Feminism went overboard

What ever believe we hold on to, let it be in moderation. Be it religion, principle or thought, there isn’t any need to go overboard. Take for example, feminism. The main idea is for fair treatment of the sexes, where there shouldn’t be prejudice and inequality. The keyword is “inequality”. What we want to achieve is to abolish inequality that oppresses people, regardless of sex, age, race, or whatever form of injustice. However, fighting against inequality doesn’t equate to fighting for equality, because that would be absurd.

Men and women are not “equal” (or more accurately, “identical”). Children and adults are not identical. All the races in the world are not identical. There will be differences (and we should appreciate these differences) in us, and to fight to become equal is illogical.

Feminists (male or female members) who hold on to extreme idea of trying to close the gap that separates or distinguishes men and women (or boy and girl) is not doing justice. As Nature intended, we are different. Science clearly showed that our development is different, our mind is differently wired, and our physiology/physique is completely different. How then can we be equal? What we should be fighting for is to abolish inequality, injustice, and disrespect, but at the same time, we should also respect that we are different, because diversity is good.

Similarly, in marketing science, researchers never tire to study the differences between men and women, so as to effectively target their sales to them. Success in marketing depends on how accurate researchers can predict the response from targeted buyers, and hence it isn’t surprising that corporation can spend millions of dollar just to get the right formula. For example, colorful packaging with floral design is usually meant for girls not because company wants to demean them, but rather to get the best response. Furthermore, skin care products are formulated separately from men and women to reflect gender differences in skin, and not to segregate the sexes so as to stereotype them in bad lights.

As a side note, I do admit that there will always be half-baked marketing company that will come up with stupid, infuriating, and insensitive ideas for their product, e.g. nude models for Volkswagen car in China. The event organizer failed miserable to understand their market. No one in their healthy mind would want to drive their wife and daughter in a car that is so freaking insensitive and disrespectful to women!

Well, I say, keep on fighting against inequality and injustice. But please do it in the right way because it is not mentally healthy to be oversensitive (or over-zealous) all the time. Most important, being a prick could inadvertently hurt the wrong people.

Lastly, I do support the struggle of feminism, and I stand by the ideology, but what I will not tolerate is for zealots to ruin the main intention of the movement. Similarly, brainless zealots are the ones who turned beautiful religion into terror. That should never be condoned.

Just a thought.


Fw: Be gracious, there is no entitlement in Singapore

Hi, I just wanted to share an article with the above title.

Here is the link to Be gracious, there is no entitlement in Singapore. I have seen many people, even the elderly forgetting the basic needs to interact with other people (which is respect). Sad to see that there are nasty elders who failed to know karma. I guess sometimes, age doesn’t really improve a person’s wisdom and tone down their nastiness.

Just a thought.

Good or bad neighbor?

My neighbor brought an old couple as guest to her home for dinner, we met and we were introduced. An unexpected side-question was uttered by the husband of the couple, “is he a good neighbor”?

My embarrassed neighbor answer promptly saying good things about me and my family who lived just next door.

The next question directed to me blew me off my feet, “are you local or foreigner”?


I’m flabbergasted.

“Gender equality”, why men hate this statement..

Time and again, men (especially young men) despise such statement being made by women rights groups. Why do they react in such a way, especially when these men have loved ones comprising womenfolk at home, e.g. mother, sisters, aunts, cousins, other family members as well as best friends?

Take for example the comments from Yahoo News SAF stopping the singing of ‘misogynist’ lyrics from marching song: AWARE

The commentators (mostly young adults I guess) would equate their hardship at NS training being more than women; and hence there shouldn’t be any equality in this sense – because they experienced more hardship while girls don’t. They seemed to dislike the connotation of equality because men think they sacrificed more in society. Likewise, women fight for “equality” want to be treated equally because their sacrifice is comparable if not more than men.

To me, I think both sexes are right in the sense that they sacrificed a lot for society and humankind. They are actually fighting for the same cause. Women fight for “equality” doesn’t mean that they are belittling the contribution and sacrifice of menfolk – in actuality, they are fighting against “inequality”. Fighting against “inequality” doesn’t deprive men of their strength.

The statement “fight for equality” is misleading to men and to me because there can never be equality of sexes (nor their roles in society). Probably that is the reason why some men dislike such statement.

For example, men work in construction sector where womenfolk don’t because of the “unequal” physiques. Secondly, men fight in war and kill (or got killed) in seconds and later awarded as heroes, whereas women work in the “safe zone” mending the injure. Last, most men work all day just to bring bread to table while women stay at home.

In reality, we don’t realize that women are not ignoring men contribution nor their hardship. In sectors where women can contribute, they are just asking to be given “equal” treatment and opportunity as men (based on performance rather than on sexes). As men, we surely want our loved ones such as mothers, or wives (and daughters) to be respected and given equal treatment at work, no? Furthermore, in war we fought and killed millions in seconds, BUT do we realize that women fight for 9 months and 20 more years to bring up a life without any expectation for any HEROES awards except to see the smile of their sons (and daughters)? We can’t really compare because comparing is doing injustice.

Probably that is why “fighting for equality” statement which serve to compare causes some dislike in men because they don’t realize in-an-instance that the word equality is context-dependent such as in terms of education, health, and work – and not to equate men’s role with women’s.

But I guess young adults will be young and will need time to mature. These individuals will realize that one day they will have daughters and the realization that having women rights in society will ensure that their daughters will at least be in good hands. Furthermore, women rights group movement comprises men as active members and not exclusively women – and this should be made known to everyone constantly.

As a son, a father, and cousin brother to my loved ones, I for one support women rights and respect them. I consider myself a member to AWARE Singapore (and other women rights group), although I’m not a registered member.

Death penalty is not revenge

Society is like a living organism; when cells become malignant (and life-threatening), they should be removed. A society which keeps these cells in the system run a risk of severe morbidity (if not death). What benefit is there to society if these cells are contained (or preserved)? To me, these cells can still do harm by depleting resources (in terms of maintenance cost, human resource, among others) which could have benefited people who really need (and deserved) them. Worst, if the containment is flawed, prisons can be used as bases for organized crimes (it has been reported).

If death sentence is considered revenge, who do you think is avenged (if not families of victims)? The majority is just relieved that another threat is removed. As simple as that.

When the US went to war (probably killed thousands) because a terrorist state was perceived as malignant and life-threaten, can we assign such response as “revenge”?

If you compare senseless (or emotional or calculated) and spontaneous (or chronic torture) act of killing people as murder; revenge seems to be under the same category as “murder“. However, the judicial-cum- execution process is not. No ill intention was ever meant for the convict and the process is never easy. If you compare the rate (number per day) of people murdered in crime, “murder” by sentencing is almost nil.

If you think murder is cruel; how about confinement without parole? Isn’t that more cruel, being caged for life (like animals in zoos or birds in cages)? Sometimes, I hope the decision can be decided by the convicts, i.e. death or forever caged.

It would be akin to giving terminally ill person a decision to either continue living with the pain or have induced death (euthanasia). For some criminals, I guess death is an easier way out rather than to live regretfully (for being caught) behind bars.

Last, I still hold firm that “death penalty is not revenge killing”.

Reserved seatings, but unreserved mutual respects


We know the meaning of this seating (reserved seating). They are meant for commuters who need them more than others. However, sometimes people at the borderline of the definition “needy” makes it difficult to distinguish who needs and who doesn’t.

The best way to help distinguishing (as well as show respect to one another) would be to ask for the seat courteously, without reservation nor expectation. The former describes needless feeling of reservation (nor qualm) in asking for seat regardless of circumstances (e.g. if the other party sleeps or pretend to be). As for the latter, no-expectation means we don’t expect to get the seat. This helps prepare and beef us for whatever the outcome may be; only with less expectation comes less disappointment (or frustration and anger) but it will be a pleasant surprise as well after knowing how caring and friendly people really are. Don’t forget that after having made a proactive approach of asking for seat, we let ourselves be in a lot more control of a situation and whatever outcome is just secondary to that rewarding feeling we feel inside. Who knows, we could be helping the other party-who-let-us-his-seat feel good about his being and deed as well.

Lastly, do have faith that majority of people are good and they are willing to let seats to the needy.

Smile always and you will get one in return…