In today's worldview, men and women have been viewed as two separate beings, both physically and psychologically (Lorber, 725). The interior and exterior mapping of bodies remains unchanged for centuries. The only variables are the justifications for gender inequality. Many people are familiar with the common comparison of the two sexes in sports, personal situations and workplaces, simply based on physiological or biological aspects. Established differences result in separate genders that would not prevail without a culture that causes divisions, groupings, and categories. In Judith Lober's work, she passionately delves into the issue of gender inequality, highlighting how it all begins with fundamental physiological differences and how society transforms these dissimilarities into a sociopolitical aspect from a biological perspective (Lorber, 733).Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay This essay delves into Lober's compelling literature that presents statistical evidence, research-based assessments, and his opinion on the gender issues people face daily across the nation in the fight for equality sexes. Judith Lober is one of the most widely read gender theorists in the modern world, reinforced by her role as a professor at the City University of New York and Brooklyn College, where she teaches women's studies and sociology. . Lober's decision to write about gender inequality is informed by her training. She has written a few books, including: Gender Inequality: Feminist Theories and Policies: Degenderism and Feminist Change and Paradoxes (Evans, 24). Lober has received several awards due to her consistent spotlight on issues related to gender inequality. In the lecture delivered by Lober, no particular event inspired his literature, but his inspiration came from a chain of situations and events. she had to convey the reflection to her listeners. The prerequisite was that there was or was a social precondition to divide people. Lober's literature clearly presents and discusses the inevitable and specific reality that women and men are divided into women and men simply on the basis of bodily variations (Lorber, 732). The creation of these two categories leads to stigmas that hold these genders back and dictate the roles and responsibilities they must assume. Lober considers these to be cultural creations that lead to division through rules laid down by generations of social influence. The extensive research Lober did and her involvement in the feminist and socialist world allowed her to conduct massive studies and led to a developmental understanding of the inner workings of society and a compelling conclusion that inspired her lecture. We can assume that the audience to whom the lecture was given consisted of a few intrigued students, graduates, faculty, and members of Brooklyn College. Currently, the audience has evolved and involved many readers ranging from academic writing to investigation as well as the work of Judith Lober. followers. Through his intellectual abilities and as a teacher, his intentions brought awareness to his readers and inspired some change in society. On the other hand, it is obvious that Lober wants to reach out to her skeptics when she states: "I am not saying that physical variations between bodiesmasculine and feminine do not exist, but these differences have no social meaning until social practices transform them into facts. » (Lober, 731). This statement not only provokes thought among skeptics and readers, but also approaches the topic with a valid argument that strongly supports every statement Lober made during his lecture. In Lober's transcribed speech, there is much persuasive material that seeks to persuade the audience using rhetorical methods. The way she conveys valuable information with normal ease that influences the reader in a commendable way (Evans, 76). Building on Lober's philosophy, she is authorized to provide comprehensive and substantive information due to her background in gender studies and her continued engagement in the socialist and gender equality movement. Its consistent content is supported by studies, interviews and statistical data. For example, in her opening speech, she gives a history of the creation and growth of power that divided the two sexes (Lorber 732). Scientific studies and discoveries then created modern excuses for society to produce variations that presented more struggles for women and these powers were created by man. In further research, Lober presented an interview of six medical specialists conducted by Suzanne Kelser in 1990 (Lober, 727). In this study, it was found that children were classified as boys or girls based solely on the size of their penis. It is unfortunate that many existing physiological attributes are gender-determining, giving society the ability to divide the two sexes based on their physical characteristics. The same criteria are used in the Olympic Games where each distribution is based on the existing natal factor of athletic ability and genetic material. Lober's application of pathos helps him connect with his listeners and readers, as well as his studies in many ways. Being a woman, it is evident that she has first-hand experience with issues of sexism and gender discrimination. As an educated professor and renowned scholar, one can easily guarantee that she has experienced her fair share of skeptics and skeptics who only served as a basis for her valuable opinions and research. On the other hand, Lober uses the word “we” in the closing remarks of his lecture in order to connect with his supporters and audience (Lober, 733). Intentional association with the audience makes her on par with them, rather than superior. His association with the public places him in the cultural stigma and automatically includes him in society. Throughout her lecture, she provides undeniable facts and studies on issues of gender inequality. Lober emphasizes to his listeners that as a culture there is a tendency to group things and people into defined groups. This division is evident across religious affiliations, ethnic groups, genders, and educational backgrounds. Regardless of the truth of existing biological differences, it is socially "right" to point out these differences and then deliver a farewell speech that not only lacks understanding and acceptance, but also provokes dangerous generalizations regarding desires, the conventional skills and behaviors of each gender. The question of female inequality is not, and has not existed for some time, simply a woman's question (Evans, 88). Men are stuck by social stigmas just like women. Conversely, this stigmatization is not accompanied by the division of?”