This was super fun to write.

30 minutes of my writing (so you will see the errors...there are many).

I was given a grade of 5/6. I need 4.5 to get into my program. Or a 154 on the verbal section. I think I'm going to get in. So that's exciting.

I need to leave more time to proofread and apparently I always have to write a conclusion paragraph, even though those things are STUPID. Like...were you paying attention to what I said? Guess not. Let me say it again in other words. Sigh.

I really wish I had gotten a 6. 

Also, the question for this essay was not copy-pasteable, but it was something like, "Men and women are physically different, so they are better suited for many different tasks." Pfffft. It depends entirely on what you mean by "many." 

I personally really don't think it's that many. 

***

I object to the the claim's qualification of "many"; If we were to compare the tasks that are ideal for most men and the tasks that are ideal for most women, the vast majority of the number of tasks would fall within the overlapping area. While it is true that men and women are not physically the same, we are more alike than we are different. Therefore, I strongly disagree with this statement, and even object to its subtle hints of perverted adherence to a primeval male patriarchal order through its oversimplified phrasing and socio-historical context.

Let us start by thinking about tasks that are clearly only possible, let alone suitable, for women. Can a man grow a baby inside his body for nine months, birth that baby through his nonexistant birth canal, and then proceed to breastfeed him or her for the next two years or more? Scientists have thus far been utterly unable to replicate human wombs; in India, women sell their services as surrogate birth mothers every day. Millions of people pay billions of dollars for In Vitro Fertilization; they cannot outsource this task to a machine. So far, there is no other way for a child to enter this world than through contact with a female uterus. Therefore we can unequivocally state that there is at least one universal task relevant to all human beings for which men are utterly unsuited. As for birth canals and lactation, it is possible to be born via C-section, to live on a diet of only formula, and even for men to take lactation-inducing hormones which allow them to physically sustain a baby through the first few months to years of their life. Still, even though these tasks are not universal to all human beings, we can say with great confidence that female anatomy is much better suited - designed, even - for their performance.

Let us next start thinking about tasks that are best suited for men. In general, men are bigger, stronger, physically faster, have deeper voices, are better at visualizing 3D objects in their minds, and can both become physically aroused and reach orgasm much faster. Neither are these inherent physical differences universal to all men, nor do they constitute the entire breadth of male capacity and potential. If you were to compare a female olympic athlete to an average sedentary computer scientist, she would physically outmatch him in strength, speed, endurance, and possibly even size. Hypersexual women exist who could rival the time of any male arousal-to-ejaculation cycle. This generalization really depends so much on the specific men and women about whom one is speaking.

Now let us consider the breadth, depth, and quality of the tasks suited for both genders. Men and women are both people equipped with bodies, brains, hearts, feelings, emotions, memories, psychology, relationships, and so much more. Our human genome is almost physically identical. The most compelling reasons and examples to challenge my position are not universal to all men and women, not frequent occurences in daily life, and are in no way representative of the qualifier "many." The number of tasks for which men and women are equally suited far exceeds the number of tasks for which our physical differences matter. In the end, it is both the lack of qualification of what group of men or women we are talking about and mostly the tiny adjective "many" to which I object so strongly.