.hifza.nazir wrote: ↑Sat May 11, 2019 6:06 pmOn the one hand, it is described by the author that the core standpoint of gender equality is that men and women shall have equal rights, equal opportunities, obligations and also to eliminate the discrimination on the bases of gender. But at the same time, the question raised by her deals with the social expectations and aspirations toward both sexes, whether can be of equal or same in nature and extent? It seems these are two paradoxical approaches that are totally contradictory. The term gender equality only calls for equal rights, opportunity and the elimination of discrimination in this regard. The societal expectations whether differ or not is another issue I think.
The women vulnerabilities have mentioned by the writer but she has not mentioned the vulnerability of men. Vulnerability of men stands for what? It is unclear.
The second point about vulnerabilities of men means male also suffer from numerous issues but the discourse of equality is merely focused on female issues.
Thank you Rahat for you valuable remarks. i will definitely consider them however i have few reservations. The point you highlighted about sudden transition to the question is that i have to keep it concise due to time and space limitation and same is the justification for the issue of coherence as these are the initial ideas that i presented rather than a complete article an do need to be discussed further. in second paragraph after giving argument i quoted various studies as evidence though there link to each other may not be well constructed that make you feel it confusing. similarly the point about gender equality mechanisms and examples of pink buses i admit is not well explained by me however i do believe it can be a relevant example and there are many other examples of mechanisms opted by various organizations to ensure gender equality but if we evaluate them they are creating more segregation in society. The focus on Pakistan was limited as i would have discussed in detail it would have crossed the page limit of 3. finally you said the background information was boring however i feel before presenting the issue there was need to provide the background about gender equality discourse. i would appreciate your feedback how the background can be made interesting.Rahat shah wrote: ↑Sun May 12, 2019 10:36 pmA very good effort and well written thesis to counter the discourse of gender equality. The arguments presented are well supported by evidences. Having said that, I have pointed some loopholes in the essay that I will be discussing one by one.
1) the title seems very catchy but I think it need little bit reconsideration. As you have mentioned that gender equality in Pakistan then there is no need of mentioning indigenous cultural morals. Exclude indigenous or cultural.
2) sentences no 7 in first paragraph could be linked with sentence no 8 for making a better and logical sense.
3) The background provided in first paragraph seems long and boring, and the transition towards your questions seems very sudden. It seems like a debate is going on and someone suddenly posed an irrelevant question. Though the question is relevant but does not matches with the background.
4) I think it was not necessary to mention your objectives explicitly as you have done.
5) The second paragraph seems too long and confusing. The author is not able to make distinction between the evidences provided and her arguments.
6) Many grammatical and typographic mistakes, specially in paragraph no 3.
7) The author claim that gender equality creates segregation which is not supported by evidences. The evidence of pink busses does not seem appropriate.
8) Rather focusing on gender equality in Pakistan, the author focus in the essay is on gender equality debate in general. She should have focused and highlighted the issue in specific Pakistani context.
9) I haven't seen any mentioning of morales as mentioned in the title in Pakistani context.
10) there is a general issues of coherence in the overall easy.
I think working on these issues will further add to the strengths of the essay.
With best regards.
Thanks usama for giving me a hard time however i am not so pessimistic that if certain arguments are rejected in past by western academicians shall be buried and a debate can not be regenerated. i think instead we take things for granted at least we should make effort how far its going to be successful is another question. i would be happy if you suggest how i can improvise it.usama.ansari wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2019 1:43 amGender and Feminism
First of all i want to say congratulation you for fully equipped (with all necessary features) article.
After reading it carefully I found it informative as well as there are some technical/Philosophical problems in arguments.
1) Argument 1, 2 and 3 are general and are not related with this study (in my point of view) and highly controversial too. What you are trying to establish and destroy merely in a piece of academic work is neither possible nor an academic norm. as your first three arguments discuss Gender/Feminism debates. I want to introduce Postmodernist Feminist Hélène Cixous, Luce Irigaray, and Julia Kristeva . Your arguments have been destroyed academically/philosophically by these authors. So I think (for your first three arguments) this is/should not be your article's domain because you are going to discuss these arguments in a article and there are well established 1st order strong theories against it. I'm sorry I'm not opposing your arguments in details, I have just enlisted authors, please use Wikipedia for simple and quick information.
2) Last three arguments are relevant with Pakistani society and again i'm felling guilty to sat that these arguments too have been destroyed on strong and sound foundations by above mentioned Feminists.
3) Now the question is what I have (knowledge/criticism/appreciation etc) to add in your article ? And my simple answer is perhaps I don't know. I'm not criticizing hare for the sake of solely criticism. All I know is that these arguments are not able to face international academician critic and consequently not publishable.
4) The only hope for me may be your concluding remarks. At the moment I don't know ( personally as well as it was my official responsibility to leave comments on your drafts ) what to do, but may be I think your conclusion's arguments that Pakistani Society is a Muslim and Traditional society so there should be religious/ traditional doctrine in order to resolve the issue. And how should be these arguments managed I don't know as I has been thinking and studying on this problem since 2013 and unfortunately I can't found sound explanations( hare sound means in academics language ) but still I'm hopeful that the task is not impossible one. I wish you Good Luck ( personally ) and looking for a strong argument with sound rationale ( for academicians ).
5) Please correct the numbering in order.