Personal ish aside (Pro1, I wanna apologize for my less than civil response to your post. . .I know, I know I didn't mention your name but it was quite obvious that post was directed at you. My bad! ) this has certainly being an interesting discourse.

It's amazing how so myopic we can be, we just assume some things are a given just because it makes sooooo much sense to us. Reading the other side of the debate does puts things in perspective and while I don't necessarily agree with some of the points raised, I am now aware that there is an other side to this and the reasons for it do make sense.

Slightly off topic, don't know if anyone has been following the Indian Rape Case. . .it's about this Indian girl who was kidnapped and then raped by 5 guys, she died form her injuries a week later. As Expected, there is an uproar about the way the case was handled by the police force of mostly men. This morning, the Indian officials say they are going to recruit and promote more women in the police force to prevent a repeat of this messy handling of the case.

Yes, this women will be go through the necessary training and all but should they be put in a position of power just because they are women? It is obvious there is a problem with the way police do their jobs, shouldn't they put a better training process in place...for both men and women and then pick the best person for the job?

Anyway, this has kicked off a debate on what they called "POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION" and here are the talking points (should the Mods decide to use this as a debate topic)

In India, there is a renewed campaign for women’s rights following the case of a gang-rape in New Delhi, which brought the Indian youth onto the streets. Will that give a boost to the Women’s Reservation Bill that has been sitting in the lower house of parliament? Another country that is looking at a similar quota for women in parliaments is Egypt. Is positive discrimination – through such quota systems – the best way to create greater equality between men and women in society?

Join our debate.

These are the statements that will be debated:

There should be a quota for women in every private sector company.

Positive discrimination for women is discrimination.

More women in positions of influence and power will help normalise the idea of women being equal.

Women appointed by quota will be seen as undeserving and not worthy of the positions.

What is your stand on each of these statements?

If you want to participate in the live debate on this topic. . .you can comment here


I didn't want to open a new thread because I think this topic and the debate that ensued kinda ties into it.

ogugua88:

[size=13pt]You're not alone. We all have to deal with it. I was born in the US and have "no accent" or "sound American", and I still have my own encounters. It's funny that this has come up today as it was only yesterday that I was discussing with my mom how angry I get when someone tells me I speak "good English". Firstly, I speak English well. Secondly, how were you expecting me to be speaking? I can't go out with my youngest sister, who's 11, without getting stares as people think I'm her mother. Even when I'm wearing scrubs on the train back from the hospital, I get stares. Single black mothers fill the train with cantankerous children, and there I am, sitting quietly in uniform and holding my book bag. I've met white supremacists and have been told cruel things. I've ran into a young Klansman in May (couldn't have been older than me), and that's fine. I should be telling them "thank you" in fact. They can continue stereotyping and grouping me anyhow they like. I still have my goals and aspirations and will meet them by force. Their negativity gives me more reason to prove them wrong anyway.

Like Sisi rightly asked, do we combat that by continuing to place that emphasis on ourselves? I try not to. My goal is to apply to medical school in the next few years. I know that affirmative action may help in any future acceptances I may receive. There's nothing I can do about that. When I get there, however, I still have a lot to prove as many know the situation around minorities and the few that get accepted. We always have to work that much harder to prove to everyone else that we're intelligent and were accepted for more than quota purposes.

I believe in hard work. In various sectors in Nigeria, getting to the top doesn't require hard work, and working hard doesn't guarantee career ascension. I hope these six women know what their new positions entail. It's also my hope that they're perseverant and take their jobs seriously, in hopes of impacting real change wherever possible. Although I see where you're coming from, I cannot support someone simply for their gender. I'm sorry. That's how I was phone banking for Obama in 2008 and women were telling me they'd vote for John McCain because he had a female vice presidential candidate. Just as it has to be more than being a URM (underrepresented minority) in medical school to be taken seriously, it has to be more than gender for anything to come of these six appointments.[/size]

Thank you for this!!

Honestly! I am in awe of you!!

pro01:

"Ample" is a relative term. An ample supply in itself or in comparison with the supply of males? Especially in the high positions? I posed some questions in the previous post that would reveal the yawning disparity between the sexes in this part of the world. For instance, law is one profession where you would find a fairly high number of women. Every year, several lawyers are elevated to position of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. There are countless female lawyers, no doubt, but what percentage of SANs in Nigeria are female? That's just an example.

The supply is much more in the entry level and middle level positions, not the high positions. In any case, I did not say that "most" educated women end up as housewives. . .I said "many". There is a difference between most and many. Besides, even for those married women that go on to have their own careers, I did mention that many of them have limited career options and have to contend with a glass-ceiling in many cases. These issues are not debatable if you know the reality on ground.

The norm in this society is that the man should be the breadwinner (which means that he should pursue his career or business to the highest level possible), whereas the woman should be the homemaker (which inhibits her capacity to pursue her career to the fullest).Certainly, something has to give, and not every woman can juggle homemaking responsibilities with career advancement. This explains the 'supply' disparity I talked about. It is pointless to try to negate this reality merely for the sake of argument.

The gender disparity in the legal profession is not peculiar to the Nigerian legal profession only. Its the same all over the world.
I still get your point though, the higher you get in an administrative hierarchy, the harder you find women, especially in a male dominated field. Its a common global occurrence and shouldn't be ascribed to the worldview/beliefs of the nigerian male. Many Nigerian men(educated) don't have any issues with their wives being in leadership/administrative positions. The number of nigerian women getting advanced academic degrees is expected to double within the next few years. I believe they're not getting these degrees to boost their homemaking skills. . .

Sisi_Kill:

Gah!! Instead of 6 permanent secretaries, these eejits need to hire PRESS SECRETARIES who will keep them from just opening their big gbagba mouths to talk anyhow.

In a sane society he just opened himself for a gender discrimination lawsuit. Apart from that, he doesn't even try to cover is faux pas by stressing that there really was a real need for 6 secretaries, it looks like he counted the number of female workers on his staff, saw he hadn't met the quota and went "Oya, let us get 6 more women".

Besides, In this day and age where technology has made things easy. . .who the hell needs 6 secretaries?!! Another waste of money!

And the women. . .Do they care that the only reason they got hire isn't necessarily because they are good at their job. . .at anything but because they are "fortunate" enough to be women?

God help us!!

The beginning of ur argument sounded strong, but your 2nd to the last paragraph sadly exposed your ignorance (almost the same way "wind they expose fowl ynash".
Go back and find out what PERMENENT SECRETARY means especially in the nigerian civil service, (as opposed to your simplistic idea of ordinary secretary with cement stuck 2 their arse) then come back and post.
Secondly, didn't you read the opening remark by the governor where he said the women where chosen on MERIT, and as such must live up to expectation?
I hate nigerian governance, but criticizing every single thing(even when there is nothing 2 applaud or criticize) is actually becoming boring. #yawns moves 2 the next thread

Gov Amaechi and his Commissioner for power, Hon. Nwokocha are the unholy pair in Rivers state.

They had shamelessly and repeatedly lied to the state that by end of Dec 2012 there was going to be regular power supply. Till date, this is still a mirage. Obiwali Road Rumuigbo, Mgbuoba, Iwofe Rd, etc. only get max of 3hrs light every 2 days.

The only areas that enjoy considerable power are the places govt officials reside, Old GRA, Trans Amadi Gardens and Govt House.

Their excuse is that "we dont have mandate to distribute power".
Didn't they know so when they went on air promising the unknown?
Its a shame.

The women elite in nigeria are just as wayward as the men,infact,sometimes worse.He could have slept with all of them.