Extreme cases predicate that unconditional obedience to authority figures, i.e. parents, leaders of states, spiritual leaders or other such figures may not give convincing results. In fact, such an unconditional obedience incorporates negative elements into the society where they undermine rationality and rather undertake behaviors deemed desirable by authority figures, no matter how absurd they are in reality. Thus, it may be concluded that unconditional obedience to authority can reap devastating effects not only on the individual but also on the society in general, as experienced historically at repeated intervals of time. Social Oppression on women is one classic example of such a case where the women are manipulated by the social constructs of the society while men consider themselves to be the sole arbiter of authority. However, opponents to the position argue that unconditional obedience is the essence to the systematic flow of the state or an institution, without which it wouldn’t be able to function.As discussed above, unconditional obedience must in all cases be questioned, as it is a direct attack on one`s intellectual capacity to make decisions. Though it is agreed that obedience is an essential ingredient to discipline, but at the same time an individual must be equipped with the skill set to question the decision and even defy them if they seem unfit to the human mind. In this context, the concept of male dominance, especially in the Eastern societies where it is incorporated into the minds of the people that men must be given authority to implement decision while women must comply. The entire concept of male dominance in this context is bizarre to a rational individual or rather any individual with even the minimalistic understanding of morality and ethics.