Respected Chairperson, honourable judges, members of staff and friends. My knowledgeable opponent is of the opinion that the education of the girl child of the family is a burden. I strongly oppose the motion. May I ask how can educating the girl child, who is an equal partner in sharing the responsibilities and duties, be a burden? She will be sharing the burden and reducing its impact by supplementing the resources rather than reducing them. Let me draw your attention to the fact that such notions are a thing of the past. If the boys and girls are to be treated as equals, then both of them have right to education. If resources can be spared for the boy's education then they have to be spared for the education of the girl too, as we have seen that educating a child is not a burden, but an investment. So the family has to devise means, squeeze its budget and make space for the education of the girl child, because the future of the family depends upon the growth and education of the girl child. So I oppose this motion and I feel that it is regressive. It is a well established fact that education is a kind of investment. By educating the girl child the family is making a sound financial investment. When the girl child is educated, she will reduce the financial burden of her father and later her husband. So how can my friends say that it is a burden?
My knowledgeable friend has stated that by providing for the education of the girl child a family diverts its precious resources. But I would like to inform my friend that at the school level and even at higher levels the government institutes are providing free education to the girl child and concessions are given. So in this case the family only has to spend on her books and clothes etc.
Moreover, my friend has stated that household work is the duty of the girl child. It is such traditionally ascribed gender roles that have led to gender inequality in society. Data shows that it is uneducated...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document