Firstly, is it possible to be completely inclusive?  Is it redundant that I phrased my question that way?  Inclusive literally means everything and everyone, depending on the situation.

Thus begging a plethora of questions: can there be a mostly inclusive thing, or a partially inclusive thing?  Does ‘completely inclusive’ technically exist?  

Secondly, gender equality.  It’s actually a paradox.  While the concept seems logical, how can a gender be equal when they are not the same?  Conversely, how can we broadly define everyone under the category of ‘people’ and then give them exact equal opportunity?

A biological male cannot carry a pregnancy to term, therefore a biological male doesn’t need maternity leave.  A biological woman can carry a pregnancy to term, therefore a biological woman deserves maternity leave.  Because that same biological man does not take absence from his job due to child-birth, he has the opportunity for a raise.

The same biological woman is not qualified for a raise, due to her maternity leave.  Is this a form of equality because biologically they are fundamentally different, subsequently receiving equally different benefits?  Did I just explain the wage gap crisis?       

Thirdly, if there were no problems anywhere – no definitions to ponder, no inequities – would we be passionate about anything?  If we actually lived in Utopia, would we be happy?  Should we be grateful for the issues that thwart and divide us, because without them we would merely be existing?   

Some of these questions seem like a never-ending, multifaceted debate.  Will there ever be a winner – a mere settling point; something to agree on – when all of the intersections have such stimulating perspectives to offer? … I guess that’s why we go to college, right?  

Think about it.