The Rise of Female Dominance vs The Barriers of Their Dominance.

Time goes by, globalization is everywhere and female dominance had show their contributions and role in shaping a world modernization. Even though they are not in the same level of dominance as compared to male, yet their role and position in decision-making and keeping the economic flow goes smoothly is undeniable. On the other hand, the barriers are there, slowing down their journey to the top.

Take a nearest example. Something that everyone admit about that. In Malaysian education itself. The total number of female students are far beyond the total number of male students. Even in my class, the total number of female students are double the total number of male students. In fact, female students dominate approximately 64.8 percents total intake into public universities. I wonder if this might be the era towards the extinction of educated male?? No wonder our Prime Minister's wife quoted that such program like Selangkah Ke Universiti (One Step To University) was organized to motivate male students to continue their education at university level.

Well, bravo for that, but how many of us knew that the facts that men are actually giving some space for women in education?!!!

Wow! chill out brah. By the way, maybe I need to find a better and accurate words for that. Even the facts that women contribute more than half of the intake's percentage into public universities, however their number who failed to get a job are also double the men's statistics. Human Resources Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam said the Education Ministry statistics showed that more female graduates failed to get a job that is of 21 760 as compare to men which is 10 240. This is actually due to market demands.

Not enough with that, their role also has spread into the economic development, specifically in business. Looking at those aunts at supermarket, trading their stuff is enough to illustrates their dominance. Alright, let's take a real serious view. One of it is in China, future-dominance-economic country in the world, showed from the statistics is that the number of female directorate officers in the civil service increased from 35 in 1981 to 368 in 2008. However, even with that, plus together with the fact that women are increasingly well represented in such professions and field like law, medicine and so forth, but their decision-making are still on the low level.

Concluding Remarks

People trying to show the rise of female dominance, but the barriers are still there. Note to myself and readers, I'm trying as hard as possible not to discriminate any gender. Feminist person always seek for equality to be prevail. Sometimes, equality does not mean if male got 'A', female also need to have an 'A'. Somehow equality means something that one's due. What he and what she is deserved to have.

link of the picture

link of the picture

Individual Rights: Amendment of AUKU 1974

Section 15 of University and College University Act (AUKU) will be amend consistent under Political Transformation Program (PTP). Those who reached the age of majority are allowed to join a political party, yet in order to maintain a university role as an academic institution, the government said that the politics of parties shall not allowed be brought into it.

The reforms was due to the freedom of individual. Speaking of which most of the students keep saying that this is their right was in fact true, and I shall not have any objection on that. Personally, I met many of them who showed their eagerness in politics yet does not show any maturity in giving argument prudently. Giving argument does not mean we condemn a particular thing. It is two different things. Sometimes we might think that we know about 'A', but the question is, do we know the reasons of 'A' ?

For instance, most of us know what the hell is 'BERSIH 2.0'. However, how many of us knew who lead BERSIH 2.0? What is their demands? Other than 8 of their demands, how many of us knew about their demands in regards with freedom of religion? How many of us knew about NED was in fact the crucial part of that demonstration? Do they even know what is NED???

link of the picture

Be Professional, Or Be A Hero ?

The Examination

I used to face in some kind of emotional-based situations. Maybe something like when my friends asked me the answer in period of an examination. Somehow I feel so pity to him or her, looking their face. damn! yet, it always end up with..

"shhh.."

or maybe some sort of non-verbal language expressing that i do not have any idea for that particular question.

There are only 3 reasons in this circumstances.

1. I do not know the answer though.

2. I don't want to give an answer.. "dude, it is my hard work"

3. I'm just being professional.

out of these 3 reasons, the third one is my priority. I mean, it does affects me the most. I don't bother when people say to me..

"come on la..kawan2 beb.."

"ishh..terok gila kau.."

Well, rules are rules.

The Work

You are a bank officer, and there is a girl who make a loan to a bank and bought a house. She doesn't do the payment. What should you do? Confiscate the house, right. The moment she came by to your office, begging you to extend the date yet you do not have any authority in that particular field.

What would you do?

Break the rules and be a hero?

or just follow the procedure? For me, personally, 'rules are rules'. Maybe I still can provide a little favor, it might be in terms of suggestions or recommendation towards the supervisor or so forth. But not something outside of my authority.

The Law

Correlated with our current issue, the death penalty. You want things to be equal, this is it. A minor crime has been done, the guilty still can be given a counseling and prevent a major things from happening. But when a major crime has been done. The guilty deserved to get based upon on his own action and indirectly gives a lesson to the other community members.

"dura lex sed lex"

"the law is harsh, but it is the law"

Concluding Remark

Everything has a system. These systems work by their own rules and procedures. A world of civilization should be taught with the concept, and apply the rules. For me, the rules made upon the morality and equality. To balance both of these, we removed certain matters. Win-win technique. Thank you.

link picture

How You Define It ?

Some matters are too subjective to have its exact definition. Take a simple example, the word 'beautiful'. Yes, it is undeniable that the definition of beautiful has been stated in a dictionary, despite with that, when it comes to a particular perception you will have a different meaning, understanding and aspects that has been taken into account.

"for me..she's beautiful if she is tall, have a blue eyes..bla bla bla"

"i would say that a girl who are able to play guitar is considered as beautiful"

Here is the reason of why some matters like this has been given just a general definition.

Because there are too many aspects that need to consider

For you, someone who are able to play drum and guitar are beautiful but for some other guys, they might define a smart girls as beautiful. It's a matter of personal perceptions though.

Am I going to type about this? Beauty? No, of course not. As a matter of facts, it is about 'terrorism'.

So, lets take an eyes onto the definition of terrorism given by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

"terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against person or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives"

Since they are the one who listed out the names of terrorists, so they are the one who define what is terrorism. The funny thing is, they (America) is the terrorist themselves. Well, this is just a personal thoughts and views. Why?

Its better to look back at their own definition before I define themselves as terrorist right?

Based on what aspects?

1. "unlawful use of violence"

The word unlawful can be considered as 'no right', 'no legal declaration', 'no authority' and so forth that are based on the 'law'. Do you know that the action taken by the President of United States of America in regards with the military action towards Libya was unlawful? Because he actually failed to get an approval from the right authority, the Congress.

Section 8 of Article 1 of United States Constitution states that;

"The Congress shall have power to.....declare war..."

To declare war, President shall get an approval from The Congress. Did he? No, not at all. Micheal Dorf, a constitutional law expert and professor of law at Cornell University said that this action (military action towards Libya by United States of America) is considered as unconstitutional.

Well, that fulfilled the first aspect of what is terrorism.

2. "to intimidate or coerce government or civilian population, in furtherance of political or social objectives"

Iran, Afghanistan, Libya and many more. They killed hundred thousands of them. What is the common thing between all these three countries ? What are the benefits that they will gain by doing so towards these countries?

On its surface, the purpose of attacking Libya is in order to keep Moammar from continuing his attacks on civilians in defiance on international demands. But truth to be told, it is to about political control and oil. Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa. Isn't a very good reason? To protect? Then, what the hell with all the killing of Libyan's civilians? Come on guys, you are not that idiot to deny their true objectives.

The funny part is, they gave the their usual excuses of killing those civilians. Wrong hit target ? Thousands of them died and they claimed a 'wrong hit' ??

I guess it is a clear cut to show that the words or the elements of intimidate and coerce had already been fulfilled.

"when the power of love overcome the love of power, the world will know peace" ~ Jimi Hendrix.

Recommended Movie !

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

I found it very interesting as this movie, which I just watched it by yesterday, very consistent with our theme. Mother's Day.

To be short. It is based on true story in which it centers around the effort of a single mother seeking a lost son. What makes it interesting is when she had to face with the corruption of LAPD. Thrown into a psychotic ward without a legal consent in order to shut her mouth who claim that LAPD is making a mistake by sent a stranger boy to her.

It is a story about a hope of a mother. "Changeling"

I.S.A Is Justice ? : Part 2

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

The main purpose of this entry is to bring as much as possible the definitions, concept and practical way in regards with I.S.A, justice and its shortcoming.

Does ISA Against Malaysia Supreme Law ?

"What is I.S.A ?"

I.S.A actually stands for Internal Security Act. To be full, it stands for Internal Security Act 1960. It is one of the additional rules of criminal procedure. Besides ISA 1960, other examples of additional rules of criminal procedure are Child Act 2001 and Dangerous Drug Act 1952. Basically, it is being applied in Malaya in order to combat the Malayan Communist Party when at that particular time, Malaya in a state of emergency.

Under part IV of miscellaneous provisions, section 73 of power to detain suspected person, subsection 1 provides that any police officer may without warrant arrest and detain pending enquiries any person in respect of whom he has reason to believe;

(a) that there are ground which would justify his detention under section 8; and

(b) that he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to the maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof.

So, as far as I concerned, section 73 subsection 1 (b) already explain roughly in regards with the detention of any suspect is in order to prevent or halt any threats to national security. That is why it is somehow to be called as 'preventive detention'. This preventive detention is what we all known as 'Detention Without Trial' (DWT).

Once a person is detain under this Act, something that people should bear in mind is that they should not interpret the definition of detention without trial into a narrower prospect in regards with the place of detention, in regards with the restriction in the form of communication, close contact and so forth. This is one of the Acts that been given an exception towards what is so called as 'detention without trial'.

One may throw out their question by standing onto the Article 5 clause 4 of Part II, entitled Fundamental Liberties of Federal Constitution which provides that where a person is arrested and not release he shall without unreasonable delay, and in any case within 24 hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey) be produced before a magistrate and shall not be further detained in custody without the magistrate's authority.

Yet, at the same time this article provide an exceptions in 2 ways in which

i. in respect of a person arrested or detained under legislation pertaining to restricted residence such as under the Restricted Residence Act 1933

ii. in respect of those arrested or detained under immigration laws.

But most important things that we should keep remind is that there are 4 laws that allowed for this concept of detention without trial as such as, first and foremost Internal Security Act 1960, secondly Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985, Emergency (Public Order and Prevention Crime) Ordinance 1969 and last but not least is Restricted Residence Act 1933.

Therefore, it is clearly states that ISA is not against any supreme law of Malaysia indirectly it shows the validity of the ISA in the eyes of law.

Justice In Action

"What is justice ?"

Took only one formal definition of justice from a law philosopher. According to Aristotle, interprets justice as giving one what is due to him and giving one what is his own. As for the definitions of justice according to or from the Islamic perspective is placing something in its rightful place as well as it gives the definition according equal treatment to others or reaching a state of equilibrium in transaction.

In simple way, we could say as give what he deserved and take what is not belong to him.

Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provides that everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.

While Article 11(2) of UDHR states that no one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Obviously it against the concept of justice both from western philosopher and from Islamic perspective as well it is against our universal human rights.

As what I actually trying to show is the needs to avoid the concept of 'arrest first, investigate later'.

Do you deserved something until it is proven that it is yours ? So, when this concept of 'arrest first, investigate later' was applied within our community, it shows the injustice towards the people and thus denying the facts that everyone is actually entitled with their rights and liberties.

"Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberty to kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion: He instructs you, that ye may receive admonition"

(An-Nahl verse 90)

Istishab, is one of the two important principles guided jurists' use of evidence in making ijtihad. Istishab gives the definitions of continuity in which the most famous example of this is the principle of Islamic law that a person is innocent until proven guilty. A simple question has been raised, can we punish someone who do not been proven guilty ?

Concluding Remarks

As people trying to prove that this Act is valid in the eyes of law, why not these people trying to show the contradiction between this Act and justice as well as against our religious view ?

It is not a risk for me to say that the question in regards whether it is against our supreme law, and most importantly whether it is against the concept of justice and concept of guilty from Islamic perspective has been clearly states and answered. Where is the shortcoming ? Obviously, I already states that indirectly.

Thank you.

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

link of the picture 1

link of the picture 2

This is technically based on my points of view in results of my readings and observations. Most importantly, I am not representing any party or individual except for myself.

I.S.A is Justice ? : Intro

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

As I was watching a video in YouTube, I was attracted by this video. Nevertheless, in this post I won't comment in regards with this. The next entry will be my short comments and arguments pertaining to Internal Security Act 1960. This will be an introduction for the next entry.

Express It, But Obey Them.

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

Freedom of Expression

Day by day, we all alert with the news regarding our politicians behaviour, both for the leaders of the country and those who played their role in balancing the administrative system. Rumors and stories pertaining to them and their political rivalry have never been deserted. I'm pretty sure some of you have been through with all of these stuff. Comments, condemn, giving out your arguments in using some sort of rhetorical hyperboles.

Among our society. Freedom of expression is their main principle.

"Freedom ? What is it ?"

Forget about the definitions of freedom from legal dictionary, from oxford or what ever it takes to throw out the formal concept on what is actually freedom. Why ? Because I don't give a damn about it. Basically, I'm just being sarcastic.

Frankly speaking, well actually frankly typing, this is what are we going through with. Some of you do not even have a basic knowledge either on the perspective of the practical way or theories. Despite, these guys are actually the one who keep condemning even though they have never been through the theories from the root point.

So, this is your formal definitions of freedom ? Freedom from any hard evidences, theories and even practical way in throwing out your opinion and ideology. Isn't it ? Why ?

Because you don't give a damn about it!

Obey The Tyrant

Some say, our government trying to play their role as a tyranny. Someone who is doing injustice towards another person. But have you ever questioned to yourself, is it relevant for us to overthrow the government when the most expected consequences that lies ahead is only a chaotic ? Have you ?

Questioning on 'what' is most preferable way and closely related with the concept of realism.

As according to Al-Ghazali, a prominent Islamic scholar who had contributed immensely towards the Islamic law, theology, tassawuf and philosopher, obey the tyrant is compulsory if and only if the only consequences that awaits is chaoitic. Please, please and please, read every single of my words carefully so that I don't have to explain over and over again. Islam definitely opposed the injustice.

But actually this is his most contoversional opinion regarding this matter. Yet, he never states specifically about the actual way of a 'leader who being injustice towards his citizens'. I meant, in what way. He never states that.

Yet, in his time, his sultan is the one who are going to ensure the validity of a khalifah.

For the one who using a realpolitic approach, it is a view for a particular urgency. Note that obey here is closely pertaining to don't overthrow them.

That's all.

Peace be upon you.

The People's Sovereignty.

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

Before I get into the main points of this entry, I would like to make a brief of two things I've done for today and yesteday ever since I did not up date any new entry for yesterday.

Number one; there wasn't much thing I did yesterday except for attended international book fair. Unless you are a person who came just to play around, then it is not a risk for me to assume which you would understand that attending a book fair will took you a whole day. That's it for yesterday.

Number two; for today, spending some time with my friends at swimming pool, having our breakfast at mamak store, playing a guitar and chatting around was really a fun things to do especially when I was not being around with them lately. So, it was a great relief for me.

Alright, let's get straight to the point. This entry is not about supporting any political party or promoting any political ideology. I just want to make a short comment in regards with the power of the people. The power to choose.

"err..." o.O

Neither the Sarawak general election nor the power of the people to choose are a new story to tell. People usually tend to give out their criticism petaining to the process of the election. Basically, it is not my intention to do that. But a criticism and a short comment which regards to the attitude showed among our society who do not care about their right to detemine the future of their country.

We live in one of the country which practicing democracy. So, maximise the advantages.

"What is democracy ?"

Of course, there are a few definitions on what is actually democracy. Yet, the most preferable definition brought by this term is about the government of the people, by the people and for the people. I'm not in a position to explain further on the concept of democracy since I am pretty sure it is not a poblem for you to understand it.

Bear in mind, when you choose your leader, you are about to choose the economic patterns, lifestyle and so forth. These are the people who are going to decide how to use your money and limit your budget.

"Does economy correlated with the politics ?"

Take an acoount who decide, promoting or regulate any economic laws. Somehow these guy will use the economic way to stabilise their political position. I meant, most of the time. We choose them, for them, to serve to enhance the national financial, thus lead us to a better lifestyle.

I believe I already told about what is deregulation in my previous entry entitled, Financial Laws and Money Management: Crisis.

It is about the removement of the government control in financial business especially. People complaint, they do their job. Have you wondeing what kind of things / matters which people usually complaining about ? Financial stuff isn't it ?

Can you picture that ? I'm trying to show the connections between choosing you leader in politics indirectly, choosing the future of your country in a very very very short way in terms of economy.

to be continue..

p.s1: this is the second entry which have two parts. Another entry is entitled, The Quran Being Divine: Part 1

and

The Quran Being Divine: Part 2.

p.s2: I might continue for the second part the day after tomorrow since I have something to do tomorrow.

May the peace, mercy and blessing of Allah be upon you.

*link of the picture.

Picture of the day:

Cigarettes vs Shisha : Ban Both of It !

Peace be upon you.

United Arab Emirates (UAE) already took a wise step by actually banning smoking in public area. Now, the Federal Anti-smoking draft law is worked out in order to increase the prices of the cigarettes in UAE.

Thankful, our government (Malaysia) did increase the price of the cigarettes. Yet, does by merely making its price expensive really works ? Hmm..I am sure some extra steps is needed to achieve our goal which is to reduce the percentage of smokers.

"Why not trying to achieve zero smokers instead of just to reduce it ?"

(-_-ll) Is this question a joke or what ? Now let me ask you back, can we ban 100 percents the import / process of tobacco in Malaysia ?

"Alright, loaded question, you may proceed" :D

But actually, neither the price of the cigarettes nor the banned of the smoking in public areas that I wanted to stress out. In the same news which states about the action taken by UAE, they also states that UAE banned shisha shops in residential areas. This is the good example. Yeah, we did banned shisha in a few places. For instance, Kota Bharu municipal has banned all the food outlets from allowing shisha smoking at their premises. That's not enough. UEA banned shisha shops in residential areas and even now the draft bylaws in UAE are being worked out to move the shops away from the residential buildings.

Well, frankly say that (based on my observation), people are way more courageous to try shisha when actually smoking shisha is 200 times worse than smoking cigarettes, said Middle East experts. Despite that, it's totally weird when people say..

"chill, I'm smoking shisha, not cigarettes" huh ?! It's a big LOL there. Maybe because of the flavour. I guess so..

Enough comments on that. That's all for this time. Peace be upon you..

*By the way, there will be new section in each of my entry called, "picture of the day". Enjoy.. :)

Picture of the day said: "Errr.....?"