I vaguely remembered a conversation I had with JB a few weeks ago. It was late in the night, I was bored and was browsing Givenchy, he was tired and was feeling argumentative and needed much verbal cuddling.

“You know why I like you?”

“Um… because I have breasts and I haven’t slept with J yet?”

“…No. I don’t even want to know where you got that idea. “

“Do enlighten me, then.”

“It’s because you’ve finally gotten out of the pseudo-feminism era of the 1960’s and have finally embraced your gender. It’s refreshing to see a girl who’s trying to play the game by her own rules.”

“But you guys play by my rules anyway. Why should I bother?”

“Perhaps because nobody else coddles and manipulates others to playing by their rules.”

While I don’t remember the entirety, I remembered this snatch of conversation yesterday and started wondering. There are so many women who are very gung-ho on “equality between men and women”, and then there are Charlie’s Angels, and then there’s Marilyn Monroe. But who actually is the closest to achieving “equality between men and women”?

I first decided to examine the “gung-ho”s. Sure, they recite the feminism manifesto, but after all they seem to be playing by the men’s rules, not the women’s. This is frivolous case but the “Men wear trousers, why can’t I” first takes the priorities based on what men prefer for themselves, thereby judging completely according to men’s priorities. Besides, men can’t wear skirts, so why should women be able to wear trousers to work? (And from now on I’m going to sleep with a gun next to my pillow so I don’t get murdered by the feminists).

I then went to the polar opposite – Marilyn Monroe. This, too, was not achieving the fairness that we all seek. While the former is trying to become a man, the latter is trying to become a man’s plaything and that never really is fairness. It’s fun having a sugar daddy and getting pampered, but that is only fun as far as there are no compensations required. So no.

So I’m starting to think that Sabrina Duncan has the right idea. Be feminine, use that weapon to fight the battles. Men use their masculinity to fight their battles, why can’t women use their femininity to fight theirs? That’s the only fairness that can be relatively agreeably achieved. Sure, Bosley can also probably get the jobs done, but Sabrina probably is better in those missions against men. So which is more efficient and painless?

Going back to the conversation. I can never beat JB in Physics and IM is far wiser than me and J has far more energy and IC is far stronger when it comes to last minute jobs. I’ll never be the girl who can carry 400lb. And I’m fine with that. JB can’t write as well as I do, IM can’t carry out experiments as efficiently, J can’t write thank-you notes and IC sucks at organising. So we all have our jobs.

Men and women are fundamentally different and for some reason even the cleverest women are dragged around by men (take Steve and Miranda, for instance). Men say up then down and women panic; women say left then right, men stops listening and just keep moving forward. Katy Parry sang that boys are hot then cold, yes then no, in then out, up then down, but I think girls do that too; it’s just that while girls notice it, get bothered about it, and make a fuss of it, guys just moving at their own paces without getting bothered by their counterparts’ behaviours.

There can never be a corpus callosum between men and women, but there can be google translate.