Equal Is Not the Same

Columbia, Missouri

July 25, 2011

12:53 p.m.

Equal is Not the Same

If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation."          --Abigail Adams, 1776

I was told recently by a man I respect greatly that in his opinion our Sole 2 Soul Walk mission was flawed.  His argument centered around the notion of equality.  “Men and women are not equal,” he asserted, implying that to “imagine a world where women are equally-valued decision makers in partnership with men worldwide,” as our mission statement suggests, is not only a vain hope, it is out of sync with the divine order of things.

As I listened intently to this accomplished and highly successful gentleman, and observed him in several contexts, both personal and professional, I realized that his view was consistent with deeply held beliefs -- more like truth principles -- to which he had dedicated his life.  In several sessions of conversations over a three-day period adding up to more than 10 hours of face to face conversation with my daughter Viveka and myself, combined with deep immersion into his domain and lifestyle, we marveled at the beauty and harmony of what he had created.  In all of the areas which I value:  consciousness, culture, community, creativity, and communication I saw nothing but integrity, consistency, wisdom, power and love operating through and through.  He had established among his family and employees a workable paradigm for a happy lifestyle.

Although he clearly admired me and our efforts and dedication to higher principle, he considered our mission to be at best misguided and therefore ultimately insignificant in the greater scheme of things.  Our espoused cause added up to a waste of time and therefore was doomed to fail. 

As I lack the skills of debate I did not enter into an argument or try to defend my position.  I was in his territory, after all, a place where he presided.  Rather, I listened intently to his point of view in order to understand how it was that I could love and admire someone so deeply and still feel, and maybe even fear, that we could not resolve our differences and come into a place of unity. 

So what were the differences that appeared unresolvable between us?  I believe it was the idea of subjection: the principle that men take precedence over women in the hierarchy of things, and therefore are entitled to a “divine authority” over them.  Perhaps this is an oversimplification, but it has implications and ramifications that can lead to injustice in my view.

Clearly my discontent stems from personal experience in my family history where male dominance was asserted, and women (and children) were expected to comply with demands which did not seem to take their ideas and needs into consideration.  In a society where “all men are created equal,” some were definitely more “equal” than others, and women, long considered as “property” were discounted as decision-makers, and were expected to go along with those in authority -- even when they perceived that authority not to be in their best interests, nor in the best interests of the whole.  Insubordination to the dominant authority was met with forceful wrath, violence and abuse. 

This was clearly not the case in the example of my esteemed friend, for those in his community had freely subjected themselves to his authority and leadership.  But I could not help but wonder what would be the position of women who are unmarried and / or choose to remain so, or widowed, or seek a greater measure of independence or autonomy?  How are such women viewed by this strictly patriarchal system?  Their gifts may go largely undervalued and underutilized.  And what about the males who do not fit into the “alpha male” paradigm?  Would they be found unworthy?

In a theocracy these questions are resolved differently from a monarchy or a democracy or a republic or a dictatorship or even a tribal council.   The huge question that Viveka and I have been asking ourselves from the very beginning -- in our relationship as in every human endeavor -- “How are decisions made?”  Where does the power lie, and how is it wielded? 

There is a lot of confusion in the world today around this questions of equality, inclusion, and authority -- for there are many different models, different methods for coming into unity.  Since beginning this inquiry, I have seen that it begins within the individual, not between individuals.  Each individual has a whole council within him or her, all vying for a voice around the table of consciousness.  How does one rule this unruly tribe within, where very often ego has been allowed to rule.  Even as a woman, I have experienced both “masculine” and “feminine” aspects of myself, and am constantly aware of the need to balance these energies within myself in order to function effectively.  Personally, I have found it more satisfying to submit to a “higher power” than to a temporal authority, whether it be a parent, a boss, or a government official.  If my allegiance to that higher power is first established -- as in “Seek first the Kingdom of G-d and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you,” I can support the authority of others over me when I know that it is also motivated by the same allegiance.  On the other hand, when I do not sense that righteous authority is being properly asserted, I find myself in conflict, and must speak up.  Finding my voice and overcoming my conditioning as a female to remain silent has been one of the most challenging aspects of this walk.

To walk one’s talk, one must also talk one’s walk, and that is what I am learning.

*   *   *

I began this essay with the hidden assumption that men and women are and should be equal -- an assumption that has not been shared by human society at large.  At best it has recently received some lip service.  While I would agree that male and female are not the same, just as two sides of an equation are not the same, yet there is, in my view, a spiritual equality that links them together.  Two sides of the equation appear very different and yet they are the same in a very real sense.  As it says in the book of Genesis, “Let US create man in OUR image.  Male AND female created He them.”    This implies a plural agency at work -- a creative divinity that is BOTH masculine and feminine -- or as some have suggested, NEITHER masculine NOR feminine!  (my italics and capitalization)    

My powerful (and charming) friend did allow that women, although not “equal,”  were very possibly “more equal” than men.  He elaborated on this paradox by explaining that in his estimation women are worthy of the greatest respect and consideration in the marriage relationship.  He then described the process by which he and his wife made decisions:  they discussed the issues and alternatives and came to a point of agreement.  They worked together in their marriage at becoming unified and acting as one.

Several days later a word came to me that seemed to satisfy me in expressing how it is that equality does not have to imply sameness -- thus, the title of this piece “Equal Is Not the Same.  If we were to recognize and celebrate our uniqueness and individuality we could rightly call both men and women not merely equal, but UNIQUAL.

Thus are equality and uniqueness abiding together in a single concept.  I will sleep better knowing that my friend and I can possibly agree on a notion that leads to more powerful and more satisfying partnerships between men and women.