Singapore government does not support sexual equality

last SG · 2008-05-30T06:20:38+00:00

Alamak.. like that is cheat meh ?That is a business transaction lah.The old man pay money.. and get a young chick to be his companion for 2 hours.Cheat is wh...

soleachip SG

I'll be damned if anybody supports equality of sexploitation of any kind. There'll be no fun in any damn thing anymore.

jojobeach SG

I'm sorry to say, we're walking in circles here.

I have already mentioned that both solutions are viable and need to be considered in greater detail.

My point when I said that was this: Whether or not there are more humane solutions, you have to admit that the government does not support sexual equality. Just saying that we should abolish the whole damn system doesn't fully address nor recognise that an injustice has been done towards men. Of course, I am not saying that we want revenge or something, but mistakes should be recognised for what they are.

Look at Germany, there, it is against the law not to acknowledge that the holocaust was a real event. They recognise their mistakes for exactly what they were because they are truly repentent and want to show that they recognise the pain victims have gone through.

Just considering a solution for this isolated issue without actually acknowledging the moral implications of the mistake means that they're just trying to get off from the fact that indeed our laws have not been entirely impartial.

It's like when you've done something wrong, often what the victim seeks may not be monetary compensation, or even if it is, the more important factor is the actual apology because it shows that one is sincerely sorry and not just trying to get rid of the issue.

Sometimes when you try to fix a small leak.. another bigger pipe may burst because of you trying to fix that leak.

There's no perfect system. You just have to choose one that causes the least damage.

That is also why there's a family court to hear both sides of the stories. And award accordingly.

If everything is as simple as you think... a divorce procedure will not be so complicated.

If everything is so clear cut.. all we need will be a simple form to fill up and submit it for public filing.

MrSean SG

is singapore today viewing men and women equally? in the workforce? in the government sector? in the home?

is the average woman able to get the same achievements as the man with the same amount of effort put in, that when a woman screws up at work, there will no longer be the immediate thought in ppl's mind, "woman..." and all the stereotypes?

are any of u, 787180, MrSean, deathmaster, VOR, so certain that a men's charter will not be abused just like the women's charter is being abused? are u so certain that with the implementing of a men's charter, that the abusive women will be tamed, and everyone will be happy, and MEN WILL NOT ABUSE THE MEN'S CHARTER?

how can u fail to see that if a women's charter can be abused, why not a men's charter?

if u can tell me that within such a men's charter, it is so foolproof and wonderful, then i tell u, well done! but hey, then there will be no need for a men's charter, just implement it to the current women's charter.. and women who really need help can seek help, and women who seek to rip men off will be unable to do so..

Personally I believe that the reason the women's charter can be abused is simply because men do not have equal rights protecting them.

As for women being discriminated against when they screw up at work... I think this is absolute rubbish and not relevant in present times, people don't do that anymore... Right now you make a mistake, your coworkers comfort you, they help you, regardless of whether you are a man or woman.

In the government sector? Again, I do not see any problems with the current model. If anything, women's rights are being promoted even more in this area. (That's not to say that their rights are being overpromoted, not in this area at least, but in other areas yes.)

In the workforce? Please, look at how they extend maternal leave rights so often. (Again, that's not to say that this is unwelcomed, just evidence that the government does respect women a lot.)

In any case, I do not believe that the fact that a woman being abused by a man is more like than the reverse justifies men not receiving some form of protection...

Yes, of course altering the women's charter with strict guidelines to prevent abuse would also be a welcomed solution... What we are fighting for, firstly, is the recognition by our society and our government that such issues do indeed exist. I, for one, am open to several different solutions. I just want our needs and rights to be recognised, for now that is what I am focusing on.

MrSean SG

Dear MrSean,

After reading your constant whining about the NS and the need for protection of men's rights, I came to the conclusion that Singaporean men(or actually boy) like you are the reason we're looked down down by our female counterparts.

First off, NS is no freaking big deal. Thousands have gone through it comming out unscathed and gaining from it as much as they hate to admit be it physcially, mentally or socially. True 2 years may be long but I feel if you make the choice to make the most out of it, you actually gain more than you lose. If you can prove yourself inside, there's no doubting you can prove yourself outside.

Secondly, as jojobeach have pointed out, male and females are fundamentally different, of course you can expect a difference in treatment between the two. Our law are a reflection of what society deems right and just and if society views that females need to be more so protected than men, of course our laws will reflect that.

I implore you to grow some balls which I hope you do in due time in light of your relatively young age.

Again, the view that NS is no big deal is simply your opinion, and I clearly do not share it. Anyway, if it was no big deal, then why aren't women put through it too? The reason: guys are assumed to be natural devils of the world while women are the angels who don't deserve to be punished.

I disagree with the way a lot of things are run in NS. If the NS system at least focused on being productive, I would not be so against it, but the fact is that often they focuse on areas that are highly unproductive and are simply out to waste us away mentally and emotionally.

Take for example, marching drills. They claim that this instills discipline, but they are assuming that all men are naturally without this, even by the time they reach the age of roughly 18 years. (I believe this varies depending on your education options.) If it instilled discipline, are women therefore assumed to be fully disciplined while men are not? Not only that, but it is unproductive. It's not like we're learning any actual useful skills or constructing something of worth...

They also have several highly unnecessary rules (these may be petty, but I still feel that they are unproductive and a waste of time.) Even the simplest of things are taken advantage of by the army to exploit and to make a rule without good reason. Take eating for example, it is a warranted assumption that when they provide you with food, you are allowed to eat it. Yet you will probably be severely punished if you do not ask for permission to eat before doing so. I am unsure as to whether this tradition still stands so please correct me if I am wrong. In short, they are forcing upon us several cultural restrictions that we may not share with them. (I believe that this specific tradition that I have provided as an example may stem from chinese traditions of telling one's elders to eat before doing so. Probably evolved to what I stated above.)

In any case, this is not the only issue that I have presented, please read the first post (and if you have time, other replies) for more information.

Anyway, in response to your reply that women should be treated better because men and women are fundamentally different... Again I pose this question, people of different races are biologically different as well (some are more susceptible to certain diseases and disorders, some have different ratios of hormonal output etc.) , yet we promote racial harmony and equal treatment of all races. Why is this? It is for the simple reason that different though we may be, one is not valued above any other. Different does not translate to being unequal, and quite clearly our laws do not agree.

MrSean SG

Yes Zarks the family court awards assets accordingly.

Not every case is the same. Some gets more .. some gets less.. some gets nothing.

Zark: This is not always the case. There have been several instances where the system has been abused and a fair outcome did not result. I believe deathmaster and 71xxxx are better equipped to reply because they have more knowledge regarding specific cases than I do.

We, too, have presented some amount of evidence regarding this.

MrSean SG

Hallo Mr. Sean

I'm sure you won't be thankful that there's no women's charter if you are a lady.

When it's that case, the topic "Singapore government does not support sexual equality" of your current forum may remain the same (: Just that the content changes. WHY females have to go ns, why no maintenance fees paid by ex husband after divorce, why why why..

No?

Well obviously if I were a lady I may seek to serve my own needs and disagree with many of the points, but personally, I think that even if I were a woman I would be inclined to agree with the arguements I have set forth. Even if I would not want to go for NS I would be inclined to agree with my statements, and also that of several others who have agreed that this is wrong. I perhaps may secretly agree but on the outside disagree in order to promote my own personal cause...

jojobeach SG

Personally I believe that the reason the women's charter can be abused is simply because men do not have equal rights protecting them.

In the workforce? Please, look at how they extend maternal leave rights so often. (Again, that's not to say that this is unwelcomed, just evidence that the government does respect women a lot.)

In any case, I do not believe that the fact that a woman being abused by a man is more like than the reverse justifies men not receiving some form of protection...

Sean,

Since you are not of legal age. It is hard for you to understand that gender discrimination DO exist in the work place, especially when it comes to a pregnant woman. Until you have the chance to come out and take a full time job , it is best you not discuss this subject.

The gahmen needs to promote women's right. If not, less women will be willing to come out to work. Less women will be interested to contribute to society.

In those countries where there is no women's rights. The women stays at home, few are out on the streets. Less women will be willing to migrate into that country.

Women's right is an essential component of female movement in our economy.

MrSean SG

jojo, have to agree with u here. 787180, pls don't repeat those stuff we alr know abt.

I am inclined to agree that to a certain extent he has been using personal insults and attacks and that is rather unprofessional, but in any case I feel several of his arguements were extremely relevant.

A Man’s Charter will at least counteract the obvious biaseness the outdated Women’s Charter(W.C) had inflicted and yet the society at large even MPs,lawyers and policeofficers acknowledge that men are always the losing party because of WC.I ever overheard at family court by 2 PRC ladies that SG’s family is clearcut to their advanatge and hence they are here to reap the maximum wnd wutrh the 50-50% sharing in matrimonial asssets these ladies can return to their home land benefiting from divorcing the local men.

Why Ivy blantanly ignored Court’s Order 5 times and no punishment was meted by the Family Court? The child visit was held at a neutral ground as Ivy in cahoot with her mum can shout abuse as anticipated any time despite Adrian having a PPO against both of them and vice versa.This suspicion was comfirmed when Ivy and her mum finally turned up after the 6th Court’s Order but only to shout that adrian had physiclly assaulted her mum? This landed Adrian in 6 hr lock up.Ivy’s reason for not turning up was because taxi’s fare one way to Serangoon Family Service was $24(all ridiculous excuse).

Further ivy even got guts to accuse adrian of trying to rape her and post the sexual acts despite the acriminious divorce proceedings.She was supposed to be charged by the police but was given a mere warning?

jojobeach SG

Well then if this is the case. It will apply also to the men as well , yes ?

So men fight for your own rights. Women fight for our own rights. Will there ever be an end ?

End of the day.. the males who fought fiercely in this battle still goes back home and share the same bed with a woman.

We still make love with each other. So what is the point of this argument ?

Since you are so young.. I hope you will not get too traumatised and start checking into a monastary.

So you see, 787180 claims he has a wife, and ofcors, everyone else's wife are evil.. only his wife is an angel...

If you choose to believe him.. I really donno what to tell you.

MrSean SG

Sean,

The gahmen needs to promote women's right. If not, less women will be willing to come out to work. Less women will be interested to contribute to society.

In those countries where there is no women's rights. The women stays at home, few are out on the streets. Less women will be willing to migrate into that country.

Women's right is an essential component of female movement in our economy.

Oh come on, those are discriminations by small companies. The government is already hard at work trying to prevent companies from doing this and I'm sure you've read about this in the papers. The government is officially trying to do something about this, but our problems have not in the least bit been officially recognised, let alone solved, in easily the past few decades.

Women rights, of course, need to be protected, but the same stands for male rights. Men are less interested to contribute to society because they know that the government is not impartial to them. Look, fathers are trying to find jobs overseas to places like Australia and elsewhere so that they can migrate and their sons don't have to suffer.

Even if men still seek to contribute to Singapore's success, (and I am sure there are many), all the more the government should be fair to them since we, too, are working for our nation.

jojobeach SG

Mr Sean,

Those are words from a biased person.

Until you hear the other side of the story. You really shouldn't conclude your judgements just yet.

If you are keen to find out the truth.. 787180 has provided info on where you may talk to ivy yourself..

Don't be surprised if the whole story he cooked up was just a fiction. And Ivy doesn't even exists.

MrSean SG

Well then if this is the case. It will apply also to the men as well , yes ?

So men fight for your own rights. Women fight for our own rights. Will there ever be an end ?

End of the day.. the males who fought fiercely in this battle still goes back home and share the same bed with a woman.

We still make love with each other. So what is the point of this argument ?

Since you are so young.. I hope you will not get too traumatised and start checking into a monastary.

So you see, 787180 claims he has a wife, and ofcors, everyone else's wife are evil.. only his wife is an angel...

If you choose to believe him.. I really donno what to tell you.

Yes it would apply to men as well, but that does not necessarily automatically invalidate our arguements just because we may have personal causes for bias.

jojobeach SG

Gahmen policy can only deter , but it cannot change the mindsets of employers.

NS is an issue I never agree with.

So in this aspect I can understand why they want to migrate. No argument here.

MrSean SG

Gahmen policy can only deter , but it cannot change the mindsets of employers.

NS is an issue I never agree with.

So in this aspect I can understand why they want to migrate. No argument here.

Well yeah but at least they recognise the issue and are trying to do something about it. I don't think that the issue of men's rights has been discussed in parliment at all in at least the last decade.

jojobeach SG

Then you should be asking. Why don't they recognise the issue ?

Most of them are men themselves. Why are they not fighting for men rights as fervently as you ?

Like I mentioned so many times before.. it is the family court judges that decides the awards. If you think the judgements are unfair.. you are saying the JUDGE is unfair.

Then it is the JUDGE who should be removed. Yes ?

MrSean SG

Then you should be asking. Why don't they recognise the issue ?

Most of them are men themselves. Why are they not fighting for men rights as fervently as you ?

Like I mentioned so many times before.. it is the family court judges that decides the awards. If you think the judgements are unfair.. you are saying the JUDGE is unfair.

Then it is the JUDGE who should be removed. Yes ?

Well yeah, if the hypothetical judge in question ruled unfairly.

Anyway, not all judgements are unfair, but why provide the gap in the system anyway? If they're not abusing the system, it wouldn't affect them. So why let a gap be there in the first place?

It's like refusing to build barriers on a staircase until someone breaks his neck.

purpledragon84 SG

i do not have much time to do this..

in the workforce, who do u think a boss hires? a mother, a pregnant lady? or a man?

in the govt sector? what is the highest rank a woman can go? for the last 40yrs of NS.. ask urself..

just ask urself, how many female presidents.. democracy my balls..

and abt ur women not interested in marriage to dvorcees above 40, seriously.. u noe the rules..

and to answer deathmaster.. there are women who are educated, there are women who are not.. there are many who are unaware of how to seek legal advice.. even with the women's charter today.. as YOU quoted, 40% of abuse cases are women... even with the law blatantly siding with the women, the men are still doing it.. what will happen if there is NONE?

and i din say the law must be unfair to be fair.. i said the law must be unfair to protect the victims..

i told u so many times.. the law IS unfair.. it IS biased.. but there is a good reason for it.. because men and women are different.. and the society ACKNOWLEDGES IT... that's why it stands, as a LAW..

because SINGAPOREANS acknowledges that men and women are different, when they are in SINGAPORE.. get the idea?

ur views do not represent the majority.. my views dun represent the majority too.. and dun say all men, and half the population.. because not every guy wants to see women caned...

jojobeach SG

Well yeah, if the hypothetical judge in question ruled unfairly.

Anyway, not all judgements are unfair, but why provide the gap in the system anyway? If they're not abusing the system, it wouldn't affect them. So why let a gap be there in the first place?

It's like refusing to build barriers on a staircase until someone breaks his neck.

If the judge ruled unfairly, either party can still appeal against the judgement.

The so called " gap" in the system is to allow for flexibility.

A divorce is not a criminal case, where you can prescribe fixed or very clear cut punishment once you are proven guilty.

In a divorce, it is not about who is guilty and who is not.

The judge has to look into many factors before he decides who gets what.

Ofcors, a couple can always agree on the asset division so there will be no need to contest , that will make life so much easier. But during a divorce.. who's gonna be so nice to each other ? If they can be so nice to each other.. there wouldn't be a divorce now, yes ?

By making it rigid, there will be a lot more who's gonna break their necks.

flabber SG

In any case, this is not the only issue that I have presented, please read the first post (and if you have time, other replies) for more information.

MrSean, for someone who has YET to gone through NS, I can understand where you're comming from. However, apparently you have a pretty warped understanding of the things that are done in the army.

With regards to marching drills, yes one of the reason is to instil discipline but many people do not see HOW it is so. In the army, everyone has to work together to achieve a specific goal and to do so, individual excellence is essential, however, teamwork is crucial. Marching drills instil that sense of teamwork when done in a unit. Every step, every swing of the shoulders and every movement of the rifle is synchronised. If done properly. not only is it a sight to behold, it aims to be a reflection of the mentality and attitude a soldier must have serving his unit, formation and country.

It sounds very ridiculous to me that a men has to do marching drills to instil discipline therefore in the first place he lacks discipline? Its as good as saying some people have tution teachers, hence the people who don't are less capable academically? It doesn't work that way.

Whoever that told you all about the food issue? Personally haven't experienced that. But Im sure many will agree that end of the day, the system is actually not flawed in the army. Its the people in command that are flawed. Some of these sorry SOBs just make it a personal agenda to make people's life miserable. But that being said, there are always others on the other end of the spectrum but most of the time the highlight and stories are often cast on the assholes.

The difference biologically between races against the difference between genders are two totally different matters. Your analogy doesn't apply. Furthermore, mentally and physically, men are more suited to fight. I say do your part and serve your country. When it comes to national defence, due to these biological defence between males and females, it is deemed neccessary for a male to contribute as it is proven that they are more capable of doing so. However if females are willing, they can do so too. This is reflected by the number of female regulars.

deathmaster SG

i do not have much time to do this..

in the workforce, who do u think a boss hires? a mother, a pregnant lady? or a man?

in the govt sector? what is the highest rank a woman can go? for the last 40yrs of NS.. ask urself..

just ask urself, how many female presidents.. democracy my balls..

and abt ur women not interested in marriage to dvorcees above 40, seriously.. u noe the rules..

and i din say the law must be unfair to be fair.. i said the law must be unfair to protect the victims..

because SINGAPOREANS acknowledges that men and women are different, when they are in SINGAPORE.. get the idea?

ur views do not represent the majority.. my views dun represent the majority too.. and dun say all men, and half the population.. because not every guy wants to see women caned...

in the workforce, who do u think a boss hires? a mother, a pregnant lady? or a man?

there are plenty of the above types of people working, as far as i can see. so far, i think age is the main factor affecting employment.

in the govt sector? what is the highest rank a woman can go? for the last 40yrs of NS.. ask urself..

how many women are there serving NS? if all women are to be made to do NS, no doubt we will see a roughly similar distribution of male and female officers.

you want to go higher ranks in NS, first serve ur NS. if not, don't bother raising the status of women in NS.

in govt sector, there are plenty of female perm secs around. if you want to run for MP, or to be minister (of which you first have to be a MP), no one is barring you to run for elections.

with 50% of the populace being women, its their own business if women themselves can't win over the votes of fellow women.

therefore, IMO, the fact that there are few women MP is attributed to the general females' lack of interests in politics.

just ask urself, how many female presidents.. democracy my balls..

again, no one is stopping you, if you meet the requirements to be a presidential candidate. not many men qualify for the post either, apparently, as seen in the walk-over in the recent presidential elections.

and again, if you do qualify to be a candidate for presidency, as i am sure you know, selection of president is carried out by voting. it is still the women to blame, if she is not convincing enough to win over the votes of the populace, since men and women are equal on voting grounds, with the population roughly at 50-50.

and abt ur women not interested in marriage to dvorcees above 40, seriously.. u noe the rules..

wad rules? i am just stating a general observation. alot of single, divorced, never-married men above 40 yrs of age are turning to foreign brides. think this issue was covered in zaobao sometime back, where there is a lot of social debate over foreign brides.

stats have shown that there are more female graduates than male graduates out in the society currently. by the rule of proportion, if there are women who are in some way unaware of how to obtain legal aid (i'm not sure why they don't, since legal aid, be it free or paid, are largely advertised and promoted in today's age. counselling center, the police, clan societies provides free of charge legal services, as they deem fit. an as far as i know, anyone can step into any law firm. even law firms are splashing their ads on TV and newspaper.)

back to the pt, if there really are such ignorant women out there regarding legal aid, judging by the general education level of the population, there would be more males who also do not know where to seek legal aid.

and how ironic for u to quote the 40% figure. u r just smashing ur feet with a rock. yes, there are 40% women in abuse case, but it also means that there are 60% men in abuse cases too. that figures just show that men are the majority of abuse victims.

and since in this thread, where some individuals are advocating the sacrificing of minorities to fit the majority, so can we sacrifice these 40% women, since they are the minority?

i'm sure you would say no. thus, i would like to ask you, why then the double standards? men also deserve equal protection under the law. i am not saying that they are incapable of fending for themselves. but there should be some sort of formalize statement protecting the rights of males.

and i din say the law must be unfair to be fair.. i said the law must be unfair to protect the victims..

u are not making sense here. if laws are unfair, what is the point of having a legal system then? you go to court expecting a fair hearing, not an unfair hearing.

if the laws are fair, victims would have no doubt a mean to protect themselves. if they are unable to protect themselves in a court of law (a fair one), then they must be the guilty party. and u and i quoted, 60% of abuse victims are male, so indirectly, we are agreeing that the law should be made more favorable to males, to protect them, since males form the majority of victims?

i dare you to go up to any court and tell the judge that the law is unfair. they will just lock u up for lunancy, since its their job to make laws fair and just for everyone.

as far as i know, a unfair court of law is known as a kangaroo court.

because SINGAPOREANS acknowledges that men and women are different, when they are in SINGAPORE.. get the idea?

are you really sure? from the replies we are getting on this thread, it don't seem that way.

ur views do not represent the majority.. my views dun represent the majority too.. and dun say all men, and half the population.. because not every guy wants to see women caned...

so, as we had long mentioned before, either impose it on both genders or to scrape it totally.

so far, its mostly men who have been arguing on the issue of caning, with women generally uninterested, since it does not affect them at hand.

if women are too caned, we shall start to see more protest on the part of females, and that would sure raise the eyes of our beloved garmen.

« Previous Page Next Page »