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?
Women's charter is exploitable..
so what makes u think that Men's charter will not be exploitable..?
so you are saying it's ok to come up with a Men's Charter so that men can exploit it, and get away after divorcing their wives, women not like Ivy, but really need help from an abusive husband..?
The woman's charter is a relic of a bygone age when women were mostly uneducated and vulnerable to exploitation. It is no longer relevant today. Abolish the woman's charter and institute one to protect domestic maids instead.
Originally posted by purpledragon84:Women's charter is exploitable..
so what makes u think that Men's charter will not be exploitable..?
so you are saying it's ok to come up with a Men's Charter so that men can exploit it, and get away after divorcing their wives, women not like Ivy, but really need help from an abusive husband..?
you still haven really explained why do you need a system to be unfair in order to be fair.
first, would like to ask some qsns.
assuming that laws are to be made equal for both genders, (ignoring WC or wadever), how is it to the women's disadvantage?
if a man would "abuse" the system, when both men and women are on an equal footing, why couldn't a woman do the same? today's women are not the ignorant traditional illiterate housewives of yesteryears. they are highly educated, and know how to consult legal aid when required.
so what is the society against, when it comes to women?
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.
so after listing out so many things, can anyone show me in what ways are females discriminated against under the legal context?
Originally posted by 787180:Jojo pple are not against you personallly and I also do not want to offend you but just sense that the road is not flat and hence I must wield my sword of justice.
Your comprehension of my write up on Adrian’s ordeal who had to fend off the relentless onslaught by his diabolic wife and vicious mother-in-law taking advantage of the Women’s Charter.
You had missed all the point -why Ivy wanted to claim $3700 monthly maintenance and 70% of adrian’s cpf and matrimonial assets when the marriage lasted< 1 year.Ivy did not contribute a single cent and yet lied to judge she contributed monthly towards the payment using Adrian’s money but but her ATM’s card after banking his $$$ into her account giving the impression she was the one paying the mortagage.
Why was there a need for Ivy to stay 50 days in a maternal ward in SGH under class A ward when Adrian was prepared to give hera C/B2 ward?
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?
Jojo wait up where is the justice?Isn’t it the law is protecting women at men’s expense..and that’s lead to . women taking advantage knowing the SG law favours them.
Ivy did not even want her husband to see or bond with his child and yet demanded exorbitant ailmony? Her Thalasimma condition was hidden from Adrian before and after the marriage.Adrian knew about the case when she tried to claim all medical expenses from him besides childbirth expenses.In fact Ivy’s mum had deliberately told Adrian that the criss cross on her body was due to liposunction and not the operation to remove her spleen.A person without a spleen nor a woman with Thalsimma is not a dying women lah so jojobeach stop tryiny to fame up the sympathy for Ivy.
I defended Adrian when I saw how unreasonable Ivy abuse the Law calling police to raid the matrimonila home on 2 consecutive Sundays just to collect 2 AA size battery and a packet of condoms,making complaints to HDB that Adrian conducted illegal lesson at his flat,complaint to IRD that adrian earns tons of $,complaints to NEA that Adrain was breeding mosquitoes in his home,cutting off his water and electricity,etc…this prompts me to defend man’s right against a scheming wife and mother-in-law(a professional divorcee)..Jojo and yet yr eyes are covered with mud siding Ivy all the way despite all his devillishness..Are’t you supposed to call this poisonus Ivy to join in the debate?
787180,
You're a real nag don't ya think ?
You havn't answer shyt in that thread you started before.
Now you still side step all the questions.
Give yourself a break. Even my grandmother knows when to stop nagging.
Originally posted by jojobeach:787180,
You're a real nag don't ya think ?
You havn't answer shyt in that thread you started before.
Now you still side step all the questions.
Give yourself a break. Even my grandmother knows when to stop nagging.
jojo, have to agree with u here. 787180, pls don't repeat those stuff we alr know abt.
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The woman's charter is a relic of a bygone age when women were mostly uneducated and vulnerable to exploitation. It is no longer relevant today. Abolish the woman's charter and institute one to protect domestic maids instead.
You are missing the point.
The guys wants to abolish the Women's Charter and institute a Man's charter.
Because they feel that men are being taken advantage of by women.
Originally posted by jojobeach:Well you tell me !! If you get raped by a man vs being raped by a woman. Are you going to feel the same way ? The answer is in your heart. Why are you pretending to not know ?
So, you really do want to see women get the cane too don't you ?
If that is the only way you feel emotionally balanced .. there's really nothing much we can do for you .
Instead of seeking to abolish the caning because it is in itself an inhumane act... you'd rather someone else suffers the same injustice don't ya ?
So your argument is , injustice + injustice = JUSTICE ????
Seriously kid. I really wonder about you. Are you an abused child ?
Did your siblings bully you ?
Do you have a sister that terrorise you ?
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.
I'll be damned if anybody supports equality of sexploitation of any kind. There'll be no fun in any damn thing anymore.
Originally posted by MrSean:
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.
Originally posted by purpledragon84: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.
Originally posted by flabber:
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.
Originally posted by jojobeach: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.
Originally posted by HaraYumi: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...
Originally posted by MrSean: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.
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.
Originally posted by deathmaster: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?
Originally posted by MrSean:
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...
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.
Originally posted by jojobeach: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.
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.
Originally posted by MrSean:
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.
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.
Originally posted by jojobeach: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.
Originally posted by MrSean: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.
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.
Originally posted by jojobeach: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.
Originally posted by MrSean:
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.
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 ?