We were soldiers once… and young.
While there are few of us who served our National Service (NS) with pride, we doggedly do for our nation what is required of us (the 2 / 2.5 years full time + regular ‘reservists’ call up). No NSF or NSmen expected any gratitude, but neither do we expect to be discriminated against or looked down upon. Yet someone calling herself JusticeLegal has done just that on an online forum (see below).
Someone, who never even need to share the burden and obligation to the defense of our nation, who enjoyed the security and peace provided by the very men in the defense forces she ridiculed, called them ‘green smelly things’ and gone so far to even call for soldiers to be banned from our public transports. Yet why someone high and mighty like her and her precious daughters would suggest our poor NS boys to take taxis while she wouldn’t, is beyond me!
She is fortunate she is born in modern day Singapore, because had she been born in the formative years of the People’s Republic of China, she would regret what she has written. Back in 1949, the Communist forces captured Guangzhou. As most of the soldiers of the communist soldiers were from the temperate and cooler northern provinces, they were unfamiliar with the climate conditions of sub-tropical Guangdong province and thus at times, sentries of the Communist forces would stink as a result of the lack of proper showers / baths. When the ladies in Guangdong walked past these soldiers, they will cover or pinch their noses in reaction to the stench.
Of course this greatly upset the soldiers of the victorious Communist forces. They decided to teach these women a lesson and any of them who did so while walking past a checkpoint or sentry post, will be made to stand under the hot Guangzhou sun until they perspire and start to smell before they were allowed to go.
While I am not suggesting a similar punishment for JusticeLegal, she should consider herself fortunate that she was born in more civilised times and a far less vindicative country.
Now, the matter of National Servicemen reminded me once again of the ‘NoToRape’ Petition to repeal Section 375 (4). It reminds me that not only does the Woman’s Charter already put Singaporean men in a disadvantage, there is also a disparity in the obligations, burdens and responsibilities between Singaporean men and women.
The gall of the very attempt to demand legislative rights for saying ‘no to sex’ to one’s husband irks me. And the very hypocrisy behind the support from members of AWARE pushing for this repeal irritates me to no end. Here I quote a comment from a female Malay blogger:
I think that the marital rape charter only applies to non-Muslim women as Muslim marriages have laws that govern it. However, a Muslim wife is not allowed to say no to the husband when he wants sex. He’s just supposed to understand that a wife isn’t his chattel to do as he pleases but if he wants it right now, the wife must give in. It kinda sucks actually.
Totally out of topic, I guess, but I thought I’d just like to share that little bit.
My point of quoting this comment in specific is this: Do we see AWARE screaming about the above which technically gave the husband the ‘right’ to rape his wife?
Where, is AWARE for the Malay woman who claimed she has no confidence in Josie Lau’s ExCo because they were Christian and Chinese? Let me guess, they will hide behind the Religious Harmony Act for their lack of action for this particular member. I am quite sure the Malay woman who so blatantly trampled upon our pledge – in specific the part on ‘regardless of race, language or religion – has her faith well placed in the new ExCo led by Dana Lam, which she probably elected.
If AWARE believes such hypocritical actions will regain the public’s confidence in that association, they are continuing down the wrong path. (It makes me wonder if they have been on the right path to begin with!)
Anyway, I will sign the petition for repealing Section 375 (4) only when the very people who pushes for it will also push for an amendment of the National Service Act. i.e. that women will now be required to serve National Service as well. On top of which, there should be a new Woman’s Charter with ‘means testing’ in place. No longer should a woman who is already capable of earning as much or even more money than the man, or already have in her possession a large amount of assets be allowed to claim up to 50% of the husband’s wealth in a divorce.
As my friend nocturne has said in this post: Equal rights. Equal obligation.
You can’t have your pie and eat it too.
Funny Picture of the Day:
It’s saddening to know that these things happen, when these army boys would be actually ensuring our safety in times of trouble. Civilians never know anything.
.-= roxy.z´s last blog ..Lifes perspective. =-.
maybe the MinDef should hang a “this family is not cover under SAF” banner on this family’s door step.
you know in modern China, a family with son serving in the army, they proudly hang a banner with the words “一人当兵, 全家光荣” outside their house. And above their main door, they stick a red tag that says “军属光荣”.
Now that is pride.
.-= chillycraps´s last blog ..fine for flag =-.
Chances are, she is a product of indoctrination of radical feminism that has sneaked into our education system.
“Can’t they take taxi with their pay?”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Ah, Singaporeans…
I have quite a few American friends, and they speak proudly of their sons, daughters, family and friends who are in the Armed Forces and even thank them for their services. Here in Singapore, you get funny looks from (mostly) womenfolk who give you a look of disgust for smelling bad. Yea, we are supposed to come out of the jungle smelling of flowers, aren’t we, ladies?