Sexual Equality in Singapore..
-
Why is it when men zao geng = flasher and can get jailed...
Why is it when women zao geng =
and sexy?
Just asking is there any wrong with our male organs? -
i guess theres nothing wrong with men's organs, just that the ones on the ladies are much more pleasing to the eye. Even the ladies admit this, i think...
-
flasher is on purposeOriginally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Why is it when men zao geng = flasher and can get jailed...
Why is it when women zao geng = and sexy?
Just asking is there any wrong with our male organs?
zaogeng is usually unintentional
blame on the guys' sharp eyes -
the better question to ask is:Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Why is it when men zao geng = flasher and can get jailed...
Why is it when women zao geng = and sexy?
Just asking is there any wrong with our male organs?
Why when a woman sees a man zao geng, the man can be accused of being flasher and the man possibly gets jailed.
Why when a man sees a woman zao geng, the woman can sue the man for outrage of modesty and the man, again, possibly gets jailed.
Either way, you're fcuked
*cover ur eyes folks* -
luckily i am a female...
-
+1~
-
I thought you are a guy !!! hahaha ..Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:luckily i am a female...
so do u Zao Geng Often?
-
Wei wei.. to add ar... i've asked many people this before.
Why is it when girls hold hands its considered nice and all.
But when guys hold hands = gay?
Some things are just ingrained in us i guess... some qualities that will never change. -
yar, but the thing is becoz of the majority of our own 'generalized' perception, it is now a part of law and we are subjected to such unfair treatments isn't it?Originally posted by _Aaron_:Wei wei.. to add ar... i've asked many people this before.
Why is it when girls hold hands its considered nice and all.
But when guys hold hands = gay?
Some things are just ingrained in us i guess... some qualities that will never change.
Divorced women may be entitled to half of her ex-husbands' assets and additionally can receive monthly payments from their ex-spouses, yet house-husbands (or those divorced men who earns less) do not have the same entitlement.
Another good example is that a rapist must be a male and the victim a female.
What I don't understand is: why can't the law NOT specify the gender in such cases? Isn't stating the gender already biased in nature? -
Originally posted by Poopie-Head:
Back in the 1960's when the law was being made(or even earlier), i don't think there were much men raping men.
yar, but the thing is becoz of the majority of our own 'generalized' perception, it is now a part of law and we are [b]subjected to such unfair treatments isn't it?
Divorced women may be entitled to half of her ex-husbands' assets and additionally can receive monthly payments from their ex-spouses, yet house-husbands (or those divorced men who earns less) do not have the same entitlement.
Another good example is that a rapist must be a male and the victim a female.
What I don't understand is: why can't the law NOT specify the gender in such cases? Isn't stating the gender already biased in nature?
[/b]
Hey think about it, all the laws are outdated, its just that Singapore is still considered conservative, and that's why they're keeping these laws until someone changes them in another country first.
Perhaps when the US starts changing their laws, PM Lee will start to follow them.
Hmm, perhaps that's why they are training younger ministers... to change all the outdated laws.