# Gender Roles



## CaramelChocolate (Nov 9, 2004)

I know Gurus said equality, but did they set gender roles? The reason I ask is because of the names men and women have in Sikhism: Princess for women, Lion for men.
This kind of implies to me that maybe women are expected to look pretty and men are meant to be fierce warriors...
Also, women give birth and maintains the child in her womb for nine months... So did Ik Ongkar really intend for each group to have a specific role in society?

~CaramelChocolate~
The little philosopher


----------



## GushK (Nov 9, 2004)

As a quick point to note,
Singh and Kaur could be for gender distinction rather than roles, because sikh first names are normally gender neutral and can be used for both sexes.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Nov 9, 2004)

GushK said:
			
		

> As a quick point to note,
> Singh and Kaur could be for gender distinction rather than roles, because sikh first names are normally gender neutral and can be used for both sexes.


Nobody does that. Good in theory but not practiced


----------



## GushK (Nov 9, 2004)

hmm....not sure
I know a couple of girls who have the same names as my brother and myself.
If you give me a name, i could probably tell you people of either gender who have that name, though you're right, there are some definite gender specific names.

some examples :-
Surinder Kaur
Surinder Singh

Gursharan Singh
Gursharan Kaur

Prabhdeep Singh
Prabhdeep Kaur

Nirmal Singh
Nirmal Kaur


----------



## S|kH (Nov 10, 2004)

I think there are gender roles, BUT equality is/should be present.

I hold gender roles amongst my female friends, and cousins, but they remain equal...matter of fact I tend to hold women in higher respect than men.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Nov 10, 2004)

S|kH said:
			
		

> I think there are gender roles, BUT equality is/should be present.


I agree. But, some may see gender roles as inequality...
Also, if gender roles are assigned to people, does this really mean caste roles are wrong? Maybe not... Maybe caste roles are needed BUT we should treat all castes as equal [none of this untouchable rubbish].

~CaramelChocolate~
The little philosopher


----------



## S|kH (Nov 10, 2004)

Your getting it wrong though, caste was abolished because it was something *inherited* which was possible to change, it was nothing natural.

Caste roles are needed in that, a doctor who earned his degree, should be a doctor, and a janitor should be a janitor...but they should be treated with the same level of respect and dignity. 

Gender roles can be seen as inequality to some, but then again, so can every little thing. Gender, you can not change, so it has some limitations upon role.

Gender role - Mother having her baby. Not possible for a man to do that...is that inequality?, I'd say its just natural.

But again, everyone draws their own lines on this.

Castes were renounced because it relies on lineage rather than what you accomplish in your lifetime. Guru Nanak said judge ones by ones own actions, not by the actions of his great great father. If your great grandfather was a farmer, you should not be judged like a farmer and assumed that your IQ is of a farmer too.


----------

