Ms Corinna Lim made her debut as IPS’ 8th S R Nathan Fellow for the Study of Singapore on Thursday, April 29, when she delivered her first lecture titled “Herstory: The Road to Equality”. The lecture traced the meandering history of the women’s rights movement in Singapore and their struggle for emancipation.
This is the first of a three-part IPS-Nathan lecture series “Gender Equality: The Time Has Come”. Ms Lim is a former lawyer, veteran women’s rights activist and Executive Director of the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the lecture series will be streamed live on IPS’ Facebook.
Ms Lim divided the historical development of women’s rights in Singapore into four phases – The Merdeka Period (1952 – 1970), The Men’s Years (1971 – 1983), The Women Return Period (1984 – 2010) and Ground Up Activism (2011 – current).
The Merdeka Period (1952 – 1970)
Set against the backdrop of Singapore’s road to independence, Ms Lim described the Merdeka Period as a time of significant breakthrough in women’s rights with the passing of the Women’s Charter. The Charter set out to abolish polygamy and guarantee women’s legal rights to property in 1961, following the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) sweep to power at the 1959 polls. The PAP was one of the few parties then that championed women’s rights in its manifesto and campaigned for an end to polygamy, in a bid to court the female vote. Ms Lim underscored the influential role that activists in political and civil society groups played in securing this groundbreaking legislation. She credited the persistence of the Singapore Council of Women and its founder Shirin Fozdar, the PAP Women’s League led by Chan Choy Siong, and other vocal female activists for relentlessly lobbying the government to keep its election promise to outlaw polygamy.
The Men’s Years (1971 – 1983)
Progress on women’s rights and gender equality stalled during what Ms Lim coined as “The Men’s Years”, referring to the absence of female legislators in Parliament until 1984. These years saw what Ms Lim described as the concomitant enactment of gender discriminatory policies. She described how policies such as the one-third cohort quota limiting the number of female medical students in 1979 entrenched patriarchal mindsets in Singapore. These policies have since been reversed, but not before leaving their indelible mark on society, Ms Lim lamented. She cited a 2020 article in the Singapore Medical Association’s newsletter alleging that the quota was responsible for the National Healthcare Group’s lack of women in its senior leadership positions.
The Women Return Period (1984 – 2010)
Ms Lim discussed the return of women’s rights campaigns in the 1980s, with the re-entry of female politicians and the formation of new civil society advocacy groups like the Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations (SCWO) and AWARE. This time, their focus was on strengthening laws against family violence. Ms Lim recalled how she was roped in by then Nominated Member of Parliament, Dr Kanwaljit Soin, to draft and introduce a Family Violence Bill in 1995 – the second Private Member’s Bill in history to be presented in Parliament. Despite Parliament’s rejection of the bill, she praised the Government’s alternative proposal to amend the Women’s Charter to shore up protections for women against domestic abuse.
Alluding to the pattern of short bursts of change led by women’s rights groups and activists followed by long periods of stagnation and backsliding, Ms Lim concluded that simply relying on the sustained advocacy of women activists and civil society groups is insufficient. “What we need for more consistent progress is an explicit commitment by the Government to gender equality. A commitment with accountability,” she said.
Singapore’s ratification of the United Nations Convention to End All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1995 was a step in this direction, she acknowledged, leading to notable changes in policies, including the introduction of the Protection from Harassment Act, Prevention of Human Trafficking Act and removal of marital rape immunity. However, she contested that Singapore had only adopted the CEDAW to “fit in” with the two-thirds of countries in the world that had signed at least one UN Human Rights treaty. She further cautioned that this should not be mistaken for gender equality being ingrained as a fundamental value of Singapore.
Ground Up Activism (2011 – current)
Ms Lim proceeded to expound on the present phase of the fight for gender equality. She touched on the groundbreaking role that social media platforms have played in building public support for social justice initiatives, leading to the democratisation of the feminist agenda in the last decade. According to her, topics like misogyny, sexual violence and gender pay gaps have become mainstream issues of concern that people encounter in their everyday lives.
“Norms have shifted. What used to be commonplace boorish behaviour is no longer tolerated, and offenders can expect to be called out on this. We are all expected to play a part in ensuring environments that are respectful, inclusive and safe,” Ms Lim remarked.
Commenting on the Government’s ongoing Gender Equality Review that will culminate in a White Paper, Ms Lim noted that this is a valuable opportunity for the state to initiate a paradigm shift in Singaporeans’ outlook towards gender equality. She expressed hope that the White Paper will be “bold, visionary, substantive and long-term”.
“It should set out a clear and comprehensive plan that sets out the steps that the Government will take to role model, signal and set in place laws, policies and programmes to achieve its objective,” she added.
Besides engaging women’s rights activists and advocacy groups as part of this review, Ms Lim also hopes for the government to actively engage men in these conversations. She emphasised the importance of involving men, not just as male allies, but as individuals in their own right on the other side of gender equality.
Calling for “visible and substantive actions” to establish gender equality as a fundamental value in Singapore society, she advocated amending the two most authoritative expressions of Singapore’s values – the Constitution and Pledge.
Ms Lim proposed enshrining gender equality in Singapore’s Constitution by amending Article 12(2) to include gender as a prohibited basis for discrimination, alongside current prohibitions based on race, religion, descent and place of birth.
Alternatively, an aspirational and non-binding clause could be included to signify the state’s commitment towards gender equality if the amendment is not feasible, she added. “Even if it is not binding on the State, an aspirational section carries a strong symbolic value. Symbols are important when we are trying to shift mindsets,” she said.
Ms Lim also suggested incorporating gender into the National Pledge, proposing to revise the opening line to: “We the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language, religion or gender.”
“Imagine, if every day, girls and boys recited [this]… Gender equality would quickly be imprinted on the collective consciousness of all these young minds,” she added.
Q&A Section
Following the lecture, Ms Lim joined moderator Dr Kanwaljit Soin, founding member of AWARE and former Nominated Member of Parliament to take questions from the online audience.
Addressing a question on how the government can work together with women’s organisations to advance gender equality, Ms Lim recommended convening a multi-group committee featuring representations from different organisations, with subgroups that deal with key dimensions of equality, such as health and education. In her view, this would not only engage multiple stakeholders to drive change but also decentralise the push for gender empowerment to all facets of society. She also called for the allocation of more funding to women’s groups to empower and grant them greater autonomy.
When asked how AWARE would determine the government’s Gender Equality Review a success, Ms Lim suggested that an increase in the number of stay-at-home dads in Singapore might be a good indicator.
Responding to a question on the barriers to amending Article 12(2), Ms Lim acknowledged that the government has its work cut out for them in reviewing existing laws and policies that could contravene the proposed anti-discrimination clause on gender. She cited examples such as the Women’s Charter provision on spousal maintenance.
Regarding the feasibility of translating online engagements into concrete changes, Ms Lim expressed confidence in the ability of the digitally savvy younger generation in reaching out and engaging with others, including older generations, to promote gender equality and inspire change.
On the prospects of an Equal Pay for Equal Work law in Singapore, Ms Lim argued that such a law would be trickier to achieve. In her view, imposing a general anti-discrimination law would be more practical. She also argued that female-dominated low-wage sectors, such as those in childcare and nursing professions, should be included in the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) scheme.
Finally, replying to a question as to whether the Women’s Charter lives up to its name, Ms Lim proposed renaming the Women’s Charter to the Family Charter. To her, this would be a more accurate and less divisive name, citing the Charter’s greater focus on family law as opposed to women’s rights.
Click here to watch the video of lecture I.