Jump to content

Live within your means


Mustank
 Share

Recommended Posts

This women charter thing has been outdated but nobody dares to bring it up.

 

It was formed not long after 1965 to protect the women because back then most women were pretty reliant on their hubbies.

 

These days women earned as much as men, so I don't see why they need such protection anymore. It's really a very sexist thing......

 

I sooOOOoo totally agree on this point. [thumbsup]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wan Ang Kong pattern to be engraved on top of my head [grin]

No need lar..... use red dye can already, for I know you want to cover your mouldy coloured head right ..... [sly]

 

[:p][:p][:p]

Edited by Picnic06
Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact there has been cases I know of where:

 

1. The wife earns more and was ordered to pay maintenance

 

2. Upon divorce, there wasn't any assets, but lots of liabilities. So the judge ordered a nominal $1 maintenance for the wife.

 

3. When adultery is proven, the women usually looses her rights to claim maintenance for herself.

 

However in the above case, the decisions to the men's favour was only granted as an exception to the norm, because the men had discharged his burden of proof to the satisfaction of the judge.

 

That said, there are at least two arcane assumptions in the laws that needs to be reformed:

 

1. Assumption that it is in the best interest of the children for custody to be granted to the mother

 

2. Assumption that women is the weaker party in a marriage contract

 

The reason why these assumptions should be re-examined because they don't necessarily hold true, but it puts the burden of proof on the men, which is not fair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need lar..... use red dye can already, for I know you want to cover your mouldy coloured head right ..... [sly]

 

[:p][:p][:p]

 

Mine clear FFF (Fit For Firing) one hoh & ready to shoot anytime [smash]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This women charter thing has been outdated but nobody dares to bring it up.

 

Actually they did, in another way. Can't remember what exactly it was about so correct if I am wrong here.

 

Some years back another female MP raised the issue of a new legislative law to be included in Women's Chapter... but somehow it was rejected because some of the folks seated in Parliament figured that was breaching the rights of men and deemed to be "special treatment" for women.

 

So in that sense, while we see no new conditions being added, we see none removed too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Upon divorce, there wasn't any assets, but lots of liabilities. So the judge ordered a nominal $1 maintenance for the wife.

 

Actually I am a divorcee myself and this was what my lawyer told me. (BTW, my lawyer is a woman.)

 

Let me explain this in my own words and without the legal jargons. At any point a wife asks for no maintenance but still includes a $1 maintenance fee in the divorce terms, the husband should be wary.

 

The issue at hand here is, if the women does not request even for a dollar... she is deemed to give up her rights to maintenance FOREVER. However if a woman enters a $1 maintenance in the divorcee terms, she can always appeal to increase it some years later due to "change in circumstances". And trust me, I do have female acquaintance who are not working and living off the ex-husband. One of them even bought a car for the new bf. So technically, you can be divorced from a woman but you still end up having to feed her and be held responsible for her livelihood. In layman's terms, divorce as good as no divorce.

 

My lawyer was damn insistent in including NO MAINTENANCE to protect my interest. And I have her to thank. Within a year into our separation, she was impregnated by another guy. Imagine if she turned it around and ask for more maintenance? What do you think my money will be used for? [rolleyes]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I am a divorcee myself and this was what my lawyer told me. (BTW, my lawyer is a woman.)

 

Let me explain this in my own words and without the legal jargons. At any point a wife asks for no maintenance but still includes a $1 maintenance fee in the divorce terms, the husband should be wary.

 

The issue at hand here is, if the women does not request even for a dollar... she is deemed to give up her rights to maintenance FOREVER. However if a woman enters a $1 maintenance in the divorcee terms, she can always appeal to increase it some years later due to "change in circumstances". And trust me, I do have female acquaintance who are not working and living off the ex-husband. One of them even bought a car for the new bf. So technically, you can be divorced from a woman but you still end up having to feed her and be held responsible for her livelihood. In layman's terms, divorce as good as no divorce.

 

My lawyer was damn insistent in including NO MAINTENANCE to protect my interest. And I have her to thank. Within a year into our separation, she was impregnated by another guy. Imagine if she turned it around and ask for more maintenance? What do you think my money will be used for? [rolleyes]

 

Yeah... I know of this $1 maintenance 'trick' too.

 

Another way of looking at it is by accepting it, the ex-husband AGREES to provide maintenance... it leaves the door open for the ex-wife to justify for increased amounts down the road. [sweatdrop]

Edited by Scoots
Link to post
Share on other sites

Women's Charter is the wrong concept, it should be 'Family's Charter' but due to feminist concerns their rights will be diluted so they compromise and say Women's Charter is to ensure the family's welfare come first and not just about women. Typical hypocrisy of women.

 

Women's charter has alrdy lost the primary reasons why they had existed alrdy.

 

Its main purpose is to protect women's rights and prevent them from being abused and trodden down.

 

I think in singapore, we need Men's charter more Women's charter.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just the women/wives for that matter.

 

Just take a look at the publications and TV programs we have. What do you get when you have so many magazines all talking about men cheating on women? Where are the stories of women cheating on men? Which TV show actually gave a voice to men who are victims of cheating wives (when you see shows even specially done for women)?

 

And, some women actually said they don't have a voice? (Damn, I can even memorize what they say most of the time.)

 

Thats y i say we need Men's charter to neutralise the effects of the damned women's charter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:mellow: Problem is, how do you legally define a "Family", houw to quantify it? A family must comprise A husband, wife, 2 children? Difficult...Setting up an exact opposite of the Women's charter, the Men's Chearter, dunno if it'll be more plausible.

 

Great men think alike. [thumbsup]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This women charter thing has been outdated but nobody dares to bring it up.

 

It was formed not long after 1965 to protect the women because back then most women were pretty reliant on their hubbies.

 

These days women earned as much as men, so I don't see why they need such protection anymore. It's really a very sexist thing......

 

Exactly! Women's charter is only for 3rd world nations as well as countries that treat women badly.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...