Rwanda goes to the polls sometime in August.Currently,ladies in Rwanda constitute about 56% of all the elected leaders.This is about to change.
If you've been keen enough,you must have heard a few well coordinated bombings in the capital city Kigali in the past few months.
These bombings are an attempt to scare away ladies voters from voting for lady candidates by introducing an 'atmosphere of threat'.The person behind this is hoping that true to type, lady voters will gravitate towards male candidates for "protection"! You think that this is just a conspiracy theory and it wont happen,right? Ask the Americans: it works like a charm,all the time too!
I am not a betting guy(probably because I don't have the money for it!)but if I were, I'd bet my Last pence on the female representation in Rwanda plummeting to below 30% after the August general elections!
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Of Kenyan Ladies' representation in the DRAFT constitution
Many ladies in Kenya are all for the draft constitution in the mistaken belief that once it passes, they will laugh all the way to the bank-sorry, to parliament!
I appreciate the fact that from nothing to 47 seats is some milestone,but to me 13.5% is nowhere near enough.In addition, the 2/3rds rule in the draft is just "the spirit of the law" devoid of "the letter of the law".
"The letter of the Law" would have dictated that there be specific steps to ensure the attainment of 33% representation. As things stand now, new constitution or not, I don't see how the legislation to get at least a third of the seats being occupied by the ladies (especially in parliament) will ever happen, especially in the backdrop of previous attempts by some guys to sue the COE for giving "too many seats" to ladies in the draft.
If we leave everything to the new constitution, the best the ladies would get in 2012 would be just that:13.5%! And you can take this to the bank!
The men voters will be hard pressed to vote for a lady candidates after they realize that there are exclusive county seats where they (men) are not even allowed to contest!To me the 47 county seats provision for the ladies in the draft constitution is basically a poison chalice!
I appreciate the fact that from nothing to 47 seats is some milestone,but to me 13.5% is nowhere near enough.In addition, the 2/3rds rule in the draft is just "the spirit of the law" devoid of "the letter of the law".
"The letter of the Law" would have dictated that there be specific steps to ensure the attainment of 33% representation. As things stand now, new constitution or not, I don't see how the legislation to get at least a third of the seats being occupied by the ladies (especially in parliament) will ever happen, especially in the backdrop of previous attempts by some guys to sue the COE for giving "too many seats" to ladies in the draft.
If we leave everything to the new constitution, the best the ladies would get in 2012 would be just that:13.5%! And you can take this to the bank!
The men voters will be hard pressed to vote for a lady candidates after they realize that there are exclusive county seats where they (men) are not even allowed to contest!To me the 47 county seats provision for the ladies in the draft constitution is basically a poison chalice!
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Of ladies' suffrage rights
All societies in the world literally depend on the ladies for survival, especially in the raising of the children. Ladies actually reign supreme at the family level (ask any man about the value of his mom!). However, at the larger society level, ladies still allow themselves to be treated as second rate citizens or ‘filler material’- and especially in elections!
Did U know that after much struggle, New Zealand became the first country in the world to grant women the rights to vote (suffrage) in 1893, but women were not allowed to run for office until 1919? Finland became the first country in the world to grant women full suffrage (right to vote and run for office) in 1906.USA gave full suffrage rights to ladies on 1920.
In other words before 1893, ladies were not considered Human enough to have rights. Unfortunately, a century after the ladies fought for, and got the right to vote and run for office, they are still begging for a third (1/3) of the elective positions!
Well, it doesn't help matters that some ladies are like a certain “mama pima” (name withheld), who believes that “leaders” is a Greek word that means “men” or that Lady leader is an oxymoron!
Did U know that after much struggle, New Zealand became the first country in the world to grant women the rights to vote (suffrage) in 1893, but women were not allowed to run for office until 1919? Finland became the first country in the world to grant women full suffrage (right to vote and run for office) in 1906.USA gave full suffrage rights to ladies on 1920.
In other words before 1893, ladies were not considered Human enough to have rights. Unfortunately, a century after the ladies fought for, and got the right to vote and run for office, they are still begging for a third (1/3) of the elective positions!
Well, it doesn't help matters that some ladies are like a certain “mama pima” (name withheld), who believes that “leaders” is a Greek word that means “men” or that Lady leader is an oxymoron!
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Of Britain Elections and lady voters as "filler material"
Britain goes to the polls on the 6th of May 2010. And as usual, the ladies and gentlemen of British citizenry will have equal suffrage rights (to vote as well as run for office).
The million Pound question is: supposing I was in a position to, and I go right ahead and revoke the woman’s suffrage rights right now, would it make any difference to the eventual outcome of the elections? I’ll hazard a guess and say NO. At least, not in any fundamental way!
Men would still win the elective positions, albeit with fewer votes. For the life of me, I still can’t figure out the significant difference between a man winning a seat with one million votes, or winning the seat with a half of a vote provided it’s proven beyond an iota of doubt that the individual won fair and square.
In other words, British ladies are “Filler materials” - adding bulk devoid of any quality- in the political process. Maybe they should go back to the kitchen. And they can sue me!
All I am intimating here is that British Ladies constitute one hell of a disappointing role model for the rest of the developing world as far as gender and politics issues are concerned. This is especially so given that they know from practical experience that ladies can and do make good, if not perfect, leaders. I am talking of the “Iron Lady”, Margaret Thatcher!
Ladies in the rest of the world expect -and deserve- better from the British ladies. Unless, of course, they have joined the rest of their less enlightened ladies who:
A) Have a “weakness mentality” I.e. They know (then again, may be not!) that they are as strong as their male counterparts but they believe that “leaders” is the Greek word for “men”.
b) take reject votes (after men have already taken the better votes) in which case try as they may, their votes cannot elect a lady as the reject votes will not count anyway, being rejects and all…
The million Pound question is: supposing I was in a position to, and I go right ahead and revoke the woman’s suffrage rights right now, would it make any difference to the eventual outcome of the elections? I’ll hazard a guess and say NO. At least, not in any fundamental way!
Men would still win the elective positions, albeit with fewer votes. For the life of me, I still can’t figure out the significant difference between a man winning a seat with one million votes, or winning the seat with a half of a vote provided it’s proven beyond an iota of doubt that the individual won fair and square.
In other words, British ladies are “Filler materials” - adding bulk devoid of any quality- in the political process. Maybe they should go back to the kitchen. And they can sue me!
All I am intimating here is that British Ladies constitute one hell of a disappointing role model for the rest of the developing world as far as gender and politics issues are concerned. This is especially so given that they know from practical experience that ladies can and do make good, if not perfect, leaders. I am talking of the “Iron Lady”, Margaret Thatcher!
Ladies in the rest of the world expect -and deserve- better from the British ladies. Unless, of course, they have joined the rest of their less enlightened ladies who:
A) Have a “weakness mentality” I.e. They know (then again, may be not!) that they are as strong as their male counterparts but they believe that “leaders” is the Greek word for “men”.
b) take reject votes (after men have already taken the better votes) in which case try as they may, their votes cannot elect a lady as the reject votes will not count anyway, being rejects and all…
Sunday, April 4, 2010
"Out of shape" female voter rights
Ever wondered how on God’s good earth it gets so hard to pass a female- friendly bill in parliament despite the fact that ladies are the majority voters. It is simply because their voting rights are so unhealthy and out of shape.
Instead of the ladies “exercising” their voting rights, they allow these rights to be “taken for a ride”. The voting rights develop no “muscle” to even shift a comma in a bill or legislation.
There are a few bills from FIDA pending in parliament. These bills, if and when debated by the male dominated parliament, will result in watered down versions. they will suffer the same fate suffered by the sex-offenders bill proposed by one Njoki Ndung’u.
Instead of the ladies “exercising” their voting rights, they allow these rights to be “taken for a ride”. The voting rights develop no “muscle” to even shift a comma in a bill or legislation.
There are a few bills from FIDA pending in parliament. These bills, if and when debated by the male dominated parliament, will result in watered down versions. they will suffer the same fate suffered by the sex-offenders bill proposed by one Njoki Ndung’u.
Julius Malema on president Zuma's rape case
Julius Malema , ANC’s youth leader commented that Zuma’s rape victim had actually enjoyed the experience. And for that piece of B.S. the courts, on the 15th march 2010, let him off lightly, with a small fine.
The million dollar question is :do some people have mothers sisters and daughters? How would he have felt if it had happened to one of them?
The courts should also have been a lot harsher. The comments amounted to raping the victim a second time, if you ask me. Then again, that case touches on the high and mighty, and the rest of the miserable lot can take a ride into the Indian Ocean and take a dive!
The million dollar question is :do some people have mothers sisters and daughters? How would he have felt if it had happened to one of them?
The courts should also have been a lot harsher. The comments amounted to raping the victim a second time, if you ask me. Then again, that case touches on the high and mighty, and the rest of the miserable lot can take a ride into the Indian Ocean and take a dive!
Friday, April 2, 2010
Gender India
On the 9th day of march 2010, India passed a bill that would guarantee 1/3 of all elective positions for the ladies..
This is all fair to women assuming that:
a) Ladies in India are outnumbered by men at the ratio of 1:3
b) Ladies in India do not have the right to vote
c) A lady’s vote in India is 1/3 of the length of an ordinary man’s vote
d) The ladies in India are equal to men numerically; that the ladies’ votes are equal in length to their male counterparts’; and that they actually vote. However, they have a “weakness mentality” and believe that politics is only for “strong people” (read men), and they, therefore, vote for men.
This is all fair to women assuming that:
a) Ladies in India are outnumbered by men at the ratio of 1:3
b) Ladies in India do not have the right to vote
c) A lady’s vote in India is 1/3 of the length of an ordinary man’s vote
d) The ladies in India are equal to men numerically; that the ladies’ votes are equal in length to their male counterparts’; and that they actually vote. However, they have a “weakness mentality” and believe that politics is only for “strong people” (read men), and they, therefore, vote for men.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)