Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks.
The author argue that the men and women are not equally treated for many works because of their naturally boned physical differences. I partially agree with that men and women are not equally suited for many tasks. However, even the trend of feminism fashion through the whole areas in Korea, the part of tasks still describes the invisible gap between the gender difference. Therefore, I oppose the opinion who aid both of sex should be treated in the all the tasks.
Admittedly, copious of fields seems fair enough to say current status of women in my society equal to those of men. jobs requiring ability of on intelligence have been increased recently. For example, since the beginning of the advent of computer, occupation which demand the high quality of reasoning stilly accelerated; programmer, reverse engineer, application programmer and server manager. In addition, the tasks with creativity either shows less relevant to gender issue. From now on, Google, one of the prestigious company in the world, will lead the increment of job requiring creativity and reasoning. Thus, the rate of identically handling labor without considering the sex will be increase in the total number of job markets. even though these explanation describe well for conclusion fairly treatment of gender issue in many tasks, we should consider several factors to strength and support inference.
First, the distinction between the sexes nothing to squeeze in some areas. Although statistically the legislation women's social position have been guaranteed enough number of seats for women in the field of civil servant or soldier in recent few years, the disparity between the sexes still remain a huge gap in the percentage of people of National assembly. this data can explain the relevance of the men for politics and assembly related occupation.
Second, The process for a professional soldier has distinct regulation between sexes in all examination such as doing sit-up, running, or press-up. Of course, speaking of propriety and adequacy, this rules seem quite fair taking account of the disparity between the sexes. According to this example, some tasks need to regard and acknowledge the distinct gender. For example, who should be in charge of cleaning men and women's bathroom? In the superb condition, the person with same-sex take the cleaning of their bathroom sounds proper. If we try to impartially and evenly this task, then everybody should to endure the ashamedness every moment they go to the toilet.
Third, men's physical ability works well in daily life's task. For instance, when we would to fix the fluorescent light in the high, taller person might be proper and the possibility men are taller than the women highly examined. Furthermore, when making clothes and tasks demanding thoughtful consideration effectively be allowed for women.
In conclusion, though there are lots of example we can discuss on the gender issue such as the cases mentioned above, it is hard to generalize whether men and women should be dealt with impartially or not.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 12, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'argues'.
Suggestion: argues
The author argue that the men and women are not equally ...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 446, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on who aid both of sex should be treated in the all the tasks. Admittedly,...
^^
Line 1, column 470, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hould be treated in the all the tasks. Admittedly, copious of fields seems fair...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 117, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Jobs
...en in my society equal to those of men. jobs requiring ability of on intelligence ha...
^^^^
Line 5, column 738, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Even
...ase in the total number of job markets. even though these explanation describe well ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 750, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this explanation' or 'these explanations'?
Suggestion: this explanation; these explanations
...otal number of job markets. even though these explanation describe well for conclusion fairly tre...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 36, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'sexes'' or 'sex's'?
Suggestion: sexes'; sex's
... First, the distinction between the sexes nothing to squeeze in some areas. Altho...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 360, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...centage of people of National assembly. this data can explain the relevance of the m...
^^^^
Line 9, column 453, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...litics and assembly related occupation. Second, The process for a professional s...
^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 341, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ation effectively be allowed for women. In conclusion, though there are lots of ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, still, then, therefore, third, thus, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, of course, speaking of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 58.6224719101 130% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2586.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 493.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24543610548 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70384102108 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 284.0 215.323595506 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576064908722 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 791.1 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9381977824 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.75 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5416666667 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.25 5.21951772744 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 7.80617977528 128% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308648816911 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0859961782145 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.131466996608 0.0758088955206 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160324733546 0.150359130593 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.134396844157 0.0667264976115 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.1392134831 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 100.480337079 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.