And for the sake of comparison, what are your so called examples
of an unconventional society?
--- "As for comments from bigots who think that gender directly
determines the value/worth of a person's potential in the
workforce, imho it screams lack of confidence in their masculinity
and it shows they are incapable of negotiating beyond
conventional ideas.---
Not from an elite school. Not from an elite debate team so
please bear with me.
Conventional refers to traditional gender roles adopted by
generations before today, during times when people thought women
should not be given education because the workforce has no need for
it. In the 21st millenium, this concept is no longer valid. It's
sexist to assume that all indivuduals clearly fit into the category
of male or female roles in our society - women have characteristics
fit for home making, therefore they should be home makers.
To believe that equal education and employment opportunities for
women is not the right step for our society, sounds like an idea
marred by very obvious suppression. I won't compare it to third
world countries, they don't have the advantages we have.
Go conventional and stuff out radical? What's radical? Misandry?
ok back to the point.
If Singapore is waiting for evolutionary confirmation before
granting female borns the right education, why are home econs
lessons and D & T workshops compulsory for all? Please evolve.
Please.
Or nope I get it now, this is not about snuffing out the "weaker
sex" in the workforce or denying them equal opportunity for
promotion for the good of nature.
It's the secret grief of an abnormal mind.
Alright fair enough. First things first, please do get the
definitions "elite" and "good" school striaght. Only shallow people
fail to make the distinction between a "good" school and "elite"
school. So please, before you associate me with elitism, get your
definitions straight.
About the conventional part, there is no basis for the comparison.
In no part of my argument did i include conventional or radical
societies. I merely included singapore being a conventional society
so as to irritate a certain femenist being rather unfriendly in her
posts.
"It's sexist to assume that all
indivuduals clearly fit into the category of male or female roles
in our society - women have characteristics fit for home making,
therefore they should be home makers"
-What is sexist about saying a gun is designed to kill, therefore
you should use it instead of the stone as it is more effective.
It is however, sexist to deny women the rights to education,
which is not what the basis of my argument is. We encourage women
to stay as homemakers because men do not make as good ones as
women. Please, do read carefully in
future.
Now let us review, why is it that our dear femenists are so unhappy
about being homemakers? Is it because they find that they do not
get enough recognition, or is it because they get paid nothing ? If
that is the case, perhaps they should be complaining to the
government about it and not calling us "unevolved oppressive
extremists" to sum up their, ah, case.
Regarding education, you do realise that D&T, home economics
and the like is offered to provide a "wholesome education" . The
same reason why art is offered, it is not compulsory, in fact a
student can choose to drop this subjects if his parents were to
write a letter to the school.
Therefore, I highlight ONCE AGAIN, that homemaking is a worthy job,
as noble as any coporate job out there. I do not see anything wrong
with it and if women stay on as homemakers, they do not have the
need for high education, however they are still welcome to be
educated if they wish.
And if women don't look after the children, who will? Sure, men can
do it, but not as well as women , on a scientifically proven
general basis. Why do you think courts are often prejudiced to give
the child to the female side. And again, we must look at the
consequence, stop being selfish my dear lady. This benefits society
as a awhole. With women staying at home, the birth rates will
definitely go up (look at countries such as india and compare and
contrast to this hypothesis), thereby solving the workforce problem
with women removed.
I would like to remind you that the women are still employed (as
home-makers) and I don't see how this is an unfair job opportunity
as the minute they have a child, they are employed. Neither are we
saying that women cannot enter politics. So please stop making us
sound like Nazis.
If you don't like the idea of gender inequalities, I suggest
Thailand. They have several good sex change offers available, you
might even become asexual and enjoy the benefits of both man and
woman! ^^ And yes, this is radical. And no, you are the
conventional femenist in todays society, perhaps it is a time to
step back and review if we've been doing the right or wrong thing
since the 40s. You say evolve? I say look before you
leap.
