Category: Equality

Introduction: what is intersectionality?

Intersectionality is an academic approach that helps us makes sense of the complexity of social reality by acknowledging the interdependence of different social ‘locations’ or ‘categories’ in people’s lives, such as gender or race, to explain their social situation and life experience.

Intersectionality also helps us understand the mechanisms by which social inequality is reproduced in our daily interactions. Because of this, intersectionality provides strong discursive tools to fight inequality.

I personally chose to work on this concept because it is both a comprehensive way to look at social interactions and understand social inequality by acknowledging people’s individuality and agency, and also because it provides strong analytical tools to assess social policy.

Evolution of the concept

The link between intersectionality and social inequality has been present from the beginning. As an academic approach, intersectionality is rooted in “a long and deep history of Black feminist writing, Indigenous feminism, third world feminism, and queer and postcolonial theory” (Hankivsky et al 2014). It emerged during the 70s as part of the US’ civil rights movement, when activists and authors like Angela Davis pushed for a differentiation between men and women in the African-American struggle for equality. The idea of class, race and gender as interdependent categories was used to explain, for example, why black women’s voices were either being misplaced or ignored in the civil rights debate (McBean 2018).

The notion of intersectionality has evolved since then and has now become more intricate, with authors like Marx Ferree (2009) explaining that “the intersection of gender and race is not any number of specific locations occupied by individuals or groups (such as black women) but a process through with ‘race’ takes on multiple ‘gendered’ meanings for particular women and men (and for those not neatly located in either of those categories)”. This, in turn, can have decisive impact on people’s lives and on their capability to participate in society and fulfill their basic human rights.

Intersectionality of what?

What do we mean by the interdependence (or intersectionality) of different social ‘locations’ or ‘categories’?

As human beings, faces must be the single thing we are more accustomed to seeing and scrutinising. When we meet somebody for the first time, certain characteristics stand out for us that seem to provide information about this new person. From the colour of their skin to the tone of their voice, we somehow are able to ‘fit’ this person into our mental representation of society, based on our previously acquired knowledge.

By analysing society and human interactions through an intersectionality ‘lens’, we understand that these pre-conceived ideas about others are somehow organised into ‘sections’ of human identity. These sections may even have a name, such as ‘gender’, ‘race’ or ‘age’. An intersectionality approach tells us that, although we may perceive these categories as separate, they are in fact completely interrelated. The breaking down of a person into separate categories is a fictional, but powerful, exercise we are able to do in our minds.

These ‘sections’ (or ‘categories’, or ‘locations’) of human identity are social constructions. Through social interactions since birth, we learn how to make sense of others by recognising in them characteristics that we are taught are more significant. Simultaneously, these social constructions not only inform the way we see others, but also the way we see ourselves and how we create our own identity.

We use the term ‘locations’ to refer to these social constructions in order to acknowledge their fluency and variability through time and space. These interdependent ‘sections’ of human identity are constantly debated and deconstructed through social institutions that may challenge existing discourses or fight to maintain them. This means that definitions and valuations of these categories (and of the variations within them) remain firmly dependant on the specific time frame and the specific place we are researching about.

A useful way to understand the concept of intersectionality is to say that we all have an intersectionality. As individuals, but also as members of a society, we all carry with us the multiple social categories that define us. We learn, for example, that some of our inner desires can be referred to as ‘our sexuality’, and that it changes with age. We also learn we have certain physical phenotypes, such as a skin colour, and through experience we learn how they are valued by others. Our individuality, therefore, can be seen as the expression of the intersection of all the different social ‘locations’ we carry in our our bodies and in our minds.

Intersectionality and social inequality

In order to understand the link between intersectionality and social inequality, we can review Georg Simmel’s philosophical discussion of how things exist in our mind.

In Philosophy of Money (1978 [1907]), Simmel explained that things that exist in our minds have two intrinsic qualities: existence and value. The first quality, existence, refers to the actual state of being of things in our mind. The simple act of thinking about something means that, for us, it exists. This includes the ‘sections’ or ‘locations’ we recognise in people and in ourselves.

The second quality, value, adds judgement to things in our minds through binary schemes of valuation. Therefore, things not only are, but they also are good or bad, beautiful or ugly, frightening or attractive, etc. These judgements can be rational, product of our reasoning, but most commonly are the product of our irrational feelings and emotions.

Simmel’s goes on by explaining that the separation of the quality of existence from the quality of value of things in our minds is purely an intellectual one. In fact, when we perceive the outside world and new things appear in our mental representation of it, existence and value are indistinguishable. The judgement we make of things is firmly attached to their existence in our minds.

This means that when we see people for the first time and we are able to recognise in them the different ‘locations’ of their identity, we are also creating value, or judgement, of them based on our previously acquired knowledge of these categories, a process that is both automatic and unconscious. When these judgements are reflected in our actions and on how we relate to others, in a way, we are reproducing social inequality.

Furthermore, because intersectionality shows us that the separation of human identity into ‘sections’ (or ‘locations’) is also purely intellectual (or fictitious, because in reality people exist as a single unit), when we judge a person based on a specific ‘section’, like their gender orientation, we are not only looking at one specific aspect of their identity, but rather we are judging the whole person through this categorisation.

Intersectionality and development

Using an intersectionality lens to approach our Development practice means moving beyond the use of singular categories to understand people and groups, and embracing the notion of inseparable and interconnected sets of social ‘locations’ that change through time, vary across places, and act together to shape an individual’s life experience and actions (Hankivsky et al 2014).

As development practitioners, we can use intersectionality to illustrate the power of individual life stories and the challenges this poses to mainstream Development discourses. An intersectionality lens allows us to see how social policy may affect people differently, depending on their specific set of ‘locations’, and what unintended consequences particular policies may have on their individual lives.

Intersectionality also illuminates how social policy can contribute to the “hegemonic constructions of individuals’ and groups’ relative power and privileges” by favouring certain ‘categories’ over others in its effort to know and categorise the population (Hankivsky et al 2014). By allowing this to be seen, intersectionality also helps us produce counter-hegemonic and transformative knowledge about our research subjects (Bilge 2013) that can directly address persisting social imbalances and injustices.

Example: intersectionality and disability

Persons with disabilities is a social category used to designate people with “long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments” that, in their interaction with social barriers, may hinder their capability to participate in society (United Nations 2006). Disability is a social category that cuts across any other social ‘location’ we may find. This is because anybody is at risk of obtaining a disability at some point in their lives, regardless of any other social definition they may carry, which makes the group of people that can be categorised as ‘with disability’ as diverse as it gets.

Looking at disability through an intersectionality lens makes us see this diversity, and also allows us to understand the complexity of people with disabilities’ struggle for participation and equality. For instance, the intersection of disability and gender. Natalia Moreno, a Colombian feminist activist with disability, talks about their difficulty to find a welcoming political plaza to express themselves as women with disability. On one side, she says, there is the male-dominated disability rights movement, that silences them based on gender discrimination; but on the other side, within the feminist movement, other feminists fail to see them beyond their condition of persons with disabilities (‘Colectiva Polimorfas: making spaces for all kinds of bodies’ 2017).

Another example of the usefulness of intersectionality to understand disability is when we see the intersectionality of disability and poverty. In order to participate fully in society, persons with disability need special services that enable them to have an education and get employed. Poverty, rather than the disability itself, can be a fundamental obstacle for participation and equality in countries where public provisioning and protection is limited or null, and people are dependant on markets for their social provisioning.

Intersectionality can also shed light on the diversity within the category of people with disabilities. The category is broad, covering persons with physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments. They all share a common situation of exclusion from participating fully in society, which makes such a broad category politically useful. But it also casts a shadow over the differences in the difficulties they have to endure, depending on their particular case of disability. Blind people, for example, have to face different social barriers than persons with Down Syndrome. Furthermore, an intersectionality lens shows us how social policy may reinforce social exclusion by accentuating the differences within this group through targeting mechanisms, instead of having a universalistic approach (Martínez Franzoni & Sánchez-Ancochea 2016; Borsay 2005).

Conclusion

To sum up, intersectionality is a useful analytical tool to understand social reality and assess social policy. It is also a comprehensive way to understand our own identity and the way we see others. Intersectionality allows us to see the complexities of social reality by pointing out the power of individual’s life stories. By doing so, it also poses serious challenges to mainstream development discourses, as it allows us to see the unintended consequences (positive or negative) it may have on people’s lives. It also sheds a strong light on the mechanisms by which social inequality is reproduced in our everyday practice and in policymaking. Because of this, an intersectionality lens provides us with strong discursive tools to fight social inequality. For all of this, intersectionality is a very strong approach to social studies and a sound contribution by feminist writings the making and unmaking of Development.

References

1. Bilge, S (2013) ‘Intersectionality Undone: Saving Intersectionality from Feminist Intersectionality Studies’. In Du Bois Review: Social Science Research On Race 10:2
2. Borsay, A (2005) Disability and Social Policy in Britain since 1750. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
3. ‘Colectiva Polimorfas: making spaces for all kinds of bodies’ (2017) Accessed 10 January 2018 at < https://www.mamacash.org/en/colectiva-polimorfas-making-space-for-all-kinds-of-bodies>
4. Hankivsky, O et al. (2014) ‘An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity’. In International Journal for Equity in Health 13:119
5. McBean, S (2018) ‘A Brief History of Intersectionality and the Question of Class’. Accessed 8 January 2018 https://kclintfemsoc.wordpress.com/2014/01/08/a-brief-history-of-intersectionality-and-the-question-of-class/
6. Martínez Franzoni, J., & Sánchez-Ancochea, D. (2016) The Quest for Universal Social Policy in the South: Actors, Ideas and Architectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Marx Ferree, M (2009) ‘Inequality, intersectionality and the politics of discourse: Framing feminist alliances’
8. Simmel, G. (1978 [1907]) The philosophy of money. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
9. United Nations (2006) ‘Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’ 13 December 2006. Accessed 10 January 2018 at

An issue about gender equality has absorbed much attention from the society and has become a popular topic discussed by all humans. While some experts argue that the gender equality is more likely taking disadvantages in many life events such as education and discrimination, others state at opposite opinions that the rights of different gender are equally attained in many fields. The term “Gender equality” can be defined as shared rights and opportunities under the same condition across variable parts of the society, including access to working place, salaries, and politic participation. The varied thoughts, aspirations, and behaviors from both male and female are evenly valued and supported. This essay will argue that gender equality has improved in the 21st century based on three reasons. The reasons are more political participation of female, increasing employment rate in different industries, and the phenomenon of higher income contrast with male.

Firstly, more female representatives are elected in the government. According to the date from the United Nations Women (2019), it has numbered that a significant increase has occurred in average percentage of female political participation of all national parliament from 11.3 percent in 1995 to 24.3 percent in 2019. The participation is still in expanding. The empowerment of women takes advances in building laws that more likely favors women and girls and settle them in decision making positions (Mbabazi, 2018). Even though the growth rate of women seating in governing bodies remains low, it reflects a globally advocation of championing gender equality.

Moreover, Laws that priorities female have been introduced into most of the countries in the world in order to achieve the balance between two sexes in the government parties.

Hergenhan (2017) mentions that European countries firstly legislated gender quotas to enhance the number of female candidates and the number of women elected in the administration arm of the government in 1970s. Both obstacles of the rights to be elected and influential ability to vote were effectively overcome. However, it is controversial that the female participation rate in local government still remain under the average of 23% worldwide and 26% in Europe (Women in National Parliament, as cited in Hergenhan, 2017), although the gender quota has last and been implemented for 30 years. After a long time of implementation, the benefits of gender quota tend to meet its extreme and the extension of the policy is being questioned. Overall, in the past decade years women display more important role in the government, which contributes to narrow the gender gap in governmental agencies.

Secondly, gender equality also displays improvement in the workforce. A stereotype inherited from generation to next generation was that the only duty for women was cultivating children and finishing the housework. Rare female worked for companies or industries as long as surviving needs were satisfied. The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017) found that the employment rate of female labor force has progressively raised from 30% to 60% over all labor force in 2000. This great surge of women labor force symbolized that the women participation rate reached the peak across the history in America. As a result of the great share held by women, some female elites successfully squeezed into the leadership condition where was dominated by male in the past. Data from Australia Government (2018) indicates that the number of female managers across different industry fields inclines consistently from 26.1% to 29,7% in 2013 and 2017 and female chief executive officers or the owner of companies smoothly arise to 16.5% which is 2% higher than the data in 2012 in Australia.

The contribution from male workers toward society is closely followed by female employees. It can be concluded that an impressive outcome made by women labor force added to stimulate the gay between different genders more equal. However, analyzed by the Parliament of Australia (2018), the large amount of female labors is more likely concentrate enrolling in health care, education, financial services, and art, which in return will lead to the division of different industries. While women target to take actions on engaging in jobs, the variable industry shares are being segregated. Generally, the enhancement of female workforce is a phenomenon that gender gap has been narrowed because women attain the opportunities to be under employed rather than resisted from working.

Besides the workforce of female has broadened in the recent decades, wage gap has been narrowed as well, which pushes the gender differentiation more even. The salary gap between different genders is referred to the average total earning of male and female in a week except part-time jobs. Etta and Gillian (2002) point out that the reasons for occurrence of gender pay gap are that men paly more senior roles than women and women therefore trend to promote in careers less far and the occupation of women are commonly paid less.

The data collected from Australia Government (2018) indicates that the gender pay gaps consistently decline from 18.5% in 2013 to 14.1% in 2018 where the average weekly payment for female is 1445.8 in American dollars and the total earning in a week for male is 1695.6 dollars. As an increasing number of women successfully break the barriers of turning into the head managers, much contribution to pull the average revenue of female rise achieves narrowing the gender pay gap. An encouraging outcome from the top hierarchy within the society effectively prosper the equality between different sexes. Sayers (2016) states that the gender wage gay can also be concluded as a result of individual choice. That is, some women prefer to enter the industry with higher payment, while others favor a stable career with comparatively low but permanent work. Therefore, as lots of women earn more money in different areas, the wage gap accordingly narrows.

In conclusion, the following three reasons argue that the gender equality displays improvement in nowadays. Women attain more power in government bodies than the conditions in the last century. And a surge of female labor force injects into the market exerting an even share of workforce. Lastly, the salary gap has been narrowed as more women progress further in the careers. According to Ridgeway (2011), the rewrite of stereotype of gender equality shapes a new form of social and economic organization. Thus, gender equality is promoted in terms of political representatives, workforce, and wages.

Equality has been sought after by many and Americans have fought valiantly in order to bring equality within reach. The struggle for equality has been depicted by Harper Lee’s book, To Kill a Mockingbird, in the way the characters battle against segregation in the fictional town of Maycomb, Alabama during the late 1930’s. While combating segregation, characters in the book face many problems that are out of their control, just as Americans do in the fight for equality. America has made many steps towards equality, but has not even come close to it. The persistent struggle for equality is admirable, but unfortunately America will never achieve true racial and social equality.

To begin, segregation has been ever-present in America and continues to block the advancement of equality. Examples of segregation are present in To Kill a Mockingbird and show how the citizens of Maycomb were divided by race and how those of African American descent were looked down upon by almost all Caucasians in Maycomb. The extent of racial segregation at the time had African Americans sitting on a balcony in the courthouse, separate from Caucasians, that was referenced to as the “colored balcony” (Lee 219). Three Caucasian children had watched a trial from the colored balcony after being invited to sit with an acquaintance and were later questioned by the Caucasian people of Maycomb about why they would sit there and associate with people of color (Lee 287). The Caucasian people of Maycomb had expected these children to feel humiliated and degraded for associating with people of color.

Segregation carried over to mixed children as well, and these children of both African American and Caucasian descent were not accepted by either race. When a young girl, Scout Finch, questions her older brother, Jem, about mixed children he explains, “They don’t belong anywhere. Colored folks won’t have ‘em because they’re half white; white folks won’t have ‘em ‘cause they’re colored, so they’re just in-betweens, don’t belong anywhere,” (Lee 215). Maycomb may be a fictional town, but this intense racial segregation was the case with many southern states in America at the time. Although this intensity is no longer the case, racial segregation is still persistent in modern society in the ways people of color are treated by individuals who still hold onto the racist ideals of past generations. There is no way to control the racist thoughts of these individuals, and they will continue to keep racism and segregation alive in American society, thus preventing the achievement of racial equality.

Additionally, American society reflects an unfair distribution of power and privilege related to race. In To Kill a Mockingbird, an African American, Tom Robinson, is accused of the rape and assault of a nineteen year old woman, Mayella Ewell. Tom Robinson’s lawyer, Atticus Finch, provides a substantial amount of evidence proving that Tom Robinson did not commit the crime of which he was accused, yet he is still found guilty by the jury. During Atticus’ testimony, he speaks to the jury about how the witnesses for the state presented themselves, “in the cynical confidence that their testimony would not be doubted, confident that you gentlemen would go along with them on the assumption-the evil assumption-that all Negroes lie, that all Negroes are basically immoral beings, that all Negro men are not to be trusted around our women,” which implies that Caucasians are aware of their privileges and will spare no thought at using said privileges with bad intentions, such as using them against an innocent man in order to convict him for a despicable crime that he took no part of (Lee 273). After losing the case, Atticus Finch states, “They’ve done it before and they did it tonight and they’ll do it again,” in reference to how the Caucasian jury used their power to convict Tom Robinson, an African American, for a crime in which he did not commit (Lee 285). Situations such as Tom Robinson’s are still present in modern society in the way people of color are accused and convicted of crimes which they did not commit, for Caucasians continue to hold power over people of color. Also in To Kill a Mockingbird, an open-minded Caucasian man, Dolphus Raymond, makes a comment about, “the hell white people give colored folks, without even stopping to think that they’re people, too,” which speaks on how people of color have been dehumanized by Caucasians (Lee 269). This dehumanization of people of color has decreased substantially over time, but still exists in the present day. Caucasians have been granted privileges based solely on their race that they have used, and continue to use, against people of color. Many Caucasians today still feel as though they are entitled to these outdated privileges and feel superior to people of color. This racial privilege possessed by Caucasians causes inequality for people of color, but there is no way to change the racial superiority complex many Caucasians have. As Caucasians continue to hold this power and privilege over the people of color in America, true racial and social equality will never be achieved.

Lastly, American citizens utilize their freedom of speech and expression to express their many different opinions, but opinions related to topics such as race and society cause controversies that prevent American equality. Freedom is an enormous aspect in the daily life of an American, especially with how racially diverse America’s population is. The freedom experienced by Americans has resulted in a society of extreme individuality, but with such uniqueness spurs an onslaught of disagreements. Differences of opinion have resulted in acts of violence and abuse against individuals who do not agree with each other on controversial topics. For instance, in Charlottesville in 2017, protesters marching against white nationalists at a “Unite the Right” rally at the University of Virginia were injured and killed by white supremacists that disagreed with the protester’s cause (“Charlottesville Riot”). The protesters were peacefully expressing their opinion, yet people that disagreed with them felt that violence was the only way to state their opinion. Atrocious acts of violence, such as the situation that occured in Charlottesville, continue to happen across the country, and what most of these devastating situations have in common is that they are brought on by differences of opinion. Even if racial inequality was solved, there would still be differences in American society that would cause disagreements. If racial and social equality was achieved in America, it would cost Americans their freedom and independence because as long as people are different in some way there will be fuel for disagreements. It is impossible to create a country where everyone is equal because differences in people result in differences of opinion, and unless Americans give up their freedom, their individuality, and everything that makes them unique, people will disagree with each other and look down upon those different from them. It is important to strive for getting as close to equality as possible, but it is impossible for America to reach true equality because there will always be Americans who do not desire equality and stand against it.

In conclusion, America’s history has shown segregation based on race and culture, unfair racial privilege being used in heinous ways, and differences of opinion among society. Even within the past century, substantial progress has been made in getting as close to equality as possible, but unless Americans are stripped of their freedom and rights to individuality there will be differences (good and bad) existent in American society. As desirable as equality is, true racial and social equality is unachievable for America.

Homer’s The Odyssey is a book that’s based primarily in ancient Greece, which means that Greek culture is a prominent part of the storyline. Characters in the story can be seen portraying these cultural values such as Xenia and praying to the gods. This story transmits Greek culture’s values by having important characters carry out these actions which are cemented throughout the book and are typically key parts of the book. A great example of this is when Odysseus prays to Zeus for a sign, “Lifted his hands and prayed to Zeus: ‘Father Zeus, if you really willed it so—to bring me home over land and sea-lanes, home to the native ground after all the pain you brought me… another sign, outside, from Zeus himself!’” (20.109-113). Odysseus prays to Zeus to give him an omen so that he can be assured that the prophecy stated throughout the book of his return is true. Odysseus’ prayer is then answered through very comprehensible signs from Zeus. This is just one example of a character praying to the gods for help. Praying to the gods is a recurring theme in The Odyssey, especially since Odysseus does it quite often. Another very prominent cultural value is Xenia, which similar to praying to the gods, is a persistent theme in the story. Xenia is substantially shown in the story relating to Odysseus, an adequate instance is when Odysseus returns to Ithaca disguised as a beggar and advances to his castle to convince Penelope that her husband is still alive. Following the incognito Odysseus consulting Penelope, she says, “‘Dear friend,’ the discreet Penelope replied, ‘never has any man so thoughtful—of all the guests in my palace come from foreign parts—been as welcome as you… Odysseus must have feet and hands like his by now—hardships can age a person overnight,’” (19.397-408). Penelope doesn’t even know that she just delivered Xenia to her husband disguised as a beggar, she’s doing it solely because it’s a part of Greek culture. It is detrimental that a host serves the guest well to satisfy their requirements. She offers him a foot wash from her maid and later offers him a place to sleep, only with the knowledge that he is an impoverished beggar. The examples presented easily demonstrate how The Odyssey transmits Greek cultural values of welcoming a stranger and praising/praying to the gods when in need of assistance.

As mentioned, The Odyssey takes place in ancient Greece, where at the time those of “lower status” were often given a difficult time. The story demonstrates how those of inferior power impacts equity and oppression. An unfortunate example would be for Penelope, as she is a female and is given little voice at times. One instance is when Antinous is scolding Telemachus, as he says, “‘So, we will devour your worldly goods and wealth as long as she holds out… We’ll not go back to our old estates or leave for other parts, not till she weds the Argive man she fancies,’” (2.136-142). Even from the very beginning of the book, the suitors declare that they will not leave her palace until Penelope has married a suitor. Antinous gives no freedom to Penelope whatsoever and demands that she marries a suitor. This is all without the knowledge of Odysseus’ current status or whereabouts. Such disrespect is shown for those considered to be “of lower power,” even though Penelope is the queen. However, in the succeeding illustration, an individual that appears to be of actual lower power and status receives ample insolence. While concealed as a worthless beggar, Antinous attacks Odysseus verbally and insults him by expressing, “‘Now you won’t get out of the hall unscarred, I swear…’ unstaggered by Antinous’ blow—just shook his head, silent, his mind churning with thoughts of bloody work,” (17.506-514). Antinous is besieging the disguised Odysseus for absolutely no reason other than the fact that he presents the appearance of a beggar. He assumes that this beggar is of lower power and discerns himself as such a high power since he is courting in the hall of Penelope, truly reflecting the misbalance in societal order. There is just utter discontent shown for anyone who appears to be on the lower end of distributed power, and it truly imprints justice of this time. Through the harsh treatment of a beggar and demeaning actions shown for a female, The Odyssey truly demonstrates the distribution of power and how that impacts integrity.

Jane Eyre, written by Charlotte Brontë, is classified as a “bildungsroman,” meaning it is a novel that traces the development of the main character from a young child to adulthood. After being orphaned as an infant, Jane struggled to find acceptance from the family members that raised her. Her status as an orphaned, impoverished woman slates her at the bottom of the social ladder in Victorian England, which allows for her enrolment in Lowood school. During Jane’s time there, the school is under the direction of Mr. Brocklehurst, who is a large contributor to the negativity surrounding it. His direction is tyrannical, consistently treating his students poorly and without care for their basic needs, including proper meals, and a nurturing environment. Additionally, the descriptors of the school are almost exclusively negative. The physical aspects of Lowood are often described with negative connotations. The novel goes as far as to have the poor weather conditions upon Jane’s arrival foreshadows unpleasantness in her years to come at school. Lowood, while a crucial place to Jane’s development, represents harmful societal norms, and perpetuates, anti-feministic ideals, reflected through the treatment of students by the faculty and descriptions of the school itself.

Lowood is a school for the impoverished and orphaned girls of Victorian England, with its faculty expecting extreme conformity to the harsh rules set in place by its headmaster, Mr. Brocklehurst. These rules prevent the ladies of Lowood from expressing their individuality through appearance and personality. Mr. Brocklehurst has unrealistic expectations of the students, as made evident by his discussion with Miss Temple about Julia Severn’s curled hair when he says,

Naturally! Yes, but we are not to conform to nature: I wish these girls to be the children of Grace: and why that abundance? I have again and again intimated that I desire the hair to be arranged closely, modestly, plainly. Miss Temple, that girl’s hair must be cut off entirely […] (95).

Julia Severn’s hair is naturally curly, but this is not a sufficient excuse for Mr. Brocklehurst. He wants the women to look and act one specific way. This expectation of complete and extreme conformity strips women of their individuality, and furthermore, any representation of individuality is shunned and reprimanded by Mr. Brocklehurst and some members of his staff. The use of Christianity to rationalize his harsh treatment is further exemplified when he says,

I have a Master to serve whose kingdom is not of this world: my mission is to mortify in these girls the lusts of the flesh; to teach them to clothe themselves with shame-facedness and sobriety, not with braided hair and costly apparel; and each of the young persons before us has a string of hair twisted in plaits which vanity itself might have woven: these, I repeat, must be cut off; think of the time wasted, of—

Mr. Brocklehurst was here interrupted: three other visitors, ladies, now entered the room. They ought to have come a little sooner to have heard his lecture on dress, for they were splendidly attired in velvet, silk, and furs (96).

Mr. Brocklehurst’s idea that women should dress themselves with “shame-facedness and sobriety” reflects the notion that women are inferior and should be ashamed of their gender, and perpetuates anti-feministic ideals. As well, he uses Christian doctrine to justify his abuse, seeing himself as godly, and expects to be treated as such. To disobey Mr. Brocklehurst is seen as the equivalent of disobeying God. His hypocrisy is highlighted upon the arrival of his wife and daughters who are extravagantly dressed, which also shows a large bias towards the rich. Mr. Brocklehurst exemplifies misogyny, and treats the impoverished girls at his school as if they were dolls that he can control any way he chooses, further facilitating anti-feminist ideals.

Lowood is associated with negative emotions and environments, as made clear by descriptions of the events that take place at the school, as well as the school itself. Upon Jane’s arrival to Lowood, the weather is immediately reflective of negativity, as “rain, wind, and darkness filled the air” (Brontë 63). This weather foreshadows unpleasantness between Jane and a number of her superiors, as well as the general experience of her first day at Lowood. Her descriptions of Lowood school are almost exclusively negative, as exemplified on her first morning in the refectory, which is described as a “great, low-ceiled, gloomy room; [with] two basins of something hot… [sending] an odour far from inviting” (68). Most students were unable to eat due to the “nauseous mess” (69) and “in most cases the effort was soon relinquished” (69). In this case, Lowood failed to provide its students with a basic requirement for survival, calling its dignity as a residence into question. The lack of something so basic as an edible meal shows that students at Lowood are often perceived as less than equal to society due to their impoverished status and female gender, and that in and of itself contributes to the inequality of women in the novel. In addition, not only is the abuse dehumanizing, but it is implied that the students should be grateful for the social mobility that Lowood appears to provide them.

Throughout Jane’s time at Lowood school as a student, she is exposed to ridicule, abuse, and improper living conditions. All of these are by the hand of Mr. Brocklehurst, who uses Christian doctrine to rationalize his behaviour and expects to be treated with the utmost respect, while offering none to his students and faculty. He encourages the unfair treatment of the impoverished female students of Lowood, and in doing so, he facilitates inequality and harmful societal norms regarding social class. As well, the descriptors of Lowood and what it offers in terms of residency and classes are almost completely negative, with rooms being referred to as gloomy, or food being inedible. Almost all the teachers, with the exception of Miss Temple, expect the students to conform to Mr. Brocklehurst’s expectations of appearance and behaviour, further facilitating a harmful environment. Despite a large portion of Jane’s character development occurring at Lowood school, while under the direction of Mr. Brocklehurst, it proved to be an institution that supported inequality for women, specifically those who were impoverished. The reinforcement of harmful societal norms, poor living conditions, and the overall mistreatment of underprivileged women negatively represented Lowood as an educational institution.

Last year at Wimbledon, a journalist confidently announced in a press conference that Sam Querry was the first American tennis player to reach a semi-final of a Grand Slam since 2009. It was left to Andy Murray to point out the fact that he was the first male player to do this and that both Serena and Venus Williams have achieved this feat numerous times since 2009. This is just one of the many examples of inequality and “casual sexism” in sport. For example, up until very recently, Serena Williams was paid less than her male counterparts. Why? Because she doesn’t have a penis!

As a child, I always believed that what-ever profession I chose, I would earn equal amounts to the boys in my primary class. I was shocked to find out that this is not the case, and indeed is far from it. The pay gap goes back historically, not just in sports but in society. Before 1970, it was a normality for women to be on a lower rate of pay from their male colleagues even if they had contributed more or had a higher skill level. This supposedly changed in 1969, when the National Joint Action Campaign Committee for Women’s Equal Rights orchestrated a monumental equal pay demonstration. This rally ramped up the pressure on the government to make a change to the legislation and soon after the equal pay act of 1970 was brought into action. You would like to think that was the end of it, right? Surely, men and women should be paid equally now, regardless of their job. However, due to several factors impacting on this, inequality and the pay gap is an even bigger issue than it was forty years ago.

Despite the developments of women in sport and the way they are perceived in society, the portrayal of these inspirational individuals on social media has been nothing short of disgraceful. The abuse and objectification of these athletes for simply doing their job is appalling, vindictive and unfair. For example, Alex Scott MBE is a former female footballer who played for Arsenal WFC and the England lionesses. During her sixteen-year footballing career she captained Arsenal and made an astonishing 140 appearances for England. She even represented Great Britain in the 2012 London Olympics. All of these achievements are beyond most people and she was awarded a fully deserved MBE in recognition. In the last couple of years Alex has pursued a career in presenting, including the 2018 World Cup and just recently she became the first female pundit on Monday Night Football. Despite her illustrious and successful career, Alex Scott receives abuse on social media every day for, again, simply doing her job. Trolls make comments such as ‘get back to the kitchen’ or ‘she’s a woman, she clearly knows nothing about football’. My point is that Alex Scott is a very experienced ex professional, and given the career she has had, she’s proven herself to pass comment on the men’s game as well as the women’s. Due to the experience she has in professional football, Alex can be considered an expert in her field. As such, she has as much right to present and give her opinion as men do. Alex has got as much right to present and give her opinion as her male counterparts. She reached the highest level she possibly could in football so there is no reason why she should be getting any sort of abuse. But the way these sexist trolls perceive women in sport almost creates a kind of mob mentality of uneducated people, criticising these athletes for no reason whatsoever. It’s a similar story with other forms of media, such as TV, where the problem continues through coverage of women’s sports.

Every day you see advertising for sports events on all social media platforms and TV, but how many of these adverts promote the female side of sports? Coverage of women’s sport in the UK especially is something I think needs drastically improved. Research carried out in the last 25 years showed that commentary on female sports is “sexist, dull and lacklustre”. Some might say that coverage of women’s sports lacks excitement and passion and maybe this is because there is a serious lack of funding in this particular area, and I think this is something that needs to change. For example, Scotland’s women have just qualified for their first World Cup and their crucial crunch game vs Albania was shown on live TV. On BBC Alba. Who don’t commentate in English. This is a prime example of the lack of coverage of female sport when a game which should be attracting national attention is not shown on mainstream media. If this was the men’s team, regardless of the game, it would be shown on one of the big companies and be promoted on all social media. Why should this be allowed? I think this speaks volumes for the BBC’s attitude towards female sport. They clearly do not value female sports and how many positives it brings to the table. If you have ever seen a women’s football game, from any level you will know that the game promotes fairness and this is shown in the way players play the game. Compared to the men’s game, there is literally no diving, or poor sporting etiquette and if the BBC were true to their word, they’d show more of these games on their mainstream channels.

It’s not just football that has succumbed to the world of the pay gap, because it has been reported that other sports have been subject to similar problems. One story that absolutely shocked me is from the sport of cricket. In March 2018, the Twenty20 series was held in India. Both men’s and women’s international teams were flying out to compete. All the men’s teams were fully funded and paid for to fly business class but the women’s teams were made to fly economy! This is a reflection on the way women are viewed in general and if we want to tackle inequality in sport, then we must first look at the wider problem of inequality in society. The reason that some people have grown to accept things like this happening is because we are brought up with a view that men deserve better when this should not be the case. We are all human. We should be treated as equal and until society does something about this then unfortunately there will always be inequality and a pay gap. As I said earlier, there is a legislation in place to combat this, so why haven’t things changed?

To conclude, I still firmly believe that women and men should be treated as equal in sports. From all my research, it is still clear to me that inequality is a big issue today despite the huge improvements in female sports. In my opinion the biggest factor impacting on this is the way women are perceived on social media and some of the comments directed towards women are disgusting, unfair and just plain malicious. Hopefully, if people are willing to take a different view in the next few years then equality in sports and in society can finally be achieved.

Theme of Analysis

Equality, Equality is a right that is inalienable, a right not upheld by characters in stories and in real life. Equality is an important theme presented throughout novels. As stated in Merriam Webster “ a subject or topic of discourse or of artistic representation”, a theme is vital to the stories we read, it is the central idea of the story. In “The Chrysanthemum” by John Steinbeck, equality partakes in a huge fashion, the main character Elisa feels the need to spread her wings yet feels bound by not only her husband but by gender stereotypes as well. Along with “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin, the main character Louise correspondingly is bound by a man but realizes after her husband’s “death” that she had found a new sense of freedom and individuality.

“The Chrysanthemums”, by John Steinbeck, tells of two farmers named Elisa and Henry Allen, who live in the middle of nowhere during the 1930s. Elisa is a skillful gardener who has a gift, especially with her prize-winning Chrysanthemums. Elisa is the narrator through the dialect, yet the story is still written in third-person narration. Elisa is a strong feminist, she is masculine and obtains feminine ideals. While working on the year-old chrysanthemum, she makes everything she gardens, look simple. Henry acknowledges his wife’s true gardening gift and explains the negation of the cattle, which he made earlier, and results in a planned celebration later. As the day drags on, Elisa is still hard at work, as a ramshackle wagon approaches, that advertises the repairing of household appliances. The tinker pauses at the farm, he is disheveled and time hasn’t been nice to him, based on appearances, the tinker is lost and explains his route. This sparks interest in a potential career for Elisa, imagining the idea of freedom. The tinker is a swindler who is trying to convince Elisa of his services. Elisa’s whole attitude changes when the tinker takes interest in the Chrysanthemums, the tinker explains how one of his customers asked him to bring her a seed, and Elisa kindly gives the tinker a pot with a Chrysanthemums to give to the lady. She expresses a desire to the tinker of having his life, but of course, that’s no life for a “woman”. Ironically she tries to “break her chains” with Tinker, a man after her husband hasn’t expressed equality, as well as the Tinker. Once the Tinker departs, Elisa gets ready for her dinner with Henry, Henry comments on her strength and happiness. As they depart, the Tinker can be seen throwing away the seeds, a representation of how women were treated, solely for beauty and birth. Throughout the entire story, there is a sense of gender inequality for Elisa, who seeks equality in a male-dominated world. Elisa steers for freedom and equality but is constantly put down by her husband. Henry thinks little of what she does, he acknowledges her talent but knows she can’t do anything else. She is bound by a man, and the gender roles are defined clearly, obviously Elisa being subordinate. Coveting for equality from her husband, but getting nothing, she is restricted. The theme of equality is also seen in the interactions between Elisa and Tinker. Elisa ignites a connection with the Tinker, as she realizes, he might be her way out. Coveting for being set free and equal with men, along with pursuing her passions. Once more she is shut down and shown inequality. The Tinker comments that his travel and work are nothing for a “lady”, but rather a lonesome life, one more suited for a man. Elisa living in a male-dominated world, back in the 1930s, shows this theme of equality, and how desperately she wants it.

In the Story of an Hour by Kate Chopin, Mrs. Mallard is the main character who attains a weak heart, she is about to find out about the tragic death of her husband Brently Mallard. The narration of the story is third-person omniscient, all perspectives are seen. During the 19 century, Mrs. Mallard finds out about her spouse’s death, while in her residence. A family friend Richards has come to break the news of Mr. Mallard, Josephine, the sister of Louise, takes care of breaking it. Louise was in total disbelief and has many mixed emotions, the tone is filled with irony. Louise came to the point after crying and wallowing in sadness that she never truly loved her late husband. After sitting in silence and staring at the sky she let herself calm down, and she started mouthing the word “free”. Realizing she was finally free and relieved from this man that she didn’t love and wasn’t happy with. The dramatic irony is that her sister wants to be with Louise because she believed Louis was sad and mourning, which obviously was not happening. Toward the end as Louise feels collected, strong, happy, and free. At the end of the story, it takes another dramatic turn, ironically Mr. Mallard comes home because he was never killed. Mrs. Mallard dies of a heart attack, she was shocked that her husband wasn’t dead and that she wasn’t free. The theme of equality is obviously presented in the story, a woman who obtains this moment of epiphany and comes to the conclusion of freedom and happiness. Louise was oppressed by her marriage, although it was never clear that her marriage was a disaster, rather stifled. Stifled by her ways to express herself and embrace equality, rather than holding the stereotypical wifely duties. Louise understands she is no longer chained down by this previous marriage and the inequalities that came along with it. The theme discloses the story, Louise is shocked to see her husband alive and dies. Her freedom and equality are all washed away and gone, oppressed by her marriage, it went as fast as it came. Louise’s death signifies, not only the ironic outcome but freedom and equality from the oppressed. For the first time in her life, Louise will be equal and free, not bound by man or oppression, as her soul departs.

Equality is a standard right, upheld by all to hold the same rights and opportunities. In today’s society, equality is a right that is mistreated, in the news, we see immigrant children being separated from their parents and put in detention centers. This shows equality is not presented in our nation but is needed more than ever. Women today are still shown inequality, not being paid the same as men, and being taken advantage of. The short stories read, present a common theme that is still alive and going on today, inequality of women, and how much women deserve it. Reading about the theme of equality, is important, especially when it involves women. Equality is necessary for today’s society, a right that is slowly fading away, but if we read about it, we then understand its importance. Equality is needed for all, Elisa in “The Chrysanthemum”, is constantly put down by man, and strives for this leeway. Elisa is shown inequality by her husband and the Tinker, she wants to be feminine and masculine and pursue her own passions. Obviously, of the time period, this is impossible; Louise Mallard also seeks equality and receives it in the end. The lack of equality can restrict those from their true potential. Equality is not only a theme in stories but in reality.

The Roman Catholic Church represents the largest Christian denomination worldwide. It contains about 1.2 billion members globally. Today, Catholics hold many diverse views regarding the community of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer and more (LGBTQ+). A growing number of Catholics have begun to accept LGBTQ members welcoming them into the community, while many others still deny them or do not accept them. In the Catholic Church, people are taught not to act on homosexual tendencies yet everyone should still accept and respect LGBTQ people.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains the basic Christian values written in a way that aids their understanding. Catholics look to the Catechism for insight on many different topics. It describes “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law.” It also describes “homosexual tendencies” as “objectively disordered.”

The Catechism states that “the number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This objectively disordered inclination constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition”. The Catechism says that “Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.” The catechism states “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

The Catholic Church does not consider homosexual orientation sinful, however, it has a negative connotation towards it. The 1986 Letter says, “Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” The catechism states that homosexual people are to be called to chastity. It also says that “Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

“The Church seeks to enable every person to live out the universal call to holiness. Persons with a homosexual inclination ought to receive every aid and encouragement to embrace this call personally and fully. This will unavoidably involve much struggle and self-mastery, for following Jesus always means following the way of the Cross… The Sacraments of the Eucharist and Penance are essential sources of consolation and aid on this path.’ – USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops), Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination (2006)

In December 2014 Pope Francis had a message for parents of LGBTQ children he said ‘We have to find a way to help that father or that mother to stand by their [LGBTQ] son or daughter.” He had a welcoming attitude of accepting LGBTQ kids. But in the catechism of the Catholic Church, homosexual acts expressed by LGBTQ kids continue to be considered “intrinsically disordered to natural law… [and] close the sexual act to the gift of life”

As the leader of the Catholic Church, the Pope is starting to talk about these issues in a way that is different from the past. When Pope Francis joined 90 prison inmates in Naples for lunch including gay and transgender people in March of 2015, he said “Sometimes it happens that you feel disappointed, discouraged, abandoned by all: but God does not forget his children, he never abandons them! He is always at our side, especially in trying times.’ He was willing to include gay and transgender people in his luncheon and allowed a group of LGBTQ advocates on the parade route.

In July 2015 Pope Francis referred to a meeting in Rome that would take place in August and was expected to discuss changes to controversial areas of Catholic teachings including homosexuality he said ‘I ask you to pray fervently for this intention,’ the Pope continued, ‘so that Christ can take even what might seem to us impure, scandalous or threatening, and turn it … into a miracle. Families today need miracles!’

Pope Francis said that the church should “apologize to the person who is gay whom it has offended” and respect and “accompany them pastorally”

Different parishes and dioceses have different experiences with LGBTQ members. Many Catholic communities reach out and try to offer members of the LGBTQ community a welcome as much as they can while staying within the limits of a church policy that disapproves of same-sex relationships. Some parishes have denied membership to people in the LGBT community. Recently, there have been cases of LGBTQ members who have been dismissed from Catholic schools and parishes after a same-sex couple had gotten married.

Many Catholics have reflected on the scientific evidence that homosexuality is a natural variant in human sexuality and that lesbian and gay love is just as valuable as heterosexual love. They see faith and reason as connected, and state, “I don’t think that God makes mistakes. Now that we know that homosexuality is normal and natural, we need to update our Church’s thinking to be in accord with new understandings of sexuality.”– New Ways Ministry.

The Vatican used the term LGBT for the first time in June of 2018, acknowledging the community in a written document. In the final version of the document, the term was removed.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has not come out with an official policy regarding the Equality Act. This is a comprehensive bill that, if passed, would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the federal civil rights protections that previously existed based on national origin, skin color, race, religion, and sex.

The USSCB rejected the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in their statement that said it “could be used to punish as discrimination what many religions – including the Catholic religion – teach, particularly moral teaching about same-sex sexual conduct.”

In 2005, a Vatican document that was approved by Pope Benedict XVI instructed the church that it “cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’ Such persons find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women.” Pope Francis gave his famous “Who am I to judge?” comment when he responded to a question regarding the acceptability of gay men as priests. But his statement is not official church teaching. Recently, many men’s religious orders and some bishops mostly make their own decisions about accepting gay men as candidates for the seminary and the priesthood.

In August of 2013, when asked whether gay men could be accepted as priests in the Catholic Church, Pope Francis said ‘If they [gay priests] accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn’t be marginalized. The tendency [same-sex attraction] is not the problem… they’re our brothers.’His comment set the tone and approach to talking more about LGBTQ issues apart from the liberal-conservative view

Marriage is a union of one man and one woman in a permanent faithful unity. The catechism states that “Sexuality is meant for the marital love of man and woman.” The family is the foundation of the church. It is also rooted in the marriage of one man and one woman. The Catechism says “In marriage, the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament.” Catholics believe that God is the author of marriage, not man and not society or the government. Marriage is a covenant between God and his people, between Christ and the church. Same-sex marriage cannot relate because they are the same, as in both the same gender. The different genders, male and female, symbolize the difference between mankind and god. Same-sex marriage does not represent that reality. Homosexuals can never become married because they biologically cannot be open to children. There is no natural possibility of new life. Men and women complement each other, emotionally and anatomically.

The Catholic Church teaches that any sexual activity between anyone (homosexual or heterosexual) that happens outside a marriage between a man and a woman is sinful and immoral. Only sex between a husband and wife is morally permitted. The Catholic Church does not celebrate or recognize same-sex marriages; therefore, any homosexual sexual relations are prohibited. The Catholic Catechism teaches that sex should happen only within marriage between a wife and a husband, with procreation as the goal. God calls on us, whether homosexual or heterosexual, to chastity.

However, the Catholic laity has been more vocal in their support. Lay organizations, including Catholics for Marriage Equality, played an important role in the United States of America. Some Catholics support marriage equality because they disagree with the bishop about sexuality and gender. They align themselves more with the theologians who hold that sexual expression is moral if it is part of a committed, just, and equal relationship. “For many Catholics, support for marriage equality goes even deeper. They are motivated by their commitment to social justice, which is an integral part of their faith lives. Catholic social teaching requires that people be treated with human dignity, regardless of their state in life or their beliefs.” – New Ways Ministry.

Under the Catholic Catechism, sex, marriage, and surgery that interferes with reproduction seem to be prohibited for transgender people. Priests are prohibited from celebrating same-sex marriages.

The Pope’s most direct involvement in a national marriage equality debate was his statement when he said “I wish to express my appreciation to the entire Slovak church, encouraging everyone to continue their efforts in defense of the family, the vital cell of society.’

In January 2015 Pope Francis said “The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life.’ This statement belittles millions of children raised by LGBTQ parents.

Some Catholics still believe that homosexual union contradicts nature. Just because homosexuals cannot be married doesn’t mean they can’t be saintly people. Every person regardless of their orientation is called to live a life of personal holiness. Only homosexual acts are sinful. The official position of the Roman Catholic Church remains unchanged. The Catholic Church has admitted that it may be an inherited or genetic trait that is no one’s fault and says that such people have a right to respect, friendship, and justice. Same-gender sexual activity remains a sin within the Catholic Church and members are required to resist any such activities.

Some people are denied communion and funerals because they are in a same-sex marriage. Some are even refused to baptize their children.

There has been a lot of controversy about transgender in the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict XVI summarized the ability to choose one’s gender as the “epoch of sin against God the creator.”

Transgender people only make up .6 percent of the us population and 4.5 percent are LGBT based on a study from UCLA School of Law Williams Institute. There is extensive teaching on gay and lesbian sexuality but there is no universal church teaching on transgender identity. Because there is no doctrine or official policy about transgender identity, the experience that transgender Catholics experience varies depending on the parish. Some transgender people are accepted into the community, but in other situations, transgender people are mistreated.

In 2007 Colleen Fay, a Catholic woman, told her pastor and music director of her parish that she was transgender. Afterward, she was fired from her job in the church’s choir by the music director. Her thoughts were, “They don’t know what to do with us. There is no policy. There is no doctrine.” She attempted to register as a parishioner at another Catholic church multiple times. However, they said she was not registered and they had no record of her. She felt that this was because she was transgender. These experiences made her feel as though the church was asking her to choose between being transgender and being a Catholic.

In September 2015, a transgender man was denied permission to serve as a godfather by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The statement said ‘[…] the result is evident that this person does not possess the requisite of leading a life conformed to the faith and the position of godfather, therefore is not able to be admitted to the position of godmother nor godfather. One should not see this as discrimination, but only the recognition of an objective absence of the requisites that by their nature are necessary to assume the ecclesial responsibility of being a godparent.’

In 2015 Pope Francis met with a transgender Catholic and repeatedly said that gender is not a choice. In a 2017 interview, he said “Children are learning that they can choose their sex. Why is sex, being a woman or a man, a choice and not a fact of nature?” He also railed against the “biological and psychological manipulation of sexual difference” that shows gender as a “simple matter of personal choice”.”

In February 2015, Pope Francis criticized gender theory by comparing it to nuclear war and genetic manipulation. He said “Let’s think of the nuclear arms, of the possibility to annihilate in a few instants a very high number of human beings. Let’s think also of genetic manipulation, of the manipulation of life, or the gender theory, that does not recognize the order of creation.’ His comparison comes from the Catholic Church’s understanding of the gender spectrum with only men and women. It rejects the disconnection of gender identity and expression from biology. Stemmed in the story of Adam and Eve, this perspective doesn’t recognize the millions of existence and experiences of transgender and gender variant individuals who don’t fit the strict duality.

Multiple US bishops wrote a letter in December 2017 called “Created Male and Female”. They said “The socio-cultural reality of gender cannot be separated from one’s sex as male or female. … The movement today to enforce the false idea — that a man can be or become a woman or vice versa — is deeply troubling.”

Related recommendations from the Vatican say that transgender people shouldn’t be priests or even godparents, though this is not a universal Church teaching nor is it in the catechism. Doctrinal teachings associate birth with gender identity.

The National Center for Transgender Equality and the National LGBTQ Task Force reported high percentages of bullying in school, harassment on the job, and physical and sexual assault. 46 percent of trans men have attempted to commit suicide, and 42 percent of trans women have attempted to commit suicide according to the Williams Institute. Because of this high rate, some Catholics welcome transgender people. Sister Luisa Derouen, a Dominican sister in Kentucky, has been providing spiritual direction and company to transgender people. She said, “A few individual bishops have spoken publicly, with the basic message being that the Book of Genesis tells us God created human beings male and female. However, to date, there is no official position of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops or from the Vatican regarding transgender people.”

Reverend John Unni, a pastor at St. Cecilia, believes that since Jesus was open to the marginalized, they should welcome LGBT members. Catholics are told to accept everyone, especially the marginalized. When asked “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus responded by saying: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Jesus expressed that Catholics should love their neighbors. This includes LGBTQ people. Catholics accept LGBTQ people, but they do not permit any sexual activity between them and they do not recognize their weddings as they do a heterosexual wedding. God created man and women, therefore, no one should change their gender because that is the way God made you, in the likeness and image of him.

Religion has been a source of both support and suffering for many lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) Americans. While most LGBTQ members have been raised in a religion, many have been forced to leave those communities because of criticism of LGBTQ people. Recently, a growing number of organized religious groups in the United States of America have issued statements officially welcoming LGBTQ people as members of their community. Many religious organizations have also taken supportive stands on the issues that LGBTQ people face.

Dignity USA uses education, advocacy, and support to gain respect and justice for people of all sexual orientations, genders, and gender identities in the Catholic Church. New Ways Ministry educates and advocates for justice and equality for LGBTQ Catholics and reconciliation with the larger church communities. Call to Action inspires and activates Catholics to act for justice and build inclusive communities. Fortunate Families is a ministry of Catholic Family, Friends, and Allies supporting the LGBTQ+ community. They promote and facilitate a personal, meaningful, and respectful conversation with bishops, pastors, parish leaders, and dioceses. Equally Blessed is a coalition devoted to educating, supporting, and giving voice to many within the Catholic Church in the United States of America who favor equality for LGBTQ people. Catholics for Equality was founded in 2010. They support, inform, and mobilize Catholics in pushing for freedom and equality for LGBT families, parish, and community members. These organizations believe LGBT Catholics should be valued and celebrated as members of our diverse family of God. They believe that LGBTQ+ Catholics in their diversity are “members of Christ’s mystical body. We have an inherent dignity because God created us, Christ died for us, and the Holy Spirit sanctified us in Baptism, making us temples of the Spirit, and channels through which God’s love becomes visible. Because of this, it is our right, our privilege, and our duty to live the sacramental life of the Church, so that we might become more powerful instruments of God’s love working among all people.”- Dignity USA

“We also acknowledge, together with the Church, that the fullness of sexual expression is best framed in a loving committed relationship. We believe, along with mainstream science, that the homosexual orientation and experience of gender are deeply seated and cannot be reversed by prayer and/or therapy. Many of our LGBTQ+ sisters and brothers are in loving, committed relationships with persons of the same sex or persons with other gender-nonconforming expressions and ask us to embrace, accept, and love them for who they are. We do embrace them, knowing that our decision to love them – at times – places us in tension with Church teaching.” – Fortunate Families.

Some bishops, like Bishop Thomas Tobin, discourage Catholics from supporting or attending LGBTQ events during Pride Month in June. He believes that they promote a culture and encourage activities that are against the Catholic faith and morals. He also claimed that they were harmful to children. However, support would help people who are struggling with their sexual identity. Catholics who attend and support pride events are redeeming their humanity and honoring the basic dignity of the people they love in response to history, society, and culture where gay, lesbian, and transgender people have often been rejected by their religious conservative families and even by the church. Catholics who consider themselves to be “pro-life” cannot ignore the reality that LGBTQ minorities are far more likely at risk for self-harm and targeted for violence. Catholics from parishes in cities like New York, Chicago, and San Francisco have participated in pride rallies over the past years.

Catholics’ views have changed over the past years as the LGBTQ community has grown. Because we are in a new era, Catholics have adapted and have been welcoming LGBTQ members into the Catholic church. They have been supporting them in numerous ways, like organizations and support groups. Overall, Catholicism is starting to open up to LGBTQ members.

During the Gilded and Progressive Era, positive change was happening for most Americans. America was becoming an industrial power and was being reformed to be more democratic. This helped many groups who were disenfranchised at that time, but this did not include African Americans. In the time of the Gilded and Progressive Eras, the Jim Crow period was also occurring. During the Jim Crow era, many African Americans were excluded from almost every type of reform, including anything political, societal, or economic. The only thing these people were looking for was equality and to determine the best way to achieve equality they began looking towards the prominent individuals within the African American community. While many leaders helped lead the cause to help African Americans gain equality, the two leaders who made an impact within the community at that time were Booker T. Washington and W.E.B Du Bois. While they disagreed in multiple ways regarding how African Americans should receive rights, specifically which type of rights, both did achieve so much for their community. However, out of the two of them, W.E.B Du Bois did more for African Americans because he advocated for higher education, social equality, and political equality for African Americans.

While both Washington and Du Bois agreed that education was important, Du Bois believed that having a higher education was more important and beneficial for blacks than the industrial colleges. While Du Bois did acknowledge that some African Americans would thrive more efficiently in an industrial college, his overall belief was that for blacks to even have a small chance of succeeding and improving their circumstances they needed to have higher education to have teachers who could effectively educate the black community. He also believed that with the help of the Talented Tenth, which are those who are in the top ten percent of the black community with valuable skills, they could help teach the rest of the black population and it would encourage African Americans to rise up and out of their hardships and ultimately fight against the discrimination of their race. In the “Declaration of Principles” from The Niagara Movement, Du Bois said, “We favor well-equipped trade and technical schools for the training of artisans, and the need of adequate and liberal endowment for a few institutions of higher education must be patent to sincere well-wishers of the race (p. 154).” Although he did not favor the industrial colleges, Du Bois realized that during the Jim Crow era education was one of the only ways to ensure African Americans had skills that would allow them to be independent within the white-dominated society. Having an education, it did not only help individual blacks get jobs but also allowed blacks to help themselves instead of relying on others.

Despite the skills that higher education supplied to blacks, Du Bois knew that it would not be enough to bring about social equality for the African American community. He believed that for African Americans to progress socially, discriminatory barriers needed to be knocked down which meant having the white community back up the cause which seemed nearly impossible. Washington’s viewpoint of the efforts caused the whites to have an incorrect impression of what was occurring to African Americans at that time. What Washington was saying was that what the southerners were doing, including being prejudiced, was acceptable since blacks had not made any progress and remained in their current state because they chose the wrong type of higher education so it was therefore solely the blacks’ responsibility to improve the standard lifestyle within the black community. In his “Atlanta Exposition Address” he even talked about how once African Americans were freed from slavery that they began forgetting their ways and explicitly said, “… we may have overlooked the fact that the masses of us are to live by the productions of our hands and fail to keep in mind that we shall prosper in proportion as we learn to dignify and glorify common labor and put brains and skill into the common occupations of life; … (p. 126)” Although Washington did ask for blacks and whites to lend a helping hand with one another throughout the rest of the speech, he implied to the whites with that one sentence that what was happening to the blacks was because African Americans got their priorities out of line.

This was not the case at all. The truth was that because of what was going on in the South caused the blacks to remain in their current state. Until industrial universities had trained professionals from higher education colleges blacks could not have educational progress; thus this meant that until they could get the industrial universities equipped with trained professionals, African Americans needed support even while they made efforts to help themselves. Du Bois disputed Washington’s viewpoint and criticized it by implying that Washington gave the whites an excuse to not help African Americans when in reality the situation required the assistance of everyone involved and it began with the white southerners taking ownership of their wrongdoings and making things right all while the white northerners begin to actively be involved rather than just put money on the problem to make it disappear.

To help unite African Americans and whites for this cause, Du Bois helped Alexander Crummell create and organize the American Negro Academy in which black scholars would publish research in regards to the negative stereotypes of African Americans to counteract the negative impressions whites have because of blacks. In an essay known as “The Conservation of the Races,” Du Bois outlines what the academy should believe to accomplish its goals. In point four Du Bois says, “As a means to this end we advocate, not such social equality between these races as would disregard human likes and dislikes, but as such social equilibrium as would, throughout all the complicated relations of life, give due and just consideration to culture, ability, and moral wealth, whether they be found under white or black skins (p. 137).” Although the American Negro Academy was not as successful as Du Bois and Crummell intended it to be, it was a start to improving the social equality for African Americans.

While Du Bois attempted to improve social equality, he could not make a big difference because Washington’s argument allowed the whites an easy way to turn their backs on the problems involving the black community. The whites, in turn, used Washington’s speeches to argue that African Americans did not even want social or political equality even though they wanted both. Du Bois did not agree with what was being spewed by both whites and Washington so instead of waiting around for whites to change their mind he wrote an essay titled “Souls of Black Folk” in which Du Bois politically criticized Washington’s belief. Although it did make a difference, however by publishing the article backfired and caused division within the African American community.

Despite all that happened Du Bois still believed that there should be political equality, specifically universal voting rights. In “Of the Ruling of Men” Du Bois defended universal voting rights. Throughout the piece, he brings up the beliefs of others and points out the issues with them. At one point in the piece, he says, “Education is not a prerequisite to political control – political control is the cause of popular education (p. 130).” He goes on to explain that in the old assumption, there are people in the world who believe they know what is best for others than those others know for themselves, but that is not the case one bit. The reality of it is that no one knows a person better than that person. When that reasoning is applied to voting and decision-making, it does not make sense for whites to tell blacks or anyone else they cannot vote.

Eventually, after being vocal about political equality for blacks, Du Bois helped found the Niagara Movement which encouraged African Americans to take action against the challenges of racism and discrimination. Although it was unsuccessful overall, Du Bois used the experience he had with the Niagara Movement to help the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Though the NAACP appeared to be an elite social group for the Talented Tenth, it eventually began initiating lawsuits and campaigning against disenfranchisement, segregation, and lynching. African Americans started to view the NAACP as something that was doing something that was going to help their community.

W.E.B Du Bois made more of an impact than Booker T. Washington on the African Community as a whole. While yes, Du Bois did make mistakes in the way he handled making improvements for the black community, this does not discount the fact that he did make progress for all within the African American community. As Du Bois said in “Credo,” “I believe in Liberty for all men: the space to stretch their arms and their souls … uncursed by color: thinking, dreaming, working as they will in a kingdom of beauty and love (p. 152).” This was a very interesting book as it caused me to look at history regarding Washington and Du Bois deeper than I have been doing in the past. I would recommend this book to everyone who wants to dig deeper into this part of history.

Traditionally, men have been dominating sport, in terms of both participation and governance. Looking back to the first modern Olympic Games, held in Athens in 1896, women were excluded from participation. Women were only allowed to participate after four years. Although women’s presence and involvement in sports activities have gradually evolved and improved, girls and women across the world still get fewer opportunities and less investment, training, and corporate attention. The importance of sport in daily life cannot be ignored as it contributes significantly to fitness, health, economy, and self-development. It also teaches values and skills to individuals, including discipline, teamwork, respect, and perseverance. However, it is an unfortunate fact that the sports world is still plagued by inequalities between women and men. A gender-friendly climate should become a standard feature of sports institutions.

Equality between women and men is a fundamental principle of the European Union. The European Commission expressed its commitment, in both the Women’s Charter and the Strategy for Equality between Women and Men, to address and eliminate the gender gap, especially in decision-making. Following the EU Conference on Gender Equality in Sport in 2013, the proposal for Strategic Actions on Gender Equality in Sport 2014-2020 was approved. The European Commission recognizes that there is still a lot to do. Due to this, the actions and recommendations contained in the proposal encourage sports governing bodies and non-governmental organizations to develop and implement strategies for action on gender equality in sports, supported by coherent and concrete measures at the EU level. The increasing number of women participating in sports helps widen perspectives, bring in new ideas, and reach new audiences.

The European Council’s conclusions on Gender Equality in Sports encourage sports organizations to increase gender balance on executive boards and committees and in management and coaching. However, gender inequality in sports still exists in the European Union. Gender inequality exists in the decision-making bodies, coaches, gender-based violence, and media coverage.

Decision-making

Except for women-only sports organizations, when it comes to decision-making positions, women form a minority in all sports, at all levels, and in all countries. Data from the report on women in power and decision-making, prepared by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) shows that on average, only 14% of all top decision-making positions in EU Member States’ sports federations were occupied by women. The percentage of women occupation in decision-making positions ranges from 3% in Poland to 43% in Sweden. With the notable exception of Sweden, the majority of countries display a share of less than 20%. The percentage of women in decision-making positions varies across Europe and among different sports. 15% of the executives in German sports federations were women. Another study showed how 64% of the football federations did not have a single woman on their boards. Whereas three sports federations, two in gymnastics and one in aquatics had around 50% women. Women are also underrepresented in governmental sports bodies as 28% of the national sports directors in the EU Member States are women.

A 2018 study looking into 21 European NSF boards, shows that women remain markedly underrepresented. Women noticeably face many barriers and these barriers in taking on decision-making and management positions can partly be explained by the different values, attitudes, and behaviors of women and men. However, such factors correlate with equal rights, gender roles, gender regimes, and the gender order in society and these can also be considered as barriers in cultural terms. In addition, co-option processes in sports have been said to lead to ‘homologous reproduction’, meaning that leaders elect or appoint new leaders who are similar to themselves or look like themselves. Furthermore, women and men are recruited to different types of positions, which emphasizes gender segregation. This often leads women into positions with the lowest prestige. The primary reason for the inequality in decision-making positions in sports is the inevitable fact that sports organizations are dominated by a male culture. This dominance tends to either exclude or ignore large groups of women. Sports organizations are sensitive to the personal responsibilities that decision-makers hold, for example, family responsibilities. Having a decision-making position implies the need for investment of time and energy, along with a flexible home and work life. Election committees generally consisted of men and they often use subjective evaluative criteria, which men usually appear to be more qualified compared to women.

Sports governing bodies should focus on gender equality in sports. By doing so, they could take advantage of the leadership skills, and experience that women have and reflect their needs. Having women in powerful decision-making positions could mean that they play a big role in setting examples for other women. EU Member States should promote training programs to raise awareness of gender inequality. This can increase the commitment to gender mainstreaming for members who are in leading and decision-making positions. The European Commission proposed that education and training for both women and men in decision-making bodies should be promoted. Eventually, hoping to reach the objective of 40% of women on executive boards, and committees of professional sports administrations.

Women as coaches

Based on figures in 7 EU Member States, it is estimated that only 20-30% of all sports coaches in Europe are women. However, these figures seemed to be lower for the number of female coaches with qualifications for coaching. Coaching is still recognized as a gendered role, dominated by men. Looking at one of the EU Member States, the United Kingdom, 25% of more than one million coaches and 17% of the qualified coaches are women. Another example would be in Germany, about 10% of the 500 national coaches, and in elite and professional sports, 13% of the coaches are women. These figures reflect the gender distribution in different sports. Only in women-dominated sports, such as gymnastics and figure skating, do women outnumber men as coaches. These female coaches often work with women or children who compete only at the regional or local level. Studies confirm that at the elite level, the number of female coaches is very low, and they tend to be assigned roles such as caretakers or assistants to male coaches.

According to several studies, female coaches face many barriers rather than support. There are barriers at the individual level, such as low confidence, low self-efficacy, and low competence. It has been proved that in several EU Member States, more formal education programs for coaches were introduced to universities and training institutes. This succeeded in attracting more women, but the problem is that there are no specific post-program opportunities to obtain the qualifications. Furthermore, looking into the curriculum of the training programs, gender-specific topics, and gender issues are hardly recognized or mentioned. Currently, no structure in the European Union requires educational providers of coach education and qualifications in sports to incorporate gender-related components. Female coaches have experienced social and cultural barriers by dominant gender stereotypes in the sports world and are aware that strategies to alter these ideologies are limited.

The football associations throughout England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland have developed a program named “Mums on the Ball.” This program’s objective is to get mothers into coaching sessions that their children are participating in. Moreover, in the Netherlands, Muslim women were educated to become swimming instructors. Most of them even got jobs or part-time jobs at their local swimming pools. This significantly increased the number of girls learning to swim, which shows the effectiveness of having more female coaches.

Women should have equal opportunities to achieve a role as a coach in any sporting activity of their choice. In a majority of EU Member States, coaching in sports is mostly delivered by volunteers, of which legislation has little jurisdiction. This means the difficulty in the development of female coaches is enforced by law. There seems to be a necessity in action for more qualified elite-level female coaches. Sports organizations must recruit women with elite backgrounds in sports. This is because female athletes have experience that can emphasize their knowledge in sport and existing stereotypes can be eliminated. The Union must implement ethical guidelines to ensure the environment in coaching is free from gender discrimination.

Gender-based violence

Gender-based violence is present in sports and it cannot be denied. In nine European countries, data for gender and sexual harassment in sports varies between 14% and 73%. As the level of sport rises from the recreational to the elite level, it has been proven that the experience of sexual harassment increases. The most frequent form of sexual harassment in sports is verbal sexual harassment. In the case of sexual abuse in sports, meaning forced sexual activity that athletes did not want, prevalence data varies between 2% and 22%. These types of sexual abuse often occur between a young female athlete and an older powerful coach. A study from the UK found that more females than males reported sexual harassment, but more males than females reported sexual abuse. 12% of young people who play sports in the Netherlands have stated that they experienced at least one incident of unwanted sexual attention. It was revealed that 4% of minors complained of either being sexually assaulted or raped. The majority of the incidents were known to have occurred at football clubs, swimming and gymnastic clubs. In EU Member States, the concept of ‘gender-based violence’ is not largely used in the context of sport. There is a lack of leadership regarding this issue as there is no organization responsible for it.

The Treaty of Lisbon took action in December 2009, which brought sport within the remit of the EU. The Treaty does state that the EU is determined to protect the integrity of male and female athletes. However, there is no legal framework that addresses gender-based violence in sports. This shows the challenges for a fair sports environment across the Member States. The issue of gender-based violence in sports was recognized by the Greek Presidency of the Council of the European Union. This ran from January to June in the year 2014. This was mainly for a better understanding of gender-based violence in sports. Also, in May 2014, the Council of the European Union issued a document entitled Conclusions on gender equality in sport. Article 11 states the Union’s acknowledgment that violence and sexual harassment can occur in sports. Moreover, Article 24 urges “Member States to prevent gender-based violence in sport, to protect victims, and to exchange ideas on best practice in preventing and managing cases of gender-based violence ins pro.” In addition, the European Parliament adopted the Resolution on Women and Sport in 2003. Article 40 of the Resolution advises “Member States and sports federations to adopt measures for the prevention and elimination of sexual harassment and abuse in sport.” Later, in 2014, at the meeting of the European Commission’s Group of Experts on Gender Equality in Sport, a strategy document named Proposal for Strategic Actions on Gender Equality in Sport was approved. This document covers the period from 2014 to 2020 and mainly focuses on fighting gender-based violence in and through sports.

Governmental actions in Belgium, Cyprus, France, and Italy have developed initiatives to raise awareness of gender-based violence in sports. France, an EU Member State, proposed an action plan against harassment and sexual violence in sports. This action plan includes a set of actions:

1. A Charter for the Prevention of Sexual Violence in Sport, published jointly with an action plan
2. An Information and Communication Campaign beginning with the publication of the plan
3. The organization of a pilot awareness-raising activity within regional sports institutes, sports federations, regional leagues, and clubs
4. Training programs for staff (e.g. coaches)

Sports governing bodies and organizations in all EU Member States should adopt specific strategies for preventing gender-based violence in sports. This should be carried out by a policy or action that specifically assists the prevention of the issue. The European Commission should appoint experts who can guide to lead the fight, especially in Member States that have no policy or legislation.

Media coverage

In sports, women are often portrayed differently compared to male athletes. Even though there is an increasing number of female participation in sports, the media coverage emphasizes the differences between women and men in sports. Gender stereotyping in media of women and men athletes is documented and women are said to be sexualized. Female athletes are often said to be depicted in a way that ignores their achievements. This is due to the way these athletes are portrayed with emphasis on their sexual attraction rather than their strength or skills in sports. In 1995, the European Broadcasting Union created a Charter for Equal Opportunities for Women in Broadcasting. The objective of this was to “demonstrate the commitment of European Public Service Media to the rights of women working in the media, and the rights of women to a fair media portrayal.”

A study conducted in Denmark, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden suggests that except for a few events, the amount of media coverage regarding sports has not changed since the 1970s. This lack of media coverage especially on women in sports is mainly because of the low number of women experts present in media-related jobs. For women journalists, the working environment in sports media is undesirable and difficult, and having to overcome barriers and having to face opposition from male journalists and athletes is inevitable. At the 2012 London Olympics, women photographers and journalists only took up 15%. A 2018 UK survey showed that the main reason why people do not watch women’s sports is because it lacks TV coverage. The importance of media attention is significant for players and athletes as it is what boosts investment, and their status. It has been said that every EU country has a couple of female athletes able to spur large audiences. However, if sports organizations do not implement a strategy, the public’s interest will die down.

The UK Women’s Sports and Fitness Foundation (2011) recognized that women make up the majority of consumer purchasing decisions. This implies that if the female population in engagement is increased, it would benefit investors and many other brands. Sports Organizations should communicate and work with media bodies to build interest in women’s sports. In France, the Minister of Women’s Rights proposed a framework law on equality between women and men. This suggests on extending the “List of events of major importance for society” to cover more women’s sports events. Member States should review this list and include more female sporting events. To achieve a balance in gender in the sports media, the employment of women needs to be increased in the sports department of media bodies. Not only should media organizations employ more women journalists, but they should also guide along with a policy for discussion.