Dear Mon Droit, As a Generation Z, university student; the recent attack on the role of men by Pranay Jha in the University of Sydney’s newspaper, Honi Soit, as well as the incendiary debate on Sunrise between Van Badham and Mark Latham regarding feminism, has prompted and compelled me to write this letter in response. Pointedly, it is clear that the world continues to change and morph significantly, at a rate quicker than most could have ever imagined. Within the last 40 years, women have entered and even dominated the workforce in some industries, became inspiring leaders of powerful nations and are now the higher represented gender at tertiary education institutions. Although, despite the ongoing falsehoods promoted by mistaken ‘feminists’ and ‘neo-feminists’, it is very, very clear that the standing of men and women in society are not, and will never be, the same. This does not mean men and women will never be equal. The concepts of being the ‘same’ and ‘equal’ are significantly different. The concept of ‘sameness’ implies that men’s and female’s role in society will homogenise, and therefore converge and ultimately collide. Although some will assure you this somehow sounds good and will be beneficial for the world – this could not be further from the truth. This is because that since the beginning of time, it has been apparent that there are significant anatomical and biological differences between men and women that cannot and will not ever be ignored. So instead of feminists striving for women to be the ‘same’ as men, they should diverge and focus on their original objective of ‘equality’. So what is ‘equality’? It isn’t working in the same jobs as men and it certainly isn’t being paid the same to play sport as men. Equality describes the view that the unique contribution that a woman offers to society through her anatomical and biological differences is equally appreciated as the unique contribution that a man offers to society through his anatomical and biological differences. It is a concept that many fail to grasp. In late 2012, a research report, conducted by Marco Del Giuduce of Italy’s University of Turin and Tom Booth of the UK’s University of Manchester, involved getting 10,000 American’s to undertake a variety of tests that measured 15 different personality traits. Guess what they found? You already know the answer: Men and women are remarkably different. Men were found to be more: dominant, reserved, utilitarian, vigilant and rule-conscious. Women were found to be more: deferential, warm, trusting and sensitive. This, and many other studies, confirm the same findings. So what does this mean? Throughout your lives, “play to your strengths” is an adage that I am sure has been often repeated by your parents, teachers, and employers – to the point that it may almost be cliché. But this piece of guidance could be perhaps the most valuable advice ever given to you. This leads me to the question: why aren’t we, as a human race, content on playing to our strengths? This is a question I cannot answer. What I can say is, to those men and women who feel that they want to engage in an activity or profession that do not reward and incentivise the unique characteristics of their gender – go for it. But just like certain races having an advantage over others in sport, do not complain when the economics and results of your endeavours do not go your way. The rise of Donald Trump can be partly attributed to those who deny and ignore the strength’s of their unique gender characteristics, as those frustrated with the misalignment of gender roles and ultimately the degradation of human nature now finally have a political outlet to channel their voice. Equality will be achieved. Sameness, never. – Anonymous, 20 Sydney University If you have a letter for Mon Droit send an editor a message on Facebook.