• Eliminating gender barriers

    To think that choosing women to represent in parliament based on this quota system will be tantamount to choosing misfits is wrong. Those who argue this assume women are generally unqualified and unworthy of such positions. This is wrong because time without number women have proven their worth and shown that they are capable. The essence of this quota system is not to breed misfits but rather to eliminate possibilities of women being denied access to such positions primarily because of their gender. It will amaze you that in this 21st century some people still think that being a woman means you are not intellectually at par with men. This is what is happening in our institutions. Women are being denied access because of their gender. This is what the quota system has come to solve. So are we saying that men always have a high chance of fitting into these positions. No! This thinking pattern is retrogressive and won't help is win the fight of gender discrimination.

  • Point of quotas is so women are equal to men

    Currently, women are vastly under represented in government compared to men. By having quotas, they will ensure there are more women in government, not limiting them in any way. Even with quotas there will still be more men but it will be a start. Many other countries have quotas and as a result more women are in government due to them seeing they can run.

  • Swift, Effective Change Requires Radical Action

    To combat the current gender disparity among many governmental bodies, in the short term, a female quota for governmental roles could be the spark to more rapid social change.

    Current gender disparities could lead to discouragement of the female population to strive for these careers. A quota would however ensure them positions within this field, eliminating current gender related stigmas.

    One could argue that such a quota would work to the detriment of a democratic governmental system as candidates should surely be selected based on their policies, rather than their outward presentation. Recognising this, it is important to note that such a quota should only be implemented as long as there is a lack of female representation. Upon the fulfillment of such a quota, governmental positions could return to being allocated purely on the base of individual policies as gender stigmatisation wold likely have been reduced or eliminated in this area.

  • Ability, Merit and Gender

    Quota is not needed if equality is what we seek. In this progressive society, where women wants to be acknowledge as equal, they should prove themselves based on their ability and skills. Having a quota, in a sense, helps kickstart involvement of women in career world but then again, the employer just hire women to fill their quotas. This is not transparent and it may be costly because the employer did not hire base on their merit and skill but rather because of their gender. This can be viewed as regressive policy too.

  • We should employ more people parliament, should be based on skill and merit

    We should employ more people, not based on their gender. You are leaving a gap for people who might not even be qualified. This is why we should base off of skill and merit, not because of gender. Being a woman doesn't really tell the parliament that you are skilled enough, so women should just compete for the seats, and whoever gets voted in gets voted in!

  • Points against it

    It goes against the gender equality of man and women. Also people are less likely to hire more women than they need to; say they only need 30% they won't go above that amount then. When would they stop. Plus it's seeing men and woman as different instead of encouraging it.

  • No More Quotas

    No more quotas. We don't need quotas. Quotas give people jobs they don't deserve.

    Especially in government. It's bad enough SJW's force businesses into this. But being in the government is a very important service, not to be doled out to any random person on the street. Especially based on something as insignificant as sex!

  • Be the change you want to see.

    If we are really equal then women do not need special laws designed to discriminate better qualified men. If you complain that there are not enough women in office, and you are a women then go to college, and run for office. Be the change you want to see, not what you want to see.

  • No Quotas for Women

    No quotas should determine the minimum or maximum number of women permitted in government. This type of thinking is as unequal as feminism. Women should be respected equally and have equal opportunity to represent society as men. They are no more or less deserving than men. Quotas are affirmative action taken too far.

  • No, I don't think that there should be quotas for women in government

    I don't think having quotas for women in government would go on to have a positive effect. I think if limits were actually set in regards to the amount of women in government this would go on to rub certain organizations the wrong way and actually do more harm than good.

  • Gov't shouldn't support sexist policy

    Having quotas on women in Government is completely wrong because it is sexist and will lead to lower quality services from the government. I personally believe that everyone, regardless of their genitalia, should be treated equal, and that government should not try to tip the scales in the favour of men OR women. If quotas are put in place, we would have the Jim Crow laws again, with men becoming the discriminate group instead of black people.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.