Group - The Equality Charter School - A Unique Place for Your Child

However, by the time with the 2005 report, only statistics where men surpassed women were captured to support the conclusion that there seemed to be no gender equality. This was achieved by neutralising all statistics where women overtaken men - ie truncating these statistics to '1' for equality. This bigotted methodology had been a mirror image in the imaginery Taleban story above. The 2005 methodology hid the truth variety in women's achievements, and more particularly, that in many areas, women surpassed men on their achievements. The bigotted approach adopted through the 2005 report leaves a reader with the suspicion that: if areas where a lot of women surpassed men were taken into consideration with equal weightage, we can balance the other areas relied on through the 2005 report. An alternative perspective on the true gender statistics may be found in an page entitled Gender Divide: http: //www. warrenfarrell. com . The writer observed that women were under-represented in various fields and leadership positions not as a result of gender discrimination but since (a) women had more life style options - ie more alternatives for better work-life balance; and (b) women had priorities that led them to different paths other than straight up the corporate ladder. With Singapore, the Women's Charter had been last century's affirmative action for women based on the gender inequality of the time. Half a century ago, had a gender equality survey been conducted on under-developed Singapore, there was little doubt which it would have presented a strong case for its affirmative legislation. Half a millennium later, there is general parity between number of men and women studying in our Universities and in our workforce. There is great doubt whether or not the Women's Charter is still needed in first world Singapore today. Several facets of the law found wanting may be discussed in various articles in such a series on Men's Rights. What is left is our law associated with matrimonial asssets. In great britain, Baroness Ruth Deech, a former lecturer on family law at Oxford University has gone on record to claim that London had become the divorce capital of Europe as a result of British Court's generous awards of marimonial assets to women at divorce. Her observations suggested that while the distribution of matrimonial assets has been fair between divorcees at the lower end of your economic scale, its application in the upper end of that economic scale was: (a) unfair (disproportionate to the effort put in); (b) demeaning to help women (ie to most who were presumably honest and hard working); and (c) prompted sham marriages (for example by women who married rich men for money). With this forceful indictment of divorce laws in the united kingdom, it is time for Singapore to examine our own divorce legislation. If you asked Paul, a divorcee who had to transfer his half in the matrimonial home to his ex-wife, whether the law was fair in Singapore, you would be answered with a resounding 'no'. He'd say that the Friends and family Court applied a double standard. True to the spirit with the Women's Charter to safeguard women, the Family Court had been quick to order Paul to disclose all his bank records, expenses receipts and other records that might trace to hidden assets. http://www.blogster.com/jacksonphill410/booker-washingtons-tireless-work-in-the-us-for-socio-economic-development-for-black-americans || Napoleonic France