The authors believe that women 's rights are never improved due to the male' s leading role. "On the other hand, I heard that the position of women never improves until the position of women improves, but until the law is enacted, women will not improve before women's position improves. It will become more fair and will be opened to women's activities in a wider range "(Elliot 5). Elliot later said that 'catch up with 22' is correct not only for women but also for humans. However, excessive enthusiasm of men ignores the fact that not only women but also humans have little room for improvement.
What is the evidence that the gender budget is affecting health policy and inequality in gender? Most of the literature on this approach and most of its experience relate to women, but not men and women. Generally, the gender budget approach focuses on economic disparities between men and women, especially from the perspective of income, employment, and income. As a result, most impacts are on employment and related benefits, social security or state income maintenance programs, pensions, tax credits etc. However, the health system consumes the majority of the government's total expenditure, which brings great potential for the value of money if the gender budget helps to more effectively target resources. Although few cases apply gender budget to health policy, it is clear that this approach will help to emphasize gender inequality in medical service use, treatment, and outcome.
There are many theories that gender inequality in education and employment may reduce economic growth. Regarding gender inequality in education, "Gender inequality reduces the number of average human capital of society and decreases economic performance, which is achieved by limiting the pool of intelligence derived there. Employment of men with low standards Promoting education for women may reduce birth rates, promote next generation education, and reduce child mortality All of these factors will affect the economy If the birthrate declines after 20 years, it will be a preferred group arrangement "Since the working-age population grows much faster than the total population over the decades, it will add to the economic growth per capita It will reduce the dependence rate that affects. "