OK, this article made no sense to me. Or rather, the premise of equality being presented by the women of Pamplona made no sense to me:
The students say it’s only logical that women should have their own bull-run.
“Cows, as well as bulls, have four legs and a natural instinct to run,” says their manifesto. “An encierro for cows, would put Pamplona at the vanguard of traditional fiestas with equality for men and women.” – [Yahoo/Reuters]
Is it just me, or do some of the ideas put forth in the name of gender equality sound more like exercises in gender separatism instead? Equality, as I understand it, means that no one is restricted from doing something simply because of gender, race, creed religion, lifestyle etc. I applaud anyone who actively promotes the ideal of gender equality, but isn’t the idea of a gender specific event anathema to the whole idea of gender equality?
How is having a “women only”
bull cow run any better than a “mens only” bull run? Aren’t they both equally sexist? And it’s not like bulls are used because they are male, but rather because, from my understanding, they are more aggressive than cows. None of this makes any sense to me, especially since women have been allowed to run along side the men for years. Can someone explain to me how a womens only run would foster gender equality? If these women want equality, why don’t they just organize to run alongside the men? As far as I can tell, no one is preventing them from doing so. Wouldn’t that be the best way to demonstrate that women are equal to men?
Women demand female Pamplona bull run, with cows – [Yahoo/Reuters]