Women and men are commonly seen as having different strengths and weekness. Is it rigth to exclude males or females from certain professions because of theri gender?

There have always differences in the type of work women and men have done. Many people claim that it is all in all correct to eliminate males and females from positive occupation, i am in favour of the view that people to have greater freedom of choice in terms of employment, gender quality shoul be encouraged.
There may indeed be good arguments for allowing certain posts to remain predominantly male or female. Most men do not have the skills to work in certain career such as a nanny and some women do not have the physical attributes to work in certain job such as soldier.For example in the nursery school the babysitter are all women because females have better males about childcare like feeding, changing diapers, sooth a baby cry. As well as many job need strengths such as construction worker, fireman and it is suitable for men.
However in the vast majority of situations making occupations more open to both genders has distinct of advantage. Men and women can bring slightly different perspectives and approaches to a job. For instance, female police officers may have a greater understanding of domestic violence and a better range of strategies for dealing with a problem. In addition, business feel that it is fine to not hire men beautician for these posts because most of their customers would not be willing to have a man perform that service.
To summarise, the changes that result from allowing men into female - dominated occupations and vice versa may be subtle but they are far - reaching. However, to benefit the most from this development, it is important not to expect males and females to approach work in identical ways.