Does a Focus on the Question of Gender Re-frame Our Understanding of Essay

Does a Focus on the Question of Gender Re-frame Our Understanding of World Politics, If So How - Essay Example This essay stresses that just as a family needs a father and a mother, so too do these two genders need to be incorporated in the social, economic and political aspects of society. We have entered an age where men and women should couple their best leadership qualities to achieve greater results. Gender roles in the ancient society had been stereotyped based on what one was expected to do according to their sex. However, gender and power determine the success derived from the opportunities received. The historical male chauvinism where men dominated the force of power in culture, society and politics is wearing out. Women have become known and more respected in areas that were male dominated. Using their femininity to convey a different aspect of power, women have made the power between men and them equal. Equality in power and gender has been attained due to great men and women of the time. This paper makes a conclusion that on a critical sense, issues relating to gender have re-framed people’s understanding of the world. We are in a new world where every race, gender, culture, ethnic and political affiliation recognises their rights and advocates for an equal treatment. Gender issues have refuted ancient philosophies that perceived women as weak sex and the male as dominants in all aspects of life. Today women have a voice. They almost equally contribute to life promoting processes as men. The old belief that the world was a ground of experimenting the strength of a gender, race, tribe or religion is drastically losing meaning.

Family Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Family - Case Study Example From the facts presented, it may be safe to assume that custody of the two common children shall remain with Susan. There is nothing in the facts which belie any intention on James' part to contest the award of such custody and even granting that he attempts to contest it, the demands of his career and Susan's track record as the primary caretaker of the two children would make such contention largely untenable. As such, we may thus safely assume that custody of the children would in fact be awarded to Susan upon their divorce. Susan's expected custody of the two common children is an important factor that will influence the resolution of the more controversial issues in their case. The issues that must be resolved upon the dissolution of James' and Susan's marriage revolve primarily upon two areas: support and property allocation. In regards to the first area of contention, we further subdivide it into two sections: support for their common children and support for the other spouse. In regards to the question of child support, James may be ordered to provide financial support for the two common children in accordance with Section 23 of the Marital Causes Act of 1973, which allows the court to order a party to the marriage to provide financial support to the benefit of a child of the family. ... As such, it is the duty of the courts to ensure that Susan receives financial support from James so as to meet her own financial needs. Pursuant to 2.53 of The Family Proceeding Rules of 1991, an order for maintenance pending suit may be imposed upon James to compel him to provide financial support while the divorce proceedings are ongoing so as to meet Susan's immediate financial needs. The amount of financial support to be provided for Susan shall be determined by several factors. The amount must not be based solely on her financial needs, but rather on what may be perceived as reasonable and fair, taking into consideration the lifestyle which characterized their marriage as well as other considerations directed towards making the two parties as equal to each other as possible, financially and otherwise. James, as the financially advantaged party may thus be ordered to provided specific payments of financial support to Susan, to be provided in regular periods, and subject to Susan' s remarriage, change in employment status, and other conditions that the court may deem significant in determining whether such maintenance is still necessary.As has been held in White v White (2000 UKHL 54), the overall purpose of the standards set in the Marital Causes Act of 1973 is to promote "fairness" between the two parties involved. This purpose places upon the court the duty to ensure that neither party is left disadvantaged by the dissolution of their marriage, a scenario that is bound to occur should the non-earning spouse be left to his or her own defenses without recourse to the protection of the court. The goal of "fairness" is further elaborated in the recent case of Miller v Miller