What price companionship?

Answer this question in no more than three seconds before reading the rest of this post: Would you or would you not accept a platonic – ie no sex involved – proposition from a total stranger to accompany him/her for a stipulated period of time for a stipulated sum of money?

Now consider this: what if you were approached by the said stranger – a foreigner – in a restaurant and were offered a sum of S$5,000 for your company over the next two weekend?

Does the above scenario make a material difference to your response?

This was a real life proposition offered to a white collar working girl over a lunch/dinner appointment with her fellow colleague.

The same scenario was repeated for the purpose of soliciting responses from a few other Singaporean women in their late twenties and early 30s. Needless to say, responses to such a proposition which tested the ‘conservative limits’ of a developed Asian society are more often than not attached with moralistic values and judgements.

A – a scholar and corporate high-flier – is quick to say no and to equate this with the treatment of social escorts. So disregarding the promise of a ‘no sex involved’ transaction, for A, it is moralistically wrong for any woman to accept such a proposition.

But why so? B asked. When sex is not part of the deal and when companionship is also part of service offered by other widely accepted professions such as tour guides?

Well, as C would argue, there’s always a nudging question when such a large sum of money is offered by a total stranger and foreigner to an Asian woman that sex – though not stipulated as part of the package – will be ultimately included in the deal. And who’s going to vouch for the credibility and reliability of a stranger and guarantee the safety of the woman providing the service?

But if there are clear conditions laid out in the first place, B counter argues, that will not compromise the (sexual) integrity of the woman, what’s stopping her from accepting the proposition? Afterall S$5,000 is good money, and for a woman to reject such a proposition, she’s probably not in need of money?

The proposition may have been offered to a Singaporean lady in her early 30s but the entire situation is not exactly gender specific. I have also come across cases where young men in their early twenties were offered money in exchange for their companionship.

For those who are still curious of the outcome, the lady in question has in fact accepted the proposition from an Italian stranger.

Personally I would not accept such a proposition from the opposite gender although I would hesitate to label anyone who does so as a social escort or to write off the transaction as amoral. Likewise, B’s arguments are fairly grounded on the basis of a capitalistic society.

So why would I say no? Well again, the idealist in me refuses to buy in to the myth that money can buy you anything in this world. I believe by consenting to participate in the trading of one’s companionship for money is arguably endorsing the statement that ‘life’s intangible richness and fragility’ can be ‘made invisible by the abstract calculations of cost-benefit analyses’ (quote from Bakan’s The Corporation p. 65).

And to the stranger who has approached me with such a proposition, my response will be ‘ No, I will not take up your offer. But yes, I will be happy to show you around the city if I find you a pleasant enough companion and interesting enough acquaintance’.

Water opens in Singapore

If you haven’t watched it already, please catch this before it closes in Singapore.

Deepa Mehta’s last instalment of her ‘elemental trilogy’ – as with the earlier releases, Fire and Earth – interrogates the legitimacy of norms and traditions in patriarchal Indian society.

At the foreground, Water narrates the plight of Indian widows who were ostracised by the mainstream society and manipulated for the pleasures of social elites. Set against the backdrop of the rise of Ghandian idealism, however, Water is arguably also a narrative of the nation’s struggle for independence and freedom from the oppression of its colonial masters.

Therein lies the spirit of the trilogy, Deepa Mehta’s attempt to elucidate for her audience, how we have to ’stand up to the system’ in order to open doors to avenues that may otherwise not be apparent in life^. So when Shakuntula, the devout Hindhu finds within herself the courage to question the basis for discriminating widows, she finally realises it is but a self-serving measure of convenience to protect the interests of a patriarchal family unit. And it is only upon such (belated) epiphany that Shakuntula decides to make a difference for young Chuyia, an eight-year-old widow on the brink of being forced into prostitution.

The widows in Water are far from the only ones who are entrapped by their blind obeisance to hegemonic norms. Patriarchal notions of gender performance remain operative – often unchallenged through adopting the guise of traditions – in our daily lives. The beauty of Deepa Mehta’s trilogy lies precisely in the director’s ability to deal with universal issues through specific cultural contexts, hence providing a reprieve for her audience to reflect and rationalise their life situations.

^See Business Times review December 22 for full quote.

More info on mistreatment of widows in ‘traditional societies’ available here.

Asian Toilet Culture

Malaysia is the latest Asian nation to announce a revamp of not just its public toilets (hardware) but now also a campaign to improve the toilet manners of its citizens.

Strangely but quite predictably I must say, the ‘T’ word – stands for toilet – often pops up in my conversations with fellow Singaporeans who have spent an extended period of time overseas.

Sadly, we all appear to agree on one fact, that Asians – other than the exceptional Japanese and possibly Koreans – generally aren’t quite civic-minded when it comes to public property (especially toilets!) and for some reason or other our toilet manners suck.

Some are quick to advise me that Asia has generally come a long way since SARS particularly in hard-hit countries/cities like China, Hong Kong and Singapore. But much remains to be done with the mentality of the Asian citizen.

Case in point: where else in the world can you find automated toilet flushing systems other than Singapore or now Malaysia?

What makes it so difficult to inculcate in the nationals the habit to flush and clean up before you leave the cubicle for the next person?

As the Chinese saying goes, Zi Bu Jiao Fu Zhi Gao, if the son isn’t well-schooled in his manners, the fault lies with his father. The same could be said about how the current generation may reflect (badly) on their ancestors. I’ve not had the luxury to go in depth in my research on the toilet manners of ancient Chinese or other Asian races. But I do have a nudging suspicion that the entire problem is rooted on a lack of consideration for anything that does not fall under one’s ownership. So that toilet in the market cannot be equated the same status as my private toilet at home, that grass field isn’t part of my own garden and the void deck is a shared area that is under regular maintenance by the town council. So why should I care for public property when it should be some one else’s responsibility? Well, perhaps only when I am fined for not doing so – then again fines don’t really work all the time in Singapore .

Ok this post has already run a longer length than expected. Have to stop rambling now. I’ll be listening here if you like to share your thoughts.

Updates on the Chinese ‘Tongzhi’

‘Overheard’ on Channel News Asia, ‘Inside Asia’ special report by Tan Bee Leng on East Asia Tonight

Chinese ‘Tongzhi’ – literally means comrade but lately has been applied as a paradoxical reference to Chinese glbt community, appears to enjoy a more legit status in their own nation than homosexuals in Singapore. Why I say so?

1. Homosexuality has been decriminalised in China since 1997 and delisted from list of mental illnesses by the Chinese Psychiatric Society since 2004. Over here in Singapore, homosexual intercourse is still considered illegal under an antiquated statute.

2. In 2003, one of the top Chinese universities, Fudan University in Shanghai offered a course on homosexual health concerns. Owing to the overwhelming response, the university has followed up with a new course aimed to promote an understanding and social acceptance of homosexuality. I don’t recall coming across any similar offerings in Singapore Universities. But then again, which Uni would dare to venture into ‘untested but marked waters’, man.

All these initiatives are taking place in a society still deeply entrenched in the feudalistic values of carrying on the family name through male heirs. According to the same CNA report, around 80 to 90% of homosexual males opt to marry women to fulfill their familial duties.

Who says the mainland Chinese are behind times? MIW: time to learn from our imperialistic ancestors and shed that ‘conservative’ cover.

Traditions and sexual inhibitions

One month ago, Sayoni Speak highlighted a survey conducted among (female) tertiary students. The results reflected a correlation between homophobia and adherence to ‘traditional perspectives on the role of women’.

This sets me thinking as to what constitutes the traditional Asian femininity and whether the survey results are indeed reflective of the operational traditions that have encouraged the inhibition of sexual expressions in Asian societies.

My earlier post on Chinese characters may speak volume of the social expectations on the ’second sex’ in Asia. I’ll not expound further on the Chinese population which I intend to discuss in greater depth in the future. But here, let me take a stab at exploring the role of Malay women pre and post-colonial times.

Interestingly, if my limited research is at all indicative of Malay traditions, indigenous women in the early days of colonial Malaya (including Singapore) have in fact enjoyed relative ‘freer rein’ in their self-expressions than their post-colonial sisters.

One of the earliest English settlers in Singapore, Frank Swettenham, for instance, had detailed in his descriptive account of the Malayan lifestyles, how women appeared to enjoy relative autonomy in their intellectual and sexual expressions – particularly after their marriages (my own emphasis here).

So,

In Perak, a man who tries to shut his womankind up and prevent her intercourse with others and a participation in the fetes and pleasures of Malay society, is looked upon as a jealous, ill-conditioned person.

And while a Malay man is entitled to “have as many as four wives”, a married woman – possibly of genteel birth – ‘can and often does, obtain a divorce from her husband’.

This arguably runs into contrary popular expectations of a Malay/Muslim woman, whose veiled countenance is often constructed (perhaps more so in the west, native scholars prefer a different reading) as a repression of her sexual expression and subjugation of the feminine to that of the masculine*. Likewise, the widely embraced norm of familial duties before career and proliferated images of ‘docile’ and ’submissive’ feminine bodies at work all served to perpetuate social norms supporting the stereotype of a hyperfeminised Malay woman^.

I do not think my resources here are exhaustive or conclusive enough to dwell on the fracture between pre and post-colonial Malay women. Suffice to say however, I do think such ’subtle’ differences are sufficient cause for Asian women in the post-colonial age to question the basis and the dominant reading of the so-called traditions.

*See ‘Negotiating Their Visbility: The Lives of Educated and Married Malay Women’ by Roziah Omar in Women in Malaysia: Breaking Boundaries on alternative reading of the ‘veil’ or tudung.
^In her paper, Vicki Denese Crinis provides a more detailed discussion on the possible motivations for constructing the ‘hyperfeminised Malay woman’.

What it means to be a Chinese woman … literarily

Am reading the English translated text of The Good Women: Hidden Voices by a long-time mainland Chinese broadcast journalist, Xinran.

The back jacket cover possibly captures the essence of the multiple facades of feminine identities in Chinese society:

For the ease of my discussion here, I will be converting these original characters into simplified Chinese texts.

Most Chinese would recognise the first character, 女, which stands for a female.

The second character is commonly used in the noun, 家庭主妇, which translates to home-maker or housewife in English. The noun 妇女 – which combines the second character with the first – is also commonly used to refer to women in general. So presumably, if we could assume that in Chinese societies – as implied in the character – women are expected to assume the duties of a home-maker.

The third pair of characters 姑娘 is the traditional Chinese honorific referential term for women. And since 良 also means kindness, this honorific term could also be taken to imply a general kindly character across Chinese womenfolk.

Now the last word arguably speaks volume of what is expected of women in Chinese patriarchy. The obsession with carrying on one’s family name explains the privileging of sons over daughters in a traditional Chinese family. Hence the word 好 (good) is a combination of 女 and 子 (son). It is commonly expected then of married women to fulfill their duties in carrying on the family name by bearing sons. Only then could a woman be considered ‘good’ by the moral standards of a feudalistic Chinese society.

In case you are wondering, I’m no linguist here. And no the above are all my conjectures. They are not indicative of the contents of the book itself, which I may be reviewing in a subsequent post.

Redirecting traffic to an interesting discussion

I’ve been slow in updating this site lately as a result of some very interesting discussions going on at this site.

If you are a Singaporean who’s thinking of venturing out your safety zone and exploring wider horizons elsewhere in the world, do check out the insightful comments from those who have taken this major step out previously.

Five cheers too to the relatively democratic cyberspace, one of the few spheres where individuals could enjoy free ranging discussion with like-minded others.

To quote from darkness, a fellow participant in our earlier discussion, let’s celebrate the diversity in cyberspace:

… we as a society need to be more tolerant of different groups in blogosphere – they may not fit nicely into your definition of a pigeon hole, but if you allow people to be and let them express themselves freely, you will find people can often surprise you in ways and means which you hardly either thought possible or could possibly have imagined …

… that is the only to create real value.

And I share Aaron’s – the blog owner – sentiment when he said:

I do think that the cybersphere is a relatively free space for now, and we are seeing many ordinary folks publishing their opinions, and many of them make alot of sense. I do hope that this will continue to keep up.

Now, ask me again why I abhor any attempt from capitalistic media organisation to colonise the cyberspace.

Will there be similar developments in ‘Corporate Singapore’?

Fifteen days ago on CNN, Marc Gunther observes how gay movement appears to sweep across Corporate America.

Some of the interesting observations as captured below:

(1) When it comes to the corporations, it makes good business sense to embrace the gay movement.

Raytheon finds the ‘the competition to hire and retain engineers and other skilled workers … so brutal that [it] doesn’t want to overlook anyone’. In order to cast a wide net in its recruitment drive, the corporation needs to adopt an openly pro-gay rights stance so as to ‘attract gay workers … who worry about discrimination’.

Yeah, bet it makes good business sense too to sponsor major gay event such as the Nation Party (see my earlier post).

(2) Sometimes, it takes the ‘coming-out’ of a top executive to ‘pioneer’ the winds of change (particularly in traditionally conservative professions – my own comment).

Mike Syers, an Ernst & Young partner, fast became the corporate spokesperson for gay rights in his firm when he decided to come out of the closet.

According to unofficial sources, corporate Singapore recently witnessed a similar albeit more low key instance, when a Vice President of a local telco (gasp! yes it’s one of the GLCs) openly spoke of his male partner in a formal meeting with his department. And oh, need to add here, he’s an Aussie hired on expatriate terms. So will we see a trickle down effect amongst locals in the same firm? Let’s just wait and see …

(3) While it makes business sense in some districts to embrace gay issues, it doesn’t in some others.

P&G appears to be facing strong resistance in Cincinnati where a conservative Christian majority seems to dominate over the rest of the population. Hence, the adoption of Article 12, “a charter amendment that prohibited the city from passing any law to protect gays against discrimination”.

Alas! As some may proclaim, this is a classic example of the tyranny of the majority. Yet, the voting exercise is – to say the least – a reasonably democratic exercise to ascertain the will of the majority.

Therein lies the difference between the situation in Singapore and America. The present stalmate in Singapore’s gay movement is often attributed to a ‘conservative majority’. Yet, we are left to question the basis of ascertaining such a ‘majority’ since there’s been no formal public poll to do so (see Yawning Bread February 2005 ‘Towards an open and inclusive society’ on further comments on the rhetoric of ‘conservative majority’).

If indeed it is prerogative to rule on the basis of ‘greatest happiness for greatest number of people’, shouldn’t every citizen be encouraged play a role in deciding any changes to public policies?

By this, I would also naturally presume that those most affected by the policy changes be actively engaged in the entire consultative process. A recent development appears to leave some of the key stakeholders in great doubt as to whether the relevant authorities are sincere in their ‘active engagement’.

So this really boils down to my final questions: Is it time now for ‘Corporate Singapore’ to openly embrace the will of majority and decry the myth of an ‘illiberal democracy’? Would gay rights be a good starting point to do so? Or are there some underlying concerns we have to deal with right here? And will private enterprises – as in the case for America – be the forerunners for gay rights issues in Singapore?

Addendum: Yet another blogger debunking the rhetoric of a ‘conservative majority. Mr Wang sums up the situation in Singapore quite well one day ago in his analysis of the outlawing of gay sex.

Cyber resource on women’s issues

Featured three months ago on Alternet, Feministing offers a “platform for [young] women to comment on and analyse’ issues affecting their “lives and futures”.

Quotable quote from Samhita Mukhopadhyay, one of the six staff writers for Feministing:

“If you are an activist and not reading blogs, you’re not doing your job. [The blogosphere] is a listening audience and an active audience. It could be anyone out there; an anti-feminist from Ohio, a housewife in Illinois.”

Hmm I’m hoping for an Asian alter ego of Feministing – am I being too idealistic here?

Sexy dresses for women in ‘Muslim fundamentalist state (?)’

Moving into unchartered territory here, kindly flag incongruencies in my report below should you be aware of the details on the dress code for Kelantan women. Constructive comments are welcomed!

In what appears to be a persistent attempt to apply Islamic Law in Kelantan, a Malaysian state dominated by opposition Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS), Kelantan Mentri Besar or Chief Minister defended a recent decision by Kelantan capital state’s Municipal Council to impose a RM500 fine on women – Muslim and non-Muslim – “dressed sexily or indecently”.

This appeared to be a repeat motion of the state government’s last proposal in March 2005to enforce a regulation that will ‘force non-Muslim women to don long skirts and loose, long-sleeved blouses’.

Both attempts of Kelantan’s government to regulate a uniform dress code amongst its female citizenry had attracted swift criticisms from the Federal government.

Leaders of the Islamic ruling party in Kelantan had quoted a possible reduction in sex crimes and disrespect of the ‘customs, culture and religious values’ of a ‘deeply conservative’ state’ entrenched with a unique blend of ethnic Malay culture.

Both of these attempts at imposing across-the-board dress code for all ethnicities in Kelantan have invited strong criticisms from the federal government.

Members of the federal government, particularly from the ruling national party, Barisan Nasional, swiftly criticised PAS for disregarding women’s rights – Muslim and non-Muslim alike and undermining women’s capabilities (see most recent critique on The Star).

On Channel News Asia just two nights ago, a senior member of Barisan Nasional flagged up a concern with straining racial relations through an imposition of such a culturally insensitive ruling.

What is interesting to note however, is a long history of harmonious relationship between the Muslim majority and other religious minorities in Kelantan at the grassroots level.

So is this but a political smoke screen or a departure from what is perceived to be “PAS’s racially tolerant politics”?

We shall wait and see.

Addendum:

1. Ah how naive I must have been to pose my earlier question. Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, Director of PAS Research Centre spoke in defence of the PAS’s stance to impose dress code in Kelantan. Needless to say, not everyone agrees with her on this issue.

2. Two days after this post, Kelantan reportedly ‘tops surfers list for porn’ in an internet survey tracking search items on Google. The same report also implied that the ultra conservative stance of Kelantan state has arguably backfired – institutionalised censure could only fuel greater interest in seeking alternative sources of information and outlets of expression.