Women and men are commonly seen as having different strengths and weaknesses. Is it right to exclude males or females from certain professions because of their gender?
Traditionally men and women work in different fields. Though they have always worked together to build a better world, a subtle difference has always been there in the types of employment they have done. The modern world has changed this perspective to a great extent despite some people’s old-fashioned views that a woman should look after the family and a man should be the bread winner. In my view, gender equality is far more important than considering which sectors are more suitable for a particular gender and which are not.
Some people might present traditional arguments regarding the suitability of some posts for females and some others for male, but the modern era teaches us otherwise. In fact, greater freedom of choice in terms of employment can accelerate the development of a nation than the old way of distributed work pattern. For instance, it is believed by many that a female is more suitable for a profession that requires tenderness and caring while men are more adept in doing tasks those demand more physical strength. Thus, according to their opinion, more women should become nurses or teachers than males while logging, mining, and construction works should be solely done by males.
However, making occupations more open to both genders have distinctive advantages and in certain cases, mixed-gender work environment outperforms the single-sex workplace. For instance, having an all-female hospital is quite challenging and not a pragmatic idea at all. Men and women can bring diverse perspectives and approaches to a job and a school with both male and female teachers has better teaching environment than a single-sex-teacher one. It is quite logical that a female patient would feel more comfortable to consult with a female doctor while a female police would better understand the domestic violence and bring superior strategies for dealing with the problems. Though traditional view does not support women to become doctors or police, we can definitely understand their needs.
To conclude, innovation and advantages the gender equality in job sectors can bring is far-reaching and have greater benefits for the society. The time has come for us to break the traditional and outdated belief of gender-suitable-profession.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-16 | SanFer | 84 | view |
| 2019-03-09 | Saira Faiz | 73 | view |
| 2019-03-09 | Saira Faiz | 73 | view |
| 2019-03-09 | Saira Faiz | 56 | view |
| 2019-03-09 | Saira Faiz | 78 | view |
- Women and men are commonly seen as having different strengths and weaknesses. Is it right to exclude males or females from certain professions because of their gender? 73
- Large shopping malls are replacing small shops. What is your opinion about this? 78
- Some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 61
- People today often buy new things instead of fixing the old things. Discuss the causes and effect of this.What are the causes of this trend? What do they affect on themselves and others? 73
- For many shopping malls are great places to spend their leisure time and meet others People however in the past mostly visited those when necessary To what extent do you think this is a negative trend 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...a particular gender and which are not. Some people might present traditional ar...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, regarding, so, thus, while, for instance, in fact, in my view, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1913.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 360.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31388888889 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11705657098 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561111111111 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.1814775106 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.533333333 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.93333333333 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198573244753 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0695432074275 0.084324248473 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0425771907577 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116073433344 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0367368330352 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.