Gender Equality and Sexual Dimorphism

The Paris Olympics started on July 26th. It did not start smoothly. France had just had an election, and no single party won a majority. Despite three alliances being formed, none of them won the majority.

The good news is that the games proceeded as planned, though somewhat subdued. The first day of the Olympics, which usually starts with an opening event of fun and pageantry, was marred by rain and, according to news reports, by a sabotage of the Paris fast train system.

At one time, only amateurs were allowed to participate and compete against each other at the Olympics. Everything changed with the 1992 Barcelona Games, when professional athletes and sportsmen were officially allowed to compete. The critical term is “officially” because it used to be a complex cat-and-mouse game when some professionals tried to compete as though they were amateurs. Sports appear to be driven by money, just as many other areas of our lives are.

Far away from Paris, I looked in the morning newspapers for news about the Olympics. One of the headlines caught my eye. It says gender equality is the ‘right thing’. This was a surprise to me. Are they going to get women to compete equally with men? Would this be fair, considering that men and women have different physiques and, therefore, different abilities?

However, the article is mainly about issues involving money, including pay disparities, prize money and media coverage. These issues affect how much women athletes earn compared with men. How much you can make from your sporting abilities now drives many decisions. Sports is becoming like a business, and many decisions are based on the profitability of the sporting event.

As money now drives many decisions in sports, it should not be surprising that a day will come when drugs will also be ‘officially’ allowed in sports. There have been many cases of athletes and sports organisations using drugs to enhance their performances. Those without the ability to hide this are caught and disqualified from the event and, in some cases, prevented from participating in the event for years.

It would not be surprising if money changes this, and some form of drugs would one day be officially allowed. Perhaps the boundaries of which drug is allowed and which drug is not allowed are already being tested.

When I spotted the two butterflies in Mac Ritchie Reservoir. I was amazed. I thought I was witnessing two different species of butterflies mating and was wondering what kind of hybrid would be produced and how it would affect the female butterfly’s choice of where to lay her eggs. I wondered whether the hybrid caterpillars would eat the leaves from the same species of plants. Where would the female butterfly lay its eggs? Which tree would it choose?

I found out that the two butterflies are of the same species. There is marked sexual dimorphism. The uninitiated butterfly observer, like me, jumped to the conclusion that they are of two different species. Sexual dimorphism is quite common in animals, and bird watchers know that males and females of many species are different.

The choice of mates is most likely why the most elaborate and sexually dimorphic traits arose in animals.

Humans are also dimorphic. However, humans are more complex than other animals. In humans, these differences are further enhanced by what they wear to attract each other.

They can and would cover themselves with clothes and jewellery to make themselves look different. It gets more complicated when money is involved. There could be more money gained when they are more completely covered. On the other hand, some can earn more when they are less well covered.

Money has a big impact on human behaviour. The lure of money is difficult to resist. Humans must learn to know when they have enough. Such is the lure of money that many things are done now, like research and health care, can probably be done better if those involved can acknowledge and accept when they have enough.