8 Reasons Why It’s Okay For National Service Men To Sing About Rape

Singapore NS Men

Just a little bit of context: AWARE Singapore (a women’s rights group in Singapore) was alerted by seven National Service (NS) men to a verse of  Purple Light, an army marching song, that went like:

“Booking out, see my girlfriend
Saw her with another man
Kill the man, rape my girlfriend
With my rifle and my buddy and me.”

AWARE then brought it up with the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and MINDEF, who then investigated and decided that they would stop their men from singing this “offensive” verse.

AWARE FB Status

This sparked an outcry among NS men – most of whom are serving the army full-time as part of their compulsory 2-year National Service in accordance to Singapore law. They all but bombarded the AWARE Facebook post and the comment pages on all the local news outlets that reported on the issue.

There were many comments, most of which were incoherent. But from what I could gather, these are some of the top reasons why they say it should be okay for NS men to sing about rape.

1. NS sucks, so NS men deserve the right to sing about anything they want – including rape.

Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.31.33 PM

Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.26.20 PM

2. Not only does military training suck, but NS men also run the risk of losing the girlfriends while they’re stuck in camp – which happens a lot. So they deserve the right to vent against these evil girlfriends – even if it means singing about raping them.

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 3.28.06 PM

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 4.11.26 PM

3. Most of the time, it’s foreigners’ faults that they’re losing their girlfriends – life is horribly unfair to these NS men. So they should be able to vent and sing about anything they want, which includes rape.

Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.26.40 PM

4. AWARE is simply overreacting! IT’S JUST A SONG. AND NS MEN ARE SUFFERING GOD DAMNIT! LET THEM SING ABOUT RAPE! NS sufferings > Idea of rape. Get over it!

Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.25.43 PM

5. Singing about rape doesn’t make you a rapist. “Grow the fuck up and live in the real world!”

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 3.29.03 PM Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 3.27.56 PM Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.33.13 PM

6. AWARE is a bloody hypocrite! They protect women but don’t seem to care about men! Gender equality my arse!

Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.32.33 PM Screen Shot 2013-11-15 at 5.28.11 PM

7. Military men singing about rape as a form of bonding experience is such a “trivial” issue, compared to the hard work and suffering the men go through to protect our country.

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 3.29.17 PM

8. This song has been around for DECADES – you’re messing with tradition! Fact is: this song is HARMLESS.

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 4.11.33 PM

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 3.39.53 PM

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 4.09.37 PM

Sheldon weeps for humanity

I was interested to find out if similar incidences happened in other countries and how people reacted to them. And I found the St. Mary’s University (Canada) case where a rape chant during orientation week caused some controversy.

The rape chant went like this: “SMU boys we like them young … Y is for your sister, O is for oh so tight, U is for underage, N is for no consent, G is for grab that ass.”

There are the obvious similarities: like this SAF case, it was a seemingly “harmless” setting. Just a bunch of people having fun, and blowing off some steam. But in the Canadian case, it was around 400 people who were chanting, whereas in this Singapore situation, the numbers run into the tens or hundreds of thousands – seeing that the Singapore army is about 500,000 strong. Granted, there are other versions of the army song that don’t include the word “rape” but I would think the number of guys who know and sing this version is pretty significant.

In the Canadian case, it was a big issue party because it was a Roman Catholic school. And here in Singapore, I would think it’d be a big issue as well, seeing that this is our national army we’re talking about.

The biggest difference between the St Mary’s situation and the SAF one, is that after they got called out, the student leaders in St Mary’s were apologetic and the reactions from the public (from what I could see) were mostly outrage at how this could’ve been going on for years without getting caught.

In Singapore, however, our comments were mostly by NS men who are actually upset that the lyrics got banned. Far from being apologetic or glad that the song should no longer see the light of day, they are angered and obstinate about continuing with singing the verse.

Screen Shot replacement

Even more mindblowingly, women were commenting and saying “I sing this with my boyfriend and I think it’s perfectly fine.”

Screen Shot 2013-11-17 at 4.31.29 PM

I wouldn’t be upset if there were the occasional dissenting voice about freedom of speech and censorship. But it honestly scares me that the side supporting the use of the song overwhelms the other by a drastic amount.

It just makes me so incredibly sad.

How anyone can argue that singing about rape is harmless is completely beyond me. Normally I could just write this off with “OMG I really hate people.” Or “Singaporeans are so stupid.” But this is actually really really disturbing. And I’m just really hoping that someone somehow can convince these NS men and occasional bimbo how singing about raping a cheating girlfriend with a rifle and buddy is definitely a no-no in any context.

Because I would think it’s completely self-explanatory. And I really have no idea how to make it plainer that banning it is absolutely the right move.

Thankfully, Conventionally.wordpress.com puts it across much clearer than I ever could. And if you’re open to listening to the women’s side of the story, and finding out why the verse should be banned, please give her blog a read.

*Edit* This blog offers a great explanation on why singing about rape should be taken seriously, and why it’s so offensive: Verse of Army Song “Purple Light” Banned: The importance of shaping culture

*Edit2* For all the comments I’ve gotten. This latest one from this guy I shall dub “Exasperated Roy” got me most annoyed. My reply to him was my most organised one, and one that I actually bothered to research for. So I’m just gonna bring it up here for anyone who cares to read.

Exasperated Roy Comment NS Men Sing About Rape Purple Light

Reply to Exasperated Roy Comment NS Men Sing About Rape Purple Light

Thanks to everyone else for your comments! I feel a lot better that the argument now seems a lot more balanced than before when it was just “You girls don’t know what we go through in NS. Stop making mountains out of mole hills. blah blah blah”

Everyone is entitled to their opinions – we just need to be respectful of each other.

Advertisements

63 comments

  1. Thank you so much for this post! All the posts and comments I’ve been seeing about this issue has done nothing but piss me off more and more. This, so far, is the only post I’ve seen that actually speaks the words in my mind! I simply cannot understand how and why people are angry over a banned verse. I love how you call out on their bullshit in this post, because it shows how whiny and unreasonable those men are being. Sure, as a girl I’ll never know how tough NS is, but the way they complain about 2 years of TRAINING like it’s absolute torture is really embarrassing. I mean there are soldiers who spend 6 years or more in actual war-torn countries, and I don’t hear them complaining as much as these Singaporean men. Soldiers fighting real war, with real frustrations who don’t get to see their girlfriends/wives/partners for months at a time do not sing of rape as a way of “venting”, so why are Singaporean men being such unreasonable babies? Like you said, the inappropriate verse doesn’t anger me as much as the reactions of the public. I would’ve thought that everyone would realize that banning it was the right thing to do and got a complete shock at the responses we got instead. It’s disappointing and frustrating that they don’t understand WHY it has been banned and WHY it was the right thing to do. So really, thank you for this post, it gives me hope that not all Singaporeans are incapable of rational thinking.

    1. It’s true that Singaporeans complain about their NS life and all that. I was one of them too. In a sense, i know our army is not so tough in our training and so on. Thinking back about it, i guess the reason why most guys in Singapore complain about NS is because there is no pride in serving NS. Singapore and the government itself don’t value NS and the people who serve it only until recently that there are some initiatives to recognise NSmen contributions.

      I went for an overseas training in Taiwan and we wore Taiwanese army uniform, stay in Taiwan’s army camps. The feeling of serving NS there is so much different. When i drove out on the streets of Taiwan, both children and adults wave to us smiling and acknowledging the sacrifice the army has made.

      Nevertheless, i still think even with all the unhappiness of NS and all that, this rape thing should not even be sung in the first place. It has nothing to do with “venting” or whatsoever. It just goes to show how screwed up the minds of Singaporean men are. I’m sure there are guys who are against this and i’m one of them. Maybe many choose to remain silent leaving those who think rape is correct to comment. I have already commented before earlier that i’m totally against it and i’m happy that it is now banned in our army. There are even more crude things in the army that a lot of people do not know. This is not the only one but i shall not comment any further.

    2. ivanovich · ·

      You cannot simply understand why people are angry about it? Why don’t you try reading some of the comments posted on this thread. Because it is quite apparent that you didn’t. Either that or you merely lack the mental faculties that allow one to comprehend logical arguments.

      Now what really caught my nerve was the sheer bullshit you spat out about our complaining about ns. Unreasonable babies are we? Well have you considered the fact that we DID NOT volunteer for this, unlike those godly men who you hold in such high esteem? The ones who ” spend 6 years or more in actual war-torn countries”. Well I presume you are referring to the allied forces in Iraq or Afghanistan, who by the way spend approximately 6 months, give or take, at the war front. Not 6 years. Well I will just consider this as a testament of your naivety.

      And then you claim ” and I don’t hear them complaining as much as these Singaporean men. ” Well clearly you spend a lot of time under your bed. During the Vietnam war, more than a hundred thousand Americans migrated to Canada when conscription was introduced. I believe migration is a form of portraying disapproval. And just in case you don’t know, and I’m quite sure you don’t, conscription, putting it simply, is forcing people to join the army, just like ns.

      The way we complain about 2 years of training is embarrassing huh? What the heck do you know about ns? You are in no position to tell us what we can or should say or think about ns. And you think training is the only thing we complain about? How about being constantly made to do things against our will? Or being punished for the most trivial or reasons? And all the injustices which I will not bother to list down here. You are clearly oblivious to all these.

      Next time think (assuming you are capable of doing so ) before you decide to insult half the country’s population..

    3. Hi Nina, thank you for your comment. Don’t worry about Ivanovich over here. This is his second angry comment here, and thanks to him, I’ve decided to disallow comments for this post from now onwards. Well, he wasn’t the whole reason – I’ve been considering it for the past day and his comment was the thing that tipped the scales.

      Hi SGYI, thanks for your comments as well. And I actually agree, I think that Singaporeans in general do not give our NS guys the appreciation and respect they deserve for giving two years of their lives, plus the many cycles of reservist they have to go through. Personally I don’t have an issue with them complaining – I was only angered when they took their frustrations out on this whole issue in a very disrespectful way to women.

      Also, thank you for speaking up on your discomfort with the song lyrics. We need more guys like you who are willing to speak up while offering a fair and balanced view of the issue. So, cheers :)

  2. […] actually much further back than you had ever thought. It’s depressing, frankly, watching the berserk response over AWARE’s announcement of their role in the halting of the misogynistic lyrics in the […]

  3. I’m trying to structure this in a neutral manner, and I hope no offence will be taken. I agree with the general perspective of your post, that the current gendered climate and culture is appalling, but I think the disjuncture in where you think the responses you have received or seen to be “incoherent” actually lie within a slightly different matter.

    I suggest that this disparity in views lies in how your perspective sees and builds intrinsic bridges between song to culture to nature, versus the average joe’s “there is no link between singing for entertainment and what I do”. Unfortunately, despite being a guy, i need to stress that the majority of the second perspective is the average JOE. What I am suggesting here is not that your perspective is wrong, but you might have over-reacted a little in seeing where some of them come from. It might not all be some cruel intrinsic misogynistic element hot-wired into young Singaporean men to react this way, but some are simply frustrated as to why their “culture” has been infringed and trespassed upon; of which said “culture” is what NSmen believe as separate from “Singapore’s culture”. Alas, it is not.

    In addition, I think most people know by now that the lyrics sung in Purple light, the ones that have been found to be offensive, are not the original lyrics of the song. The truth is, for all these chants and marching songs, there is no written form in distribution. They are passed on by oral tradition. See, songs passed on through oral tradition generally do not take on the composer’s views. In fact the “last generation” of the same song may never have intended for the song to change that way. Yet it takes but one new guy to learn the song, parody it to match his pains and share his sentiment amongst like-minded buddies, and then coerce the rest of the group to follow along, before you get “Purple light ver. X”. And it need not be Purple light. It can be anything else. I do realise your frustrations are not with and about the song, but it is an offending component in this debacle and I’m trying to demonstrate how such incidents and situations occur, and will very well tend to occur again. All it takes is one new disgruntled NSman whose girlfriend ditches him. Then it becomes a new issue.

    Another thing, when it comes to songs, I quote Roland Barthes on this: “The death of the author” is the birth of the reader. How you read the song and see the song decontextualised is not how the song might actually be sung. I personally remember singing this song during my road march and it was incoherent because i was dropping dead towards the end of the march. Not so much a word that could be understood was actually enunciated. In Morag Shiach’s Discourse on popular culture, she suggests various forms of culture. To name a few, these include adversarial culture, populist culture, plebeian culture, mass culture and politically expedient culture. Any one individual would have experienced more than one of these by the time he/ she has reached adulthood, yet a problem will arise from this very experience. This would be the tensions between social definition of a culture, speaking for the culture and speaking about the culture. The difference between speaking for and speaking about is the speaker’s standpoint during such an explanation. What you have issues with, and what you might not be happy with is thus where you have been “speaking about the culture” without speaking “for the culture”. Whilst I’m not suggesting you should (Lord forbid, it most probably wouldn’t go well), I hope you do see how understanding people might not be so straightforward as how you might gripe when you simply look at comments.

    What I want to put across, is that in future, perhaps you could be more direct, and explain that its not the singing, its not the venting, and not the comments alone, but mayhap the links that you see, eventually showing the ugly side of what our culture that you seem to see, that you have a problem with. Then from there, a more substantial argument might come about, I hope. I’ve only read your article but I haven’t gone through all the comments I’m afraid. I’ve seen enough to make me feel apologetic about what the male gender (not sex, that’s biological) has been shaped into.

  4. When I was in the army 4 years ago, we were already singing this song with the rape in the lyrics. The first time I heard it I got really uncomfortable with that song and everytime we sang to the sentence on the rape part, I would keep silent and skip it. To me, it’s just plain degrading to girls and women.

    I told it to some of my girl friends and they were shocked that we were singing this kind of songs in army. Many girls don’t know that this thing exist until now I guess.

    I’m actually glad that this is banned now in our army.

  5. SadLittleWoman · ·

    Hi Natalie. First I would like to say that as a woman I enjoyed the read. Before I begin I would like to apologize in advance for how bad my English is going to be. I’m from Scandinavia and although we do learn English in school I never got any good at it (I’m a dyslexic).

    I sadly find some of the comments defending this song well reasoned, but sadly your counter-defense is rather lacking. I assume you haven’t done this intentionally, but rather it happened because you where agitated.

    You ask rhetorically the stegosaurus Ivanovich if he really didn’t believe there is any academic studies regarding rape. He never really claims that there is not. He is asking about papers that look at convicted rapists thinking that rape isnt bad because of how rape is conveyed in culture. You only give one paper that is not only not about this, but also is over 40 years old! (Books don’t really count as they are not peer reviewed.)

    He further goes on saying that if this song would excuse rapist, or even produce more rapists then there would also be more killers due to this song or songs etc like it. You completely ignore this point – perhaps because acknowledging this would surely be acknowledging that the song does not at all promote or excuse rape the same way it does not promote or excuse murder.

    I have disregarded the ad hominems as I’m sure you are aware that you used them – maybe for comedic affect (although this might be, I feel that using them makes your stance seem a lot weaker).

    Anyways. I’m happy that you at least doesn’t censor your comment section. Props for that! I get sad when debates on the internet get censored, either by youtubers or bloggers blocking comment-sections or heavily censors opposing views:)
    I surely will continue to follow your blog:)

  6. desertfox · ·

    Cannot imagine how the banning of the lyrics could lead to such debates. It is really very simple, the lyrics are really quite inappropriate. Be it “killing the man” or “raping the girlfriend”, the lyrics are inappropriate, even if it just for venting.

    And of course, it is also ridiculous to say that the lyrics would promote a rape culture. Most of the NSFs sing it to vent their frustrations, if not, just for the sake of singing it. Our NSFs have more common sense than to go around raping or killing people. Not funny when the penalty of death could be looming.

    There really isn’t any debate at all given the above. The lyrics should be removed or reverted to its original form, and people should stop thinking that our NSFs are “young impressionable little boys” who would promote a rape culture based on the lyrics of a song. That’s just drama; drama like the entire, “NSFs have to kill/die/lose-job-/uni-placing-to-foreigner” argument/antic.

    I sang these very same “purple lyrics” lyrics 10 years ago. I couldn’t care less whether I sang it or I don’t get to sing it. It doesn’t matter.

    MINDEF did away with hokkien/chinese army songs a long time ago, and no one really cared. They realised that we had a force of multi-ethnic conscripts, and the songs had to be in a language which everyone could sign along to. The Army grew more conscious of the fact that Singaporeans no longer could speak / understand each other’s ethnic languages, and thus army songs had to be in English. I disagreed, and felt that the Army should sing songs in EVERY language… Dayung Sampan for route march would be ftw.

    The same is happening about the “rape/kill” lyrics in Purple light. Seriously, there are a lot of women serving as regulars in the SAF these days. So singing such lyrics, even if in camp, shouldn’t be tolerated. Again, the SAF is refining itself and becoming more conscious about songs celebrating un-gentlemenly conduct.

    Wall of text complete. Summary: 1. Stop singing kill/rape, 2. Stop thinking NSF are dumb.

  7. Hi, thank you for the post. I’ve gone from being irritated to disgusted to plain horrified by the lack of understanding most Singaporean men appear to have regarding this very important issue. Please do share this TED video by a man himself, speaking about this very same thing.

    Where are the good men who should be defining how real men behave?

  8. ivanovich · ·

    I’ve read your post and the majority of the comments. I have to agree most of the arguments potrayed in your blogpost put forth by my male counterparts are best described as ridiculous, though some good ones were raised in the comments, which you failed to address sufficiently.

    Now remember I’m raising these points up after reading your post and your comments. I would also ask that you read it entirely and not dismiss it after the first paragraph.

    First, let me point out that your comparison of this incident and the one at the Canadian university is irrelevant. Unlike the song they sang, the theme of the embellished version of purple light does not revolve around rape. There just happened to be one particular verse about it after a line about murder, which was so unfortunately brought to the attention of AWARE. Our song does not directly condone or glorify rape like the one sung in that Canadian university. I don’t think there is enough in it for the public to comdemn it or for all army men to apologize. Also, I agree when you say a song about rape is, or can be considered offensive. However, this song is not solely about rape, like I said. It is about a myriad of other things. Don’t you think it would be too much to take offense from such a song? Would it not be akin to taking offense when someone says ‘go and die ‘ or something of that nature? Well to each his or or her own I guess.

    Now that aside, you say ” singing about raping a cheating girlfriend with a rifle and buddy is definitely a no-no in any context.
    Because I would think it’s completely self-explanatory.” Is it really? Well I must have the intellectual capacity of a stegosaurus because I fail to see how it is self explanatory. No where, not in your post or your comments, do you provide a strong basis for saying singing about rape is a big “no-no”. So tell me again why? Why is it okay to sing about murder but not rape? I’m not saying murder is more serious than rape, or vice versa. Sure, these are all terrible things which we should all deplore. If your argument had centered around the notion that singing songs that contain lyrics with questionable morals was a big “no-no”, perhaps you would make more sense. But no, you seem to only have an issue with our singing the rape bit.

    You seem to be under the impression that singing about rape trivializes it. What is your evidence? If singing about something condones that idea or even belittles it, then I’m afraid we should be living in a world where murder and rape are commonplace or accepted by the majority. But we don’t (accept for arabia, iran etc maybe in the case of rape, but that owes to various other circumstances, and not a song.) In the French national anthem, they sing about watering the fields with the blood of their enemies. Wow. They must be all mass murderers then. Or at least they must all advocate it. But clearly they are not and I believe I can safely say the vast majority of them are against mass murder. On the same point, I do not believe any man or commander in the saf would consider the issue in rape a trivial one. Surely we all have mothers, girlfriends and sisters. How could you even suggest that we could take lightly a crime that could potentially, though it is extremely unlikely, affect ones we hold so dear? And don’t tell me It’s because we sing this song. Or used to.

    Perhaps that is why so many of us are angry. Because we were banned from singing a version of a song we thought nothing of. We never actually believed singing this song would somehow encourage or trivialize the issue of rape. Until of course AWARE comes barging in making claims about the harm this song does. Now don’t get me wrong, I agree with you completely that we have a right to interfere when the situation suits it. Evil can only triumph when good men do nothing. But the thing is, the evil component is absent in this case. At least from my perspective. Rape is evil. There is no question. But singing about it in jest? I believe this has already been raised. In addition to that, we’re mad not because we’re so adamant about singing about rape, but because we’re deprived of having the liberty to decide what songs we can sing.

    Okay one last thing. You mentioned ” It’s because men like you think that singing about rape is not a big deal, that rapists think that rape itself really isn’t, so they think nothing of their crime.” Oh is it? How do you know that rapists don’t think anything of their crime? Did you do a survey with convicted rapists? I presume you did use an appropriate sample size? Oh and how did you come to the conclusion that it’s because men don’t think singing about rape is a big deal that causes rapists to think likewise about rape? Is there a research paper by a reputable university, think tank or government organization, the existence of which I’m unaware of? If there is please do inform me. I would be delighted to take a read. Oh please, we should really stop bouncing around baseless points.

    Anyway I hope you don’t see this as diatribe but as an attempt to reason with you. I’m looking forward to your response. Have a nice day.

    1. Okay sorry that was in a fit of anger. Doesn’t make you less of an asshole.

      I have an issue with the rape bit because I personally find it offensive. Because rape is a real thing that girls go through – plus rapists get away with it a lot more often than murderers do as mentioned above. Men can kill women. But women can kill men too. Men can rape women. But how many women have raped men? Rape is one thing that men will never understand the depth of, but it’d be nice if you could respect that it’s a very real, very scary thing for us. Just as we will never understand how tough NS is – but I would never belittle it, not with you nor any of my friends. No I wouldn’t even sing about how NS is such a breeze and our men our pussies for whining about it – it’s not true, and it could be funny (to assholes like how rape is funny to assholes) but I wouldn’t sing it because it would upset people. Simple as that.

      I feel like a lot of your points have been countered by the blogs that I’ve linked to in my post. And you clearly aren’t really interested in knowing why women find this rape thing offensive – rather, you’re more interested in stroking your own ego and proving you’re smarter than everyone. So I don’t see a point in arguing with you.

      These are the books I found that you can read if you’re really that interested in understanding rape culture, the psychology behind rapists, why women are so affected by the idea of rape etc.

      “Rape. Challenging Contemporary Thinking” by Miranda Horvath and Jennifer Brown, “Accounting for Rape : Psychology, Feminism and Discourse Analysis in the Study of Sexual Violence” by Irina Anderson and Kathy Doherty, and – my university database didn’t have full access to this but from its synopsis, it looks like it could be pretty enlightening – “Psychological Studies of Rape” by Rochelle Semmel Albin.

      Or you could, I don’t know, sing the song in front of your mother and sister and ask what they think about it.

      Either way, if you still can’t see why singing about rape is offensive, then you’re entitled to your own opinion. Just stop shoving it down people’s throats.

  9. Why is it nobody seems to realise it’s not the want to preserve the line that has caused the uproar? What we are seeing is actually negative public sentiment towards AWARE as an organisation.

    While not necessarily representative of my views as well as that of others, it would seem that AWARE does not get much respect from the public because it is genuinely lacks EQ in handling the rights movement. Every statement by them is often an aggressive declaration of open conflict with someone or some organisation. In other words, the statements AWARE make tend to make others feel that they are under personal attack, that their morals are questioned and their characters condemned. The FB post AWARE made regarding this saga has them waving their “victory” in the faces of men with pride, feelings and dignity. The tone of their post set the stage for the saga.

    Is it honestly so hard to “give face”? To discuss the matter with MINDEF without openly criticizing an organisation to which almost every Singaporean son belongs to? Arguing that they had not meant to target the organisation or every soldier is futile. They should have foreseen that the tone of their speech and approach they took was insensitive to others and were likely to spark an outcry.

    Had it been a military personnel who raised the issue instead of AWARE, I have no doubts that the public would have been more accepting. This military man would have put it to his fellow soldiers that it was not appropriate of soldiers to conduct themselves as such, that that line was insensitive and in bad taste, and that the SAF and every member of it could do better. Indeed I do not think any soldier would disagree with that. Instead we had an organisation known for being ever too eager to condemn others and claim credit for every success along the way. One can express elation without offending others. We should be concerned at the lack of basic EQ AWARE has demonstrated.

    The most likely justification for their aggressive, war-mongering attitude is of course that only with such gusto would a rights group get anything done. I would concede on that point. Nonetheless, the realisation I wish to bring us to is that the public reaction we witness today does not arise because our brave men accepts the inappropriate lyrics. Rather, it is merely an expression of dissatisfaction with AWARE with regards to the manner in which they go about their business.

    1. Here, here. Well said!

  10. I think the whole issues for singaporean man is not about banning the song.. There’s more in-depth to this. My personal view is I’m ok or no comments on whether the song should be ban or not.. In any case – I’ve never heard or sang that “rape” version during my days.

    Let me give you an example before I explains this in-depth: I’m the eldest in my family and always when comes to contributing more $ or effort, my sibling will always use this phase “You are the eldest mah!!’. But recently when my parent started to draft their inheritance wealth – They want it to evenly spread amount all of us.

    This is the issue I had here. Is not about how much $$ i will be getting because I don’t even care or even think is rightfully mine in the 1st place. But what I don’t like is ppl always use this “You are the eldest” phase where they contribute lesser but when there are gains to share – They want it to be equally shared.

    Likewise for all these equally rights or treated between man and woman. All we see is this organization or individual parties want/fight for something to that they will gain but instead not want/fight for things that we man are suffering for. Which is why you see some comment on why didn’t you fight or demand that woman should serve army as well?

    There’s a saying I always use: “When there’s war, we man will go for war and rightfully so!. However when it’s peace time – Woman ask for equal rights.”.

    I know this comment maybe unfair to all woman but I think both woman and AWARE should start fight for a cause where “if man can do – So can woman” mindset instead of keep bringing up things that the true gainer are the ladies. Because if one keep thinking or let others feel you are the weaker part – Others will never see you in the same playing level.

  11. I’ve nominated you for the versatile blogger award!
    Here are the rules, if you accept:
    1. Display the award image on your blog.

    2. Mention/link-back to the blogger who nominated you .

    3. Nominate another 15 bloggers you think deserve the award.

    4. Inform your nominees that you have honored them with nominations.

    5. Write 7 facts about yourself.

    Seven facts about me .

    blogger award
    If you need more information visit: http://versatilebloggeraward.wordpress.com/

%d bloggers like this: