Oh yes. And I agree, if the old guard are not happy just go form a new org and use it as their new vehicle oh and this time write a better constitution.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Aware Ambushed & they had no clue
- Thread starter scroobal
- Start date
I got the same feedback about her being clueless. One of her friends actually tells her she is "blur" in the sms exchange she published in her blog.
She misread the ST article very badly. How could she think the ST and reporter were setting the agenda when the ex-presidents interviewed used such strong and unambiguous language to describe events at the AGM? You can't re-contextualise quotes like that much to fit a different narrative.
Also, ST took practically a week to cotton on to the story. If the government had anything to do with the takeover, the story would have come out immediately.
I am surprised by Balji's commentary. Why would he interpret the ex-presidents as being sore losers when it ought to be clear that the report itself was a bid by them to show that the takeover was not good for the women's movement here? Most readers got the implied message of the report--that fundamentalist Christians organized a takeover, and this has raised opposition to the new guard all over the island. They exposed the stealth element in the takeover, the surgical strike and the fact that the new group is not talking about their agenda--which has aroused suspicion about the ethics of their motives. In fact, Balji's own analysis of the new group as well as the strong web responses have been shaped by the voices of the old guard at AWARE. How is this about being a sore loser and all the futility that implies? I can't believe a veteran journalist like him is such a bad reader of news stories.
He seems to think the old guard is contradicting its own belief that there is a need for choices in a pluralistic society. Yes, but AWARE defends these choices from a feminist position and ideology. The takeover is by anti-feminists who, by their mode of taking over, already show that they won't tolerate difference. Their very need for stealth was demanded by this agenda of intolerance and domination, which is antithetical to feminism.
The new group could professionalise the outfit even more? Hello, it's been two weeks since they took over and we still don't have a statement from them. Their idea of professionalism is to refuse to take calls from the press. And they lost their president in a week!
Balji is merely stating the obvious in urging a clash of ideas. One way or another, it will happen, and not because Balji has suggested it should happen.
Singapore needs maturity in its politics and activism? OMG, is that a PAP position or what! No, it does not need maturity--because maturity is something that is always defined and claimed by the winner in a battle. What is needed is passion, commitment, sacrifice and high creativity.
He seems to think the old guard is contradicting its own belief that there is a need for choices in a pluralistic society. Yes, but AWARE defends these choices from a feminist position and ideology. The takeover is by anti-feminists who, by their mode of taking over, already show that they won't tolerate difference. Their very need for stealth was demanded by this agenda of intolerance and domination, which is antithetical to feminism.
The new group could professionalise the outfit even more? Hello, it's been two weeks since they took over and we still don't have a statement from them. Their idea of professionalism is to refuse to take calls from the press. And they lost their president in a week!
Balji is merely stating the obvious in urging a clash of ideas. One way or another, it will happen, and not because Balji has suggested it should happen.
Singapore needs maturity in its politics and activism? OMG, is that a PAP position or what! No, it does not need maturity--because maturity is something that is always defined and claimed by the winner in a battle. What is needed is passion, commitment, sacrifice and high creativity.
Committee needs to make its stance known
I WRITE with reference to last Friday's report, 'Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls'.
The Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) is respected for its significant contributions to women's issues, as well as its broader commitment to social equality for all Singaporeans. However, given the takeover of the new committee, I argue that these ideals are now seriously brought into question.
One wonders what the new committee's views on social equality for women are. It is not enough to argue for more opportunities or simply support for women.
If Aware is truly committed to women's equality, then it requires a complete rethinking of gender as a fundamental organising principle of social relations.
While the new committee was voted in through legitimate means, questions remain. Namely, the sudden appearance of a majority of new members who voted so similarly.
If civil society organisations such as Aware are ultimately responsible to Singapore, then surely Singaporeans will need a satisfactory answer to the controversy.
I therefore urge the new committee to make its stance clear, and also to bring its more experienced long-time members back into the centre of Aware's decision-making process.
Mark Chia
I WRITE with reference to last Friday's report, 'Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls'.
The Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) is respected for its significant contributions to women's issues, as well as its broader commitment to social equality for all Singaporeans. However, given the takeover of the new committee, I argue that these ideals are now seriously brought into question.
One wonders what the new committee's views on social equality for women are. It is not enough to argue for more opportunities or simply support for women.
If Aware is truly committed to women's equality, then it requires a complete rethinking of gender as a fundamental organising principle of social relations.
While the new committee was voted in through legitimate means, questions remain. Namely, the sudden appearance of a majority of new members who voted so similarly.
If civil society organisations such as Aware are ultimately responsible to Singapore, then surely Singaporeans will need a satisfactory answer to the controversy.
I therefore urge the new committee to make its stance clear, and also to bring its more experienced long-time members back into the centre of Aware's decision-making process.
Mark Chia
Keen to know what Aware's plans are now
I READ with interest Wong Kim Hoh's article last Friday, "Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls".
I noticed the names of members of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), namely, Jenica Chua, Alan Chin, Claire Nazar and Angela Thiang.
These are individuals who contributed to the 2007 debate in The Straits Times Forum on gays and Section 377A of the Penal Code.
They share the same position, and do not condone homosexuality.
It is difficult to speculate whether ex-co or ordinary members' identities, beliefs and other organisational affiliations might have an impact on the leadership and direction of Aware.
At the same time, we should applaud the effort and passion of the newcomers, who want to take on more responsibility and leadership in championing Aware's vision for Singapore, which is "gender equality for all".
I am interested to know what Aware's plans are now for our community.
What is its stand on minority integration and equality? For instance, will it champion the cause for social inclusion and acceptance of trans-identified women?
What is the organisation's current interpretation of "gender equality for all"? Are gender and sexual identity included under this banner?
What is Aware's position on sex education? For example, will it propose and promote a larger sex education syllabus that is relevant and empowers our youth to make responsible decisions?
I wish the organisation well.
Ho Chi Sam
I READ with interest Wong Kim Hoh's article last Friday, "Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls".
I noticed the names of members of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), namely, Jenica Chua, Alan Chin, Claire Nazar and Angela Thiang.
These are individuals who contributed to the 2007 debate in The Straits Times Forum on gays and Section 377A of the Penal Code.
They share the same position, and do not condone homosexuality.
It is difficult to speculate whether ex-co or ordinary members' identities, beliefs and other organisational affiliations might have an impact on the leadership and direction of Aware.
At the same time, we should applaud the effort and passion of the newcomers, who want to take on more responsibility and leadership in championing Aware's vision for Singapore, which is "gender equality for all".
I am interested to know what Aware's plans are now for our community.
What is its stand on minority integration and equality? For instance, will it champion the cause for social inclusion and acceptance of trans-identified women?
What is the organisation's current interpretation of "gender equality for all"? Are gender and sexual identity included under this banner?
What is Aware's position on sex education? For example, will it propose and promote a larger sex education syllabus that is relevant and empowers our youth to make responsible decisions?
I wish the organisation well.
Ho Chi Sam
Give new Aware leaders chance to prove themselves
I REFER to last Friday's report, "Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls".
There appears to be some complacency among the old guard of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) in the way they were expecting only the usual 30 to 40 members to turn up to vote.
If the voting was viewed as a symbolic gesture for the usual people to retain their seats, then do not begrudge the new blood for taking over.
In the article, the newcomers said they were there to support women and to ensure they received all the opportunities given to them. I find no fault with this, and having a daughter who is a professional, I am in favour of the new breed of women who, according to the report, included women from the corporate sector, lawyers, company directors and academics.
If they mean what they say and have a deep motivation to further the cause of women, I see no reason for alarm.
If they are eager and motivated to take Aware to another level of competence, we should give them, in fairness, the chance to do so.
Former president Tan Joo Hymn said about 80 of the 102 who turned up were new members. This hints at an enthusiasm to make Aware better oriented to serve its fellow modern women.
Whether they will succeed remains to be seen.
I wish them the best.
Dudley Au
I REFER to last Friday's report, "Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls".
There appears to be some complacency among the old guard of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) in the way they were expecting only the usual 30 to 40 members to turn up to vote.
If the voting was viewed as a symbolic gesture for the usual people to retain their seats, then do not begrudge the new blood for taking over.
In the article, the newcomers said they were there to support women and to ensure they received all the opportunities given to them. I find no fault with this, and having a daughter who is a professional, I am in favour of the new breed of women who, according to the report, included women from the corporate sector, lawyers, company directors and academics.
If they mean what they say and have a deep motivation to further the cause of women, I see no reason for alarm.
If they are eager and motivated to take Aware to another level of competence, we should give them, in fairness, the chance to do so.
Former president Tan Joo Hymn said about 80 of the 102 who turned up were new members. This hints at an enthusiasm to make Aware better oriented to serve its fellow modern women.
Whether they will succeed remains to be seen.
I wish them the best.
Dudley Au
12 April 2009
From now on, be wary of AWARE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By now, with the publication of the Straits Times story last Friday, it is widely known that the women's group AWARE was taken over by a group of new members at their last annual general meeting (AGM) held at the end of March 2009. Former president Tan Joo Hymn told the Straits Times, "We found that about 80 of the 102 who turned up were new members who joined between January and March this year."
This group went on to elect many of their own into 9 of the 12 executive committee positions.
Some of those elected come with a history. For example, the blog Alice Cheong in Wonderland has documented how the new Honorary Secretary Jenica Chua's main claim to fame is her letters to the Straits Times supporting the criminalisation of homosexual acts, and lambasting Nominated Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong for presenting a petition to parliament on this matter.
Likewise, the Straits Times, in its article, also wrote:
Older members said the newcomers spoke well but would not elaborate on their plans for Aware.
'When asked if they believed in equality, they kept repeating they were there to support women and to make sure they got ahead and got all the opportunities given to them,' Ms [Dana] Lam said.
Older members were keen to know if the newcomers shared Aware's vision and values, including equality for all regardless of race, religion or sexuality.
But one outspoken new member from the floor, who identified herself as Angela Thiang, said questions about the new office bearers' religion and their stand on homosexuality were not relevant.
And that,
A check showed that some of those at the AGM and on the new committee have appeared in The Straits Times Forum Page.
Ms Chua, Ms Thiang and Dr Alan Chin, a male member of Aware who attended the AGM and supported the newcomers, all wrote letters to this newspaper between August and October 2007.
In a letter on Oct 17 that year, Ms Chua said NMP Siew Kum Hong had overstepped his non-partisan role and advanced the homosexual cause by tabling a petition in Parliament to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalises homosexual sex between consenting men.
In another letter on Oct 25, she took issue with a Straits Times report which said NMP Thio Li-Ann had been 'visibly distraught' when she opposed Mr Siew's petition vigorously.
Ms Chua said Ms Thio had dealt with several points succinctly, with humour and passion.
Dr Chin and Ms Thiang both wrote letters to caution against the risks of promoting the homosexual lifestyle.
It was obvious to all the old members present at the AGM that it was an orchestrated take-over and it definitely occurred to them that the newcomers were part of a fundamentalist Christian group keen on capturing an existing organisation with all its resources and name-cachet.
However, I am told, attempts to find out which church they belonged to, or even whether they were Christian, were met with evasive answers. The response of Angela Thiang, cited above by the Straits Times, was typical.
In Yawning Bread's experience, a desire to mask their religious motivation is characteristic of the Religious Rightwing's behaviour.
Gay and lesbian people can now expect the new AWARE to take an anti-gay position from now on. Worse, Singaporeans as a whole can expect a big push against abortion, in line with the American Religious Right's "pro-life" fixation.
AWARE has been invited as a (previously) secular organisation to give sexuality talks to schools. You can expect that the new AWARE will re-jig the talks to preach abstinence, to rail against condoms and abortion, besides homosexuality.
In many studies, it has been shown that preaching abstinence solves nothing. All it does is to cultivate guilt and ignorance, while delaying first sex by no more than 1 or 2 years. But when young people eventually have sex, ignorance and guilt come together to put them at greater risk than if they had been through a more open-minded sexuality course. Led to believe that condoms don't protect them, these youngsters (who have been subjected to abstinence messages) are then even less likely than their peers to use protection. Feeling guilty about breaking the taboo against sex, they feel less empowered to negotiate with their sexual partner, either putting them at greater risk of abuse, or even over something simple, like a boyfriend who does not want to use a condom. For the same feelings of guilt, they are less likely to talk to adults if they face problems (so pregnancy and disease, if any, is left unmanaged for longer).
If new AWARE embarks on this course, our young Singaporeans will suffer.
* * * * *
It's a brilliant victory for Singapore's Christian Taliban, in their long term aim to make this place a Christian theocracy.
It also illustrates the problem that perennially faces those of us of a liberal persuasion. We are nowhere as organised as the Religious Right is. In a way, it has to do with the way liberals think. We are by nature accommodating and pluralistic. Furthermore, unlike the Christian Right, we have not been incubated within a siege mentality, so we show no inclination to plan raids on "enemy territory". We are slow in organising to fight.
We have a tendency to believe that our moral position is unarguably stronger than the illiberals', that if only people would open their minds, they'd see the world our way. One consequence of taking this optimistic view of life is that we tend to underestimate the tenacity and belligerence of the other side. We forget that even if a wild animal might not have our moral and intellectual credentials, it can still be bloody dangerous. What more a pack of them.
* * * * *
Constance Singam, the past president (twice) of AWARE, told me she was extremely traumatised by the result of the AGM. I feel for her and can certainly understand the impact. She and her colleagues have spent decades building this organisation, only to have it snatched from them.
The problem is what can they do now? From what I've heard, the AGM was properly conducted under the society's constitution. There may or may not be avenues to have the result overturned – I'm not privy to the internal rules of AWARE – but if the take-over was so easily achieved with new members signing up within the last 3 months, it must surely be just as easy for the new faction to flood the organisation with more, especially if they have church connections. Christianity does not regularly employ the metaphor of sheep and flocks to no effect.
I am pessimistic about the prospect of reversing this. This means that gay people, and anyone with liberal views on sexuality, including abortion, will have to be watchful of what new AWARE does in the future. The moment the new leaders use the organisation to further a religious, sectarian agenda, efforts must be made to counter it.
An interesting question arises: Shouldn't the Registrar of Societies step in if it is later shown that a society is being used for a quasi-religious agenda? You can bet the government will rush in the moment that agenda is Islam-related. But it is one of the tragedies of Singapore that with the over-representation of Christians in government, they will not see any danger should it be a Christian agenda. They may think it can only improve Singapore!
At the rate things are going, the Singapore that Lee Kuan Yew and his generation fought so hard to save from the communalism and religious strife of the 1950s and 1960s runs the risk of being lost to the same, though from a different direction.
© Yawning Bread
From now on, be wary of AWARE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By now, with the publication of the Straits Times story last Friday, it is widely known that the women's group AWARE was taken over by a group of new members at their last annual general meeting (AGM) held at the end of March 2009. Former president Tan Joo Hymn told the Straits Times, "We found that about 80 of the 102 who turned up were new members who joined between January and March this year."
This group went on to elect many of their own into 9 of the 12 executive committee positions.
Some of those elected come with a history. For example, the blog Alice Cheong in Wonderland has documented how the new Honorary Secretary Jenica Chua's main claim to fame is her letters to the Straits Times supporting the criminalisation of homosexual acts, and lambasting Nominated Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong for presenting a petition to parliament on this matter.
Likewise, the Straits Times, in its article, also wrote:
Older members said the newcomers spoke well but would not elaborate on their plans for Aware.
'When asked if they believed in equality, they kept repeating they were there to support women and to make sure they got ahead and got all the opportunities given to them,' Ms [Dana] Lam said.
Older members were keen to know if the newcomers shared Aware's vision and values, including equality for all regardless of race, religion or sexuality.
But one outspoken new member from the floor, who identified herself as Angela Thiang, said questions about the new office bearers' religion and their stand on homosexuality were not relevant.
And that,
A check showed that some of those at the AGM and on the new committee have appeared in The Straits Times Forum Page.
Ms Chua, Ms Thiang and Dr Alan Chin, a male member of Aware who attended the AGM and supported the newcomers, all wrote letters to this newspaper between August and October 2007.
In a letter on Oct 17 that year, Ms Chua said NMP Siew Kum Hong had overstepped his non-partisan role and advanced the homosexual cause by tabling a petition in Parliament to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalises homosexual sex between consenting men.
In another letter on Oct 25, she took issue with a Straits Times report which said NMP Thio Li-Ann had been 'visibly distraught' when she opposed Mr Siew's petition vigorously.
Ms Chua said Ms Thio had dealt with several points succinctly, with humour and passion.
Dr Chin and Ms Thiang both wrote letters to caution against the risks of promoting the homosexual lifestyle.
It was obvious to all the old members present at the AGM that it was an orchestrated take-over and it definitely occurred to them that the newcomers were part of a fundamentalist Christian group keen on capturing an existing organisation with all its resources and name-cachet.
However, I am told, attempts to find out which church they belonged to, or even whether they were Christian, were met with evasive answers. The response of Angela Thiang, cited above by the Straits Times, was typical.
In Yawning Bread's experience, a desire to mask their religious motivation is characteristic of the Religious Rightwing's behaviour.
Gay and lesbian people can now expect the new AWARE to take an anti-gay position from now on. Worse, Singaporeans as a whole can expect a big push against abortion, in line with the American Religious Right's "pro-life" fixation.
AWARE has been invited as a (previously) secular organisation to give sexuality talks to schools. You can expect that the new AWARE will re-jig the talks to preach abstinence, to rail against condoms and abortion, besides homosexuality.
In many studies, it has been shown that preaching abstinence solves nothing. All it does is to cultivate guilt and ignorance, while delaying first sex by no more than 1 or 2 years. But when young people eventually have sex, ignorance and guilt come together to put them at greater risk than if they had been through a more open-minded sexuality course. Led to believe that condoms don't protect them, these youngsters (who have been subjected to abstinence messages) are then even less likely than their peers to use protection. Feeling guilty about breaking the taboo against sex, they feel less empowered to negotiate with their sexual partner, either putting them at greater risk of abuse, or even over something simple, like a boyfriend who does not want to use a condom. For the same feelings of guilt, they are less likely to talk to adults if they face problems (so pregnancy and disease, if any, is left unmanaged for longer).
If new AWARE embarks on this course, our young Singaporeans will suffer.
* * * * *
It's a brilliant victory for Singapore's Christian Taliban, in their long term aim to make this place a Christian theocracy.
It also illustrates the problem that perennially faces those of us of a liberal persuasion. We are nowhere as organised as the Religious Right is. In a way, it has to do with the way liberals think. We are by nature accommodating and pluralistic. Furthermore, unlike the Christian Right, we have not been incubated within a siege mentality, so we show no inclination to plan raids on "enemy territory". We are slow in organising to fight.
We have a tendency to believe that our moral position is unarguably stronger than the illiberals', that if only people would open their minds, they'd see the world our way. One consequence of taking this optimistic view of life is that we tend to underestimate the tenacity and belligerence of the other side. We forget that even if a wild animal might not have our moral and intellectual credentials, it can still be bloody dangerous. What more a pack of them.
* * * * *
Constance Singam, the past president (twice) of AWARE, told me she was extremely traumatised by the result of the AGM. I feel for her and can certainly understand the impact. She and her colleagues have spent decades building this organisation, only to have it snatched from them.
The problem is what can they do now? From what I've heard, the AGM was properly conducted under the society's constitution. There may or may not be avenues to have the result overturned – I'm not privy to the internal rules of AWARE – but if the take-over was so easily achieved with new members signing up within the last 3 months, it must surely be just as easy for the new faction to flood the organisation with more, especially if they have church connections. Christianity does not regularly employ the metaphor of sheep and flocks to no effect.
I am pessimistic about the prospect of reversing this. This means that gay people, and anyone with liberal views on sexuality, including abortion, will have to be watchful of what new AWARE does in the future. The moment the new leaders use the organisation to further a religious, sectarian agenda, efforts must be made to counter it.
An interesting question arises: Shouldn't the Registrar of Societies step in if it is later shown that a society is being used for a quasi-religious agenda? You can bet the government will rush in the moment that agenda is Islam-related. But it is one of the tragedies of Singapore that with the over-representation of Christians in government, they will not see any danger should it be a Christian agenda. They may think it can only improve Singapore!
At the rate things are going, the Singapore that Lee Kuan Yew and his generation fought so hard to save from the communalism and religious strife of the 1950s and 1960s runs the risk of being lost to the same, though from a different direction.
© Yawning Bread
If the old AWARE members do set up a new association, I would bet that the new group at AWARE will be constantly challenging it. What I fear may also happen is that the current limited resources for women (in terms of counselling and other service expertise, avenues for negotiating with the government, and leadership, support for and execution of projects) will become fractured. There will also be duplication in some areas--which will blunt the political edge of the women's movement.
Singapore is a very patriarchal society and our women are very conservative. Even our young educated women are very conservative. This is why AWARE membership has never been high (and why, until now, it could not afford the luxury of insisting that new office bearers must have a history with AWARE). The new association will not, I think, be able to get the membership that the new set at AWARE can get. And with the greater numbers, the new set at AWARE can demand more privileged attention with government organizations in carrying out their projects.
The advantage of setting up a new association is that the current AWARE could be forced to become (and represented as) just a Christian women's organization. But I believe the new set will not allow themselves to be seen in that manner, and will make sufficient moves to blur those associations with it.
I would generally agree that one should not place the spotlight on the enemy. But how about putting the spotlight on the enemy as society's enemy? Because that is what it is.
Just thinking aloud.
I wonder why Dudley Au's daughter never has anything to say but that he says it for her? Old patriarchal duty of father securing the daughter's chastity, to save her from the women who might lead her to see how her father has been an oppressive force in her life?
Who is his daughter?
What is the new AWARE's position ? I think missionary only
Btw, what exactly is the agenda of AWARE ? Local men get whipped for the same crimes committed and serve 20 plus years of NS slavery...what the hell more do local women want ???? 
When some people first described her, before the AWARE incident, I wasn't sure except that she ended up with the Wayangparty mob. When I saw her blog, it confirmed everything said about her.
Agree.
I could not figure that one out as well. I assumed that he heard or spoke to them as the rest of his article was ok.
Forget the past. Its a lost battle. Time to form a new outfit with the same mission and goals. Grab the opportunity while this topic is in the air to bring in new members, renew that vigour and reach for the high ground.
I spoke with couple of chaps who felt that AGM outcome cannot be disputed even though the new candidates were less than honest and evasive. The fact that the numbers were brought in by them, even if they sang "Stairway to Heaven" during speech time they would have been elected.
Pointless wasting a year on a name. The new outfit in form and shape will be the same AWARE with a different name and people will know that.
I don't know. Just that I've seen other letters by this guy and he always speaks for his daughter.
Ho Chi Sam's letter is fabulous! The press needs to pick up on it and ask the new ex-com these questions.
Dear Bellepepper,
LOL! Right on the spot! Anyway, PAP is the one who needs maturity in politics.
Passion, commitment, sacrifice and high creativity. Yes, that is very lacking in Singapore's political sphere.
Goh Meng Seng
Round 2 has just started.
April 15, 2009
Counter-attack at Aware
160 veterans to table no-confidence vote at extraordinary meeting
By Wong Kim Hoh, Senior Writer
THE old guard at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) has launched a counter-attack after several unknowns seized the leadership at its recent elections.
A group of 160 veterans are calling for an extraordinary general meeting (EOGM) where they intend to table a vote of no confidence in the new executive council.
In a statement on Tuesday, they expressed concern over the unusual nature of the March 28 annual general meeting 'when a large number of new members turned up and appeared to vote for several office bearers, all of whom are also new members'.
Older members present were shocked when the newcomers contested and won almost all positions, beating more seasoned members by wide majorities.
Those calling for an EOGM also found it disturbing that Mrs Claire Nazar, who was elected president without a contest, resigned within days.
The new exco members have yet to make known publicly who they are, how they are connected, what prompted them to take over in the manner that they did, or their plans for Singapore's leading women's group.
Repeated attempts to reach exco members for comments have drawn a blank since last week.
Ms Corinna Lim, 44, a spokesman for the old guard group, told The Straits Times: 'It is necessary to have an EOGM because we need an open discussion of what their agenda is.
'We've had a lot of calls from concerned members but we have had no communication from the new exco.'
Ms Lim, a corporate counsel, said that under the Aware constitution, an EOGM must be called if 10 per cent of the membership ask for one in writing. Given the rules, it could be held within a month.
April 15, 2009
Counter-attack at Aware
160 veterans to table no-confidence vote at extraordinary meeting
By Wong Kim Hoh, Senior Writer
THE old guard at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) has launched a counter-attack after several unknowns seized the leadership at its recent elections.
A group of 160 veterans are calling for an extraordinary general meeting (EOGM) where they intend to table a vote of no confidence in the new executive council.
In a statement on Tuesday, they expressed concern over the unusual nature of the March 28 annual general meeting 'when a large number of new members turned up and appeared to vote for several office bearers, all of whom are also new members'.
Older members present were shocked when the newcomers contested and won almost all positions, beating more seasoned members by wide majorities.
Those calling for an EOGM also found it disturbing that Mrs Claire Nazar, who was elected president without a contest, resigned within days.
The new exco members have yet to make known publicly who they are, how they are connected, what prompted them to take over in the manner that they did, or their plans for Singapore's leading women's group.
Repeated attempts to reach exco members for comments have drawn a blank since last week.
Ms Corinna Lim, 44, a spokesman for the old guard group, told The Straits Times: 'It is necessary to have an EOGM because we need an open discussion of what their agenda is.
'We've had a lot of calls from concerned members but we have had no communication from the new exco.'
Ms Lim, a corporate counsel, said that under the Aware constitution, an EOGM must be called if 10 per cent of the membership ask for one in writing. Given the rules, it could be held within a month.
sg bitches vs. sg bitches. round 2. fight.
Similar threads
