"... it's a much harder job for a man,

... that's why male escorts charge a lot more than women do." tells an interviewed Kevin to Katie Glass in her article on male prostitutes (published in the Sunday Times Magazine on the 10/7/11 - cannot provide a link as The Sunday Times requests a subscription).
The comment enraged me and I want to reflect on why it has striken a cord. Has it upset me because is based on old assumptions and works at reinforces them? Did I want to reflect on why it is harder for a man? (Is it because of the performance? or because men do it better or they treat it as a job rather than pleasure?)  All the above certainly apply but it was the shockingly tone of absolute that surrounded such statement that astounded me and the fact that Glass did not pick up on that. I wondered if from her pat it could have been a well thought stratagem to make the wrongness the whole more obvious to the reader. I am not convinced but can only hope.
Because that is the issue here. Somehow we were all, men and females, led to believe that, to various degrees, what men do is harder than what women do. Even when what we do is exactly the same.
The tacticts used fall into two categories. The first puts women down: we are unable do it as well because of our nature, etc. The other puts elevates us: we are far more advanced that can do it better and in less time. The former uses policies, biology, science etc whereas the latter uses our pride. Both are leavers to contain, construct and imprison.

The point I had when I started this post 7 hours ago and a trip to Ikea in between has vanished but I am sure you got the gist. As you can see I am blaming m-l for shortcomings that may have been there regardless. Something for me to bear in mind.

In relation to this concept of being trapped into and by a construction I will suggest a book:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Penelopiad Margaret Atwood The Penelopiad. I loved it.