154th Plays Religion Card Against New AWARE. Motive?

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>April 20, 2009
AWARE POLLS AFTERMATH
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Passive supporters galvanised into action
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->WHEN news about the takeover of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) first broke, I was a little curious. Then, more information came to light and my curiosity became a deep-seated concern.
I am concerned that under the new leadership, Aware is moving towards being an organisation of exclusion. To me, Aware has always been an organisation of inclusion, one that fought for women's rights and helped all women - in whatever shape or form.
The work of Aware has brought about significant changes to the lives of Singapore women - women who may not be members, but enjoy the fruits of the labour of its founding and veteran members.
The Singaporean woman who is married to a foreigner and can now sponsor him for citizenship has Aware to thank. The Singaporean woman in the civil service who now enjoys equal medical benefits as her male counterparts has Aware to thank. The Singaporean woman who is now better protected against domestic violence has Aware to thank.
Twenty-four years of serious work may now be threatened by a group of women whose religious affiliation may lead to an exclusionary Aware. It is sad that veteran members now have to fight against possible marginalisation of women by women.
The one good thing that has come out of this is the fact that women like me who have been passive supporters are now galvanised to join Aware and make our voices heard.
Yes, I am a new member of Aware. And yes, I firmly believe it must stay true to its original guiding principles of 'promoting gender equality and inspiring every woman to reach her full potential'.

=> Instructed by Papaya masters to join to launch counter strike?

Hafizah Osman (Ms)

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Put aside differences, fulfil responsibilities
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I CALL on all parties involved in the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) dispute to be responsible members of civil society.
Aware's mission statement stipulates that it seeks to 'identify areas for improvement in gender equality, encourage positive change and support women in realising their highest potential'. It is thus clear that Aware's moral mission and area of expertise lie in promoting the welfare of women in Singapore, and its leadership, 'old guard' or 'new guard', should bear this clearly in mind.
The misuse of Aware as a vehicle to promote a liberal agenda beyond women's rights is unacceptable, as is an attempt to take over the organisation to push an opposing conservative or religious agenda.
Given the realities of a small and vulnerable society, the choice of aggressive public antagonism may set us on a slippery slope to a divided society or even ideologically fuelled violence.

=> So it's clearer now. The Old Fart is afraid to lose power cos more CSJs and CSCs have the guts to stand up and "confront" against his corrupt Leegime!

The dangers of religious extremism over the past decade and the increasing polarisation of American society along liberal and conservative lines should serve as lessons to us.
I encourage both the old guard and the new leaders to put aside insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, and instead hold meaningful discussions to divide leadership responsibilities and choose a responsible middle path.
Ethan Tan Boon Hua

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Aware saga: Lessons for other civil societies
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I READ with concern last Saturday's Insight report, 'Civil society and leadership fights'.
People far and wide feel that the leadership of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) changed hands abruptly in an exercise of organised electioneering, as most of the new executive committee, including the president, are fresh faces. They are deemed lacking in experience, and having a hidden, alternative agenda to run the established civil society group.
It is too early to tell if the new Aware exco will follow the direction, principles and policies laid down by the old guard. It will be a crucial test for the new exco to show the public what policies and programmes it intends to implement to advance the cause, and protect the welfare and benefits of women.
The eyes of the public are sharp, and people should be able to judge what improvements or vision the new exco will bring about to benefit women.
This unpleasant saga has delivered a clear message that other civil societies should take heed of.
First, all civil societies should set stringent criteria to select and recruit new members. Appropriate tests, observations or supervision should be in place to examine and prove the characters and capabilities of new members. This is especially vital for exco members.
Second, the exco of any organisation should have a continual process of leadership renewal.
Most importantly, it should not become complacent.

=> Sounds like only those who are invited to PAPee's tea party have the right to run for elections and even then, along the Familee's line!
Teo Kueh Liang