conjugal Assets and Empowerment - Do Men Have possession in Singapore?

Law Order Series Finale - conjugal Assets and Empowerment - Do Men Have possession in Singapore?

Good afternoon. Now, I found out about Law Order Series Finale - conjugal Assets and Empowerment - Do Men Have possession in Singapore?. Which may be very helpful to me and also you. conjugal Assets and Empowerment - Do Men Have possession in Singapore?

Imagine if you were to bring the Talebans to Singapore and hand to the Taleban the task of allocating the relative number of places in Universities for men and women based on the students' Gce 'A' level test results. How would you expect the Talebans to do it?

What I said. It just isn't in conclusion that the real about Law Order Series Finale. You check out this article for information about anyone wish to know is Law Order Series Finale.

Law Order Series Finale

They would want to ensure that only men win and win big. They would stack the cards against women students by manipulating the statistics. How? Well, dream a point law where:

(a) The scores for each subject for all students would be totaled up; (b) The median score for each subject would be calculated from the total; (c) test results for each boy that exceeded the median in a given subject would be given a weightage of 'one plus X' (where X is a fraction depending on how much his score exceeded the average); (d) In contrast, test results for each girl that exceeded the median in a given subject would be given a flat score of 'one';

And the Talebans would proudly desist from such a point law that boys were excellent to girls in intellect for this and that subject based on the number of X's that they calculated. And what about the rest of the subjects? The Talebans would point their rifles at you and articulate with a right face that the score was equal for boys and girls for the other subjects based on the flat 'ones' that they calculated. By this reasoning, the Talebans would desist that boys were excellent to girls and more University places should be allocated to boys.

We would have a civil war on our hands. The feminists would be up in arms over the Taleban's bigoted methodology!The reader might think that the above scenario is far fetched. And thankfully so. But something similar happened in 2005 at an exalted and august international organization - something similar but with the genders reversed. And it is thinkable, that there is no civil war yet.

In 2005, the World Economic Forum published a report called Women's Empowerment. The report contained lots of data, tables and charts and load full of scientific sounding statistical concepts. The report fulfilled, at page 16 that:

"True models of gender equality do not exist. Given the lamentable international picture, no one who studies the gender gap can doubt that no country in the world has yet managed to achieve it...We hope that this work provides the impetus for policy makers to strengthen their commitment to the idea of women's empowerment, and to consolidate the political will, vigor and resources, in concert with aid agencies and civil society organisations, to make gender equality a reality."

That was quite an indictment of policy makers across the globe, together with that of the United States of America who ranked 22nd in the world behind Sri Lanka (war torn country at that time facing a civil war) and Colombia (country facing drug trafficking gun-totting warlords). Singapore ranked 65th behind the African nations of Ghana, Uganda, Namibia, and Botswana. How did this come about? A clue would be found tossed into the Appendix at page 21 where it was stated that:

"This scale obscured the fact that for some variables some countries have reached or surpassed the benchmark of equality. For example, in quite a few countries a higher proportion of girls than boys attend secondary school. According to the previous method, the top performing country Sweden, where there are 1.26 girls to every boy in secondary school, received a 7, whereas countries that reached equality, such as Korea, received a score of only 3.04.

"In the current index, since all the variables are gap concepts and are calculated as a ratio of female values to male values, each changeable is scaled on a 0 - 1 scale where 1 is defined as the equality benchmark. The distribution is truncated at this equality benchmark so that in the previous case, Sweden and Korea each receive a score of 1."This clue showed that prior years' reports captured both statistics where women surpassed men as well as where men surpassed women. However, by the time of the 2005 report, only statistics where men surpassed women were captured to retain the end that there was no gender equality. This was achieved by neutralising all statistics where women surpassed men - ie truncating such statistics to '1' for equality. This bigotted methodology was a mirror image of the imaginery Taleban story above.

The 2005 methodology hid the true collection in women's achievements, and more particularly, that in many areas, women surpassed men in their achievements. The bigotted arrival adopted by the 2005 report leaves a reader with the suspicion that: if areas where women surpassed men were taken into catalogue with equal weightage, they would equilibrium the other areas relied on by the 2005 report.

An alternative perspective on the true gender statistics might be found in an report entitled Gender Divide: http://www.warrenfarrell.com. The author observed that women were under-represented in varied fields and leadership positions not because of gender discrimination but because (a) women had more life style options - ie more options for good work-life balance; and (b) women had priorities that led them to different paths other than right up the corporate ladder.

In Singapore, the Women's rent was last century's affirmative action for women based on the gender inequality of the time. Half a century ago, had a gender equality explore been conducted on third world Singapore, there was wee doubt that it would have presented a strong case for its affirmative legislation. Half a century later, there is normal parity in the middle of number of men and women learning in our Universities and in our workforce. There is great doubt either the Women's rent is still needed in first world Singapore today.

Several aspects of the law found wanting has been discussed in varied articles within this series on Men's Rights. What is left is our law relating to matrimonial asssets. In the United Kingdom, Baroness Ruth Deech, a previous lecturer on house law at Oxford University has gone on report to say that London had become the separation capital of Europe because of British Court's generous awards of marimonial assets to women at divorce. Her observations suggested that while the distribution of matrimonial assets might have been fair in the middle of divorcees at the lower end of the economic scale, its application at the upper end of the economic scale was: (a) unfair (disproportionate to the endeavor put in); (b) demeaning to women (ie to the majority of who were presumably honest and hard working); and (c) encouraged sham marriages (ie by women who married rich men for money). With this forceful indictment of separation laws in the United Kingdom, it is time for Singapore to explore our own separation laws.

If you asked Paul, a divorcee who had to replacement his half of the matrimonial home to his ex-wife, either the law was fair in Singapore, you would be answered with a resounding 'no'. He would say that the house Court applied a duplicate standard. True to the spirit of the Women's rent to protect women, the house Court was quick to order Paul to disclose all his bank records, expenses receipts and other records that might trace to underground assets. But when Paul applied for disclosure of his ex-wife's records to trace how investment bonus was assertedly paid out by an assurance brokerage business in cash and disappeared (instead of straight through the banking system), the house Court was incredulous and asked him why he was tracing the wife's assets when the main focus should be on his (the husband's assets). The house Court declined to order the disclosure.

If you asked Paul, he would also say that the house Court relied too rigidly on the ideal of a 'clean break'. The house Court felt that divorcees should have a clean break from each other's hold over joint assets. He had lived with his wife and child in a mature estate trying for enbloc sale for some years. The sale was aborted when the economic downturn came. The consolidate quarrelled over money issues (including the loss of money from property investments) and the intended enbloc sale was all they had left to climb out of their financial mess. He offered to buy the ex-wife's share of the matrimonial home. The Court played down the possibility of the enbloc sale and ordered Paul to replacement his share in the matrimonial home to his ex-wife. A few years later, the enbloc sale succeeded, and his ex-wife reaped the windfall.

And if you try to placate Paul by saying that the windfall was for the good of his son? In that case, the replacement should be to someone to hold in trust for his son, he would retort.Ex-husbands fight tooth and nail to preclude their assets from falling into the hands of their ex-wives. But most ex-husbands would fight less if their assets were to fall into the hands of their children. This brings us back to the interrogate either a house rent may be more favorable for today's Singapore.

The Women's rent was last century's affirmative action to protect women. Naturally, the house Court concept that the best way to protect the interest of the child was for the husband to replacement the matrimonial home to the wife who had care and control of their son. This was done purportedly in the interests of the child. But it's immediate benefit was the ex-wife. And it generated a lot of unnecessary litigation over distribution of matrimonial assets.

A house rent on the other hand will, by its very name, propose that the legislation is for the interests of all parties. With such legislation, a house Court may be more concerned in the assets of both husbands and wives, and more inclined to replacement a father's assets/windfall to his children (rather than from ex-husbands to ex-wives).

Finally, with less of a windfall, women may be less ready to head for the separation court. If a woman could be astounded that her well regarded and well favorite father was unfaithful, she might see her unfaithful husband in a good light as well -- just like the wife in the short story Sex Lies and Videotape.

Jonathan Lee

I hope you obtain new knowledge about Law Order Series Finale. Where you can offer use within your evryday life. And just remember, your reaction is passed about Law Order Series Finale.