Men disadvantaged in SG?
first visit these websites..
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw02/020207at.htm
http://menspeak.blogspot.com
Womans Charter Wedding Vows Groom:I take you to be my wedded wife, to pay all bills including yours for a high lifestyle you wish even if you earn more than me, to look after the children, be faithful to you even if you sleep around. You can keep your money, my house and divorce me anytime you like for any reason whatsoever and i cannot help it. Bride:I take you to be my wedded husband, and if you fail to meet your duties I'll divorce your ass faster than you can say "sorry" << >here
---
'thats why most say in marriage, guys dug a grave, girls brought an insurance plan, should anything go wrong, the guys bury themselves in and the girls get all the inheritance...' << here
---
'men's charter should state that men are not allowed to carry the woman's handbag it is a sorry sight, i cringe whenever i see a man carrying a handbag what more if it does not match his shoes' << here
---
Woman: We fight for our equal rights, we must treated the same as man!
Man: Then you must serve NS for 2 years too!
Woman: No! We can't! We are weaker vessel. We serve our 'NS' at home as housewife.
---
Discrimination in:
entrepreneurship? Its a market economy out there, if u r good, u'll survive. if ur business plan suxs, the venture will eventually collapse anyway. so far, i don't see the consumers frequenting a shop just because the shop owner is a man or a woman. just because a woman isn't up to it in business, it doesn't mean that she gets to have extra advantages over others in the market.
in the workplace? there are plenty of female bosses out there. companies look at look makes the most profits. they don't sacrifice profits to meer "gender preferences", since profits are the main reason for the the company's continuing existence.
education? there are currently a worldwide trend with more women studying in universities, as opposed to men.
pay? in singapore, males are paid slightly more, (not much anyway, only about $200 more), for doing NS. if females want to earn the same pay as males, they are free to serve their optional NS. no one is stopping them from doing that.
marriage? women generally are not interested in divorcees above 40 yrs old.
affairs? society now frown on extra-marital affairs by both men and women.
clothing? this is not like the middle east, when women have to conform to a strict dressing code. they have to be covered from head to toe. in singapore, if a woman is to go run about the neighbourhood in a bikini, she would at most attract catcalls from ppl. if a man is to run about his neighbourhood in a pair of trunks, he would most likely be sent to woodbridge.
sexual preference? gay homosexuality is illegal, while lesbian homosexuality is legal.
legal punishment: males can be awarded a maximum of 24 strokes of cane in one hearing. (that means that if he has multiple hearings, he may be awarded more than 24 strokes). for females, there's no caning. << here
---Men disadvantaged in Women Charter
There have been spates of debates over that question in the recent years, yet nothing has been changed, amended or refined even though there were so many so-called reviews to the charter itself. I do agree that reviews should be made in accordance to our current societal situation, with many females holding high paying jobs(cant remember where, but I've read that 60% of the senior civil servants are female in Sg), and that perhaps 'Women Charter' should be changed to 'Family Charter' to equalise the gender discrimination.
Fyi, Women Charter was started in the 1960-1970s where bias against women is widely prevalent in Sg. It is not so relevant, in my opinion, in the current context, due to more females being educated and holding degrees etc, and earning higher incomes compared to their counterparts. (find your own damn statistics)
Women have always been wanting to vie for equality, so shouldnt the law requiring men to pay for the maintenance fee and alimony be changed to spouses instead? There was even a case of a wife who earned twice the salary of her husband, yet after divorce, the husband was required to give a petite maintenance fee of $1/- to her monthly. Isnt this obviously unfair? The wife has every capability to support herself, even better than the husband, yet she is entitled the fee.
The focus is not the magnitude of the fee, but the rationale in the less-capable husband providing the fee to the more-capable wife. Shouldnt it be the other way round, since feminists have always vouched for equality. In cases like these, its crystal clear that the women's charter is skewered to protect women, more than their interest and well-being.
'AWARE points out recent statistics, which show that in at least 100,000 households in Singapore, men are unable to fulfill their expected traditional roles and their wives have become the de facto head and sole provider for the family.' <- women often complained that their traditional roles of being housewives is definitely a form of stereotyping or prejudice, but what about this? men's traditional role to be breadwinner is the norm, even if their wives can earn more?
---
I do not really feel anymore inclined to discuss the issue.. just felt the need to express it.
Im reading this, which is really interesting. the dispute between mrsean and jojobeach is so intriguing
