Because the mothers are the ones who transmit the culture generation through generation. If there is not understanding among human beings we, mothers, must take some responsibility for it!
I am not stating that human beings are equals. Although I am a firm defender of the idea that we all DESERVE the same, because we have, anthropologically speaking, the same basic NEEDS. BUT men are women are not equals in every level, which means, plainly, that we are different. Not two people are equal, a basic rule for tolerance we learn at a very early age, a tool to improve our social interaction through our life; And why we should, anyway? The more gregarious we are taught to be (I am not from the "school" that believes that everything is learned; How to explain the bizarre fact that children in new guinea are able to find joy in eating worms and raw meats while we struggle with toddlers that refuse to eat absolutely any substance and end up settling for hating only few foods ranging from peas (Juulia) to whipped cream (Joonas) without any particular reason?) the less adequate we would feel in settings different from our own comfortable sphere. In short, being gregarious is limiting one´s ability to integrate. But returning to my point, males and females distinctions can be perceived by any person who has had a child and observes how children behaviour is naturally inclined to either or gender. I consciously did not use at home labels that could lead my kids to adopt positions of any kind. I avoided the use of adjectives as feminine, masculine, ugly, good or bad. Not that I did not teach them, I simply choose words that would describe everything in more objective ways such as efficient, quick, clean, long, soft, square, etc. By the time the arrived to school (7) they did not have an interiorized idea of what ugly or beautiful might be or rather anything could be either or...They could not write descriptions of people in terms of fat, thin, pretty or gaunt, they couldn't detect homelessness by the looks. Their writings contained instead a wide range of other characteristics that very well served the same purpose, and I am glad about it. The toys were also never chosen according to the gender, However, Emil was obsessed with moving things, cars, trains, planes and legos and Juulia entered in the pink stage without any external influence, all by her self. She ignored the train tracks and the brio systems and concentrated on the soft toys and the barbies. Emil had the barbie and the ken and Juulia got plenty of Lego sets just as well! I insist! I never indicated which toys were who's and what was "appropriate" to whom but they made their choices. Now we can see the exact thing happening to Joonas. He plays 5 minutes with Juulia´s dolls while he can stay hours messing up Emil´s room. There is a good, very good book that talks about the matter, just published in Spain with this title:
EL SEXO DEL CEREBRO: LA DIFERENCIA FUNDAMENTAL ENTRE HOMBRES Y MUJERES by Francisco J. Rubia.It is worth reading if only just to finish and settle the endless nonsensical disputes about equality.
The male condition from the New York Times, from 2005, but still current.
And why not to complete a good background and form opinion combining these with a notion about high and low cultural contexts? It seems more important to understand than to be understood....it seems at least more intelligent!