At the end of January 1975, our prominent Prime Minister gave a speech on allocation of lighter jobs to women. He urged all government departments, police and private firms to follow this principle.

The question we pose is: Why should lighter jobs be specially allocated for women? Let us take a good look into our educational, economic, cultural and political position in relation to our social structure, and we will understand why such a speech given by our Prime Minister is easily accepted and not seen as unusual.

Culture

In this consumer society, women are made the major consumers to keep the purchase of goods going. Initially, the rich ladies were the victims. But to strengthen the economic stability of the form of society we are in, female workers are influenced through yellow culture to buy make-up and dresses so that they may appear charming and feminine to the male onlookers. Annual parties organised by managements reinforce this concept. Beauty queens and best couples are chosen on the basis of skin-deep beauty and sexual attractiveness. This is the greatest insult to the human worth of women. They are invested with such glamour, fame and material rewards. Without these, such contests are not much more civilized than the parades of captured women in concentration camps during 2nd World War.

Many women are implanted with the idea that they are fated to lead a miserable life if their husband marries a second woman. This happens more in rich families than poor ones. Poor women have to support the family too and their social value will be different from that of the rich class although they are also subjected to cultural and social repression.

Quite recently, the phrase 'ladies first' was imported from the west. Men usually will open the door of a car for women and let her enter first. Is this a form of respect for women? No, such habits only perpetuate the myth of women being weaker than, and dependent on men.

It deprives a woman of true liberation and of respect by men. It also contributes to propagating a wrong image on women's liberation which is fighting for equality of mankind, and not the subjugation of one another.

Education

From youth we are socialised into believing that women are physically weaker than men. The physically lighter jobs like housework will be allocated to the girls and heavier jobs like carrying heavy objects will be allocated to the men. For centuries women have been blinded by such thoughts. We are kept from knowing that during the prehistoric times, men and women went out hunting alike. If the women stayed at home, it was a matter of convenience as they had babies to nurse, and could also gather edible food in the vicinity, it was not a matter of inferiority in physical strength.

It is only through the long years of suppression, that we women appear physically weak. Now, women have courageously broken the chain to engage themselves in construction sites and have proved themselves not physically weaker than men. Women in countries like Tanganika employed in railway construction are doing heavier manual work than the men are doing The incorporation of Vietnamese women into the People's way against the intrusion of the U.S. army, suggests that women are still a great force of a country, except that they are not allowed to express themselves during normal times.

The social belief that 'once married, girls belong to their husband' restricts the educational opportunities of the girls. Although at present, we see that many women have been able to attain higher education such as of university level, within a family unit, it is always the men who are given the chance for higher education should a dilemma arise. Thus to say that men and women are given equal educational opportunity is a fraud propagated by those people who try to obscure women from figuring for equality

Social behaviour and thoughts are the products of the social structure. Why are people from some countries of this world liberated from such old-fashioned and unhealthy beliefs, while our people still cling onto it.

Economic

Within the coming of the industrial revolution and the need for massive and cheap labour, women were drawn into the industrial universe. Their wages were even lower than the cheap labour wages of their male counterparts. This was the first time that women became a visible, economically active force in society.

Today, the capitalists favour the idea of employing female workers. Does it mean that they have treated women as equal? The answer is obvious. They understand that women are a more easily exploitable class. The feelings of inferiority that are implanted deeply in working women make them accept this form of unequal wage system. Although many government departments practise an 'equal work' - 'equal pay system most private firms still persist on the old policy of paying women less, although their work and efficiency of work is parallel to that of the men. We would like to question: Why does the government allow such a policy to persist?

The job opportunity seems to be equal for everybody. Yet investigations show that few married women are employed.

The struggle for women's liberation, in Singapore as around the world, is bound up with the wider struggles for independene and freedom.

Such policies bar women from becoming economically independent and are thus easily suppressed by their husbands at home.

In higher-paid jobs, we can also see the existence of unequal job opportunity. The fact that more girls study accountancy and less girls study engineering reflects the selective employment in higher society. Many girls are capable and interested in studying engineering, yet they refrain from this course. The reason is clear; many firms prefer to employ male rather than female engineers.

The fact that there are so few female undergrads in C.E. and M.E. reflects the unequal job opportunity resulting in girls choosing the course which opens up job opportunities to them when they graduate.

Until recently, women were not allowed to vote in general elections. The fight of women for a right to vote and to determine the form of government of their countries won the support of male counterparts in the early 20th century. Nevertheless, there are still traditional social bonds barring women from participating in politics of their countries.

Juliet Chin (right) and another inmate at Kamunting Prison, where she is being detained without trial.

Despite the setbacks, women today are coming up to play their role in the politics of their country. Working women and even domestic housewives go on strike to fight for women's rights, their workers union, and against war. More female students stand up to speak for justice and fight for a better society in student movements. An example is Juliet Chin. Juliet is not unusual The main difference between her and most of us is the extent of her concern for less privileged people. Where most girls, on seeing poor or handicapped people, sigh "the poor thing...," Juliet goes out of her way to do something constructive. In her deep concern for them, Juliet is in fact more human, more womanly more feminine than our learnt graces and shyness, slender skirts and translucent make-up combined.

Due to our subversive system, few women like to join the army into defending their country. But in countries like Vietnam, women took part in the armed struggle against U.S. imperialism. The practical work done by them consisted of running of the public services by replacing the men called up at the front Assuming responsibility for family affairs so that husbands and even grown-up children could join the lighting services without having to worry, and lastly if the need arose, to go and serve the front. This movement forcefully challenged feudal ideas of contempt for women and increased their say a major step towards emancipation. It consolidated the political consciousness and social position of women.

Road to Women's Liberation

Before the United Nations proclaimed 1975 to be International Women's Year, women had already gone through a long and painful process to fight for equality and their rights.

The meaning of women's liberation is to make the women themselves realise, they, like men, are the host and makers of the society they are living in. They should be considered as human beings. The real enemies of women's liberation are not men perse, but the repressive social structure that results in men oppressing women. Women will not be liberated as long as the social structure which generates such ideas persists.

The history of women's liberation signifies the process of women's political consciousness. The more struggles against direct and indirect oppression women go through, the better will they realise the road to women's liberation. Like any other liberation movement (e.g. the Negro's liberation movement) political consciousness is the prime criteria for women's liberation.

Women's liberation should not be viewed in isolation. Under the same repressive social structure, men are oppressed too, as they are made use of as the tools to oppress women. Therefore, viewing women's liberation movement to be a justified struggle, men must actively participate. Unless men realise the meaning of equality, and feel a want for equality, women's liberation will not be sucessful. To quote from one wiseman, "the people cannot attain its full liberation until women are fully liberated". Therefore women's liberation should not be viewed only as women's career, but also men's career, and the people's career in general.

Reprinted from 'Singapore Undergrad'