Feminism is Equality, not Strength

 Today I got my team of local school leavers and ultimate secondary school class students which I mentor into a discussion, we carefully navigated what it is, for us as gender conceptualized beings with exacting roles-what equality means to them, I asked? Should it be based on physical strength, as some have stated it should be, or the obvious genital which an individual are assigned or obtained, or conservative and religious teaching asserted by our holy books? 

A proactive and progressive young woman of 16 years, clare by name spoke first: " I have heard men even some women base equality on the aforementioned terms, strength, smartness, responsibility, doctrine, genitals claiming that they(men) are better and so therefore should be considered first.....when it comes to strength, MOST men may be stronger than women but what of those who do not fall in the shade of most and some women are physically stronger than, are we going to call them women or consider them second to women because they're less stronger, smarter or even have less responsibility to handle". she continued "I don't think equality should be judged on any base, I think it should stand on its own, I'm treated or paid or respect the way I'm been done, not because I'm a woman or a man but because I'm qualified to be done so. gender identity and equality are never the same thing, one is factoring people into groups base on their sex, genital or personality the other is looking at this group although they might be different and still accord them the same respect not withstanding any of their different traits".

we just stood there mouth caped and started clapping and I said "and that's a damn good answer".