"Raw deal? Not if each party plays its part"

Not open for further replies.
Mar 16, 2005
I love controversy...:cool:

Letter from Jacqueline Chia

IF THE point of Mr Wilson's Wong writing his letter was to create controversy, I believe he has succeeded.

He argued about man's "natural need to keep sowing his seed" and asserted that "men always lose out in marriage", claiming that "the concept of marriage was intended to protect women".

May I remind him that marriage today happens to be a contract (to use his words) into which two people enter — more often than not, willingly — having made that important decision to spend the rest of their lives together.

Both the man and the woman have an equal responsibility to ensure that marriage is what they want it to be. How can he even suggest that the men always lose out? He is overlooking how much women sacrifice as well, when they decide to get married and bear children.

Why do mothers spend so much time and energy on the kids? Maybe it's because the husband is not doing his share of looking after them. Or perhaps because he expects the house to be kept by his wife; dinner to be cooked and served when he returns from work; children to be taken care of; and his income supplemented, to ensure that the family lives comfortably.

Oh yes, and have I mentioned the laundry and ironing? My point is: He is presenting a skewed perspective of marriage.

What Mr Wong proposes is objectionable because he is advocating a selfish and hedonistic attitude towards life — he wants to be able to enjoy all the benefits, but without the commitments.

I understand that many couples today get married without first carefully considering it, or what is required to make it work. They thus end up feeling frustrated and eventually want out.

But would replacing marriage with a cohabitation contract solve the problem? The family unit is the cell upon which whole societies are built. And what about the children born out of the cohabitation contract?

Why not force couples who intend to get married to attend counselling courses to ensure they know what they are getting themselves into?

What kind of values are we teaching our young, if society itself becomes the very epitome of this "if you can't beat them, join them" attitude?

I am afraid to imagine the day when a future generation only looks for "quick-fix" solutions to avoid directly confronting a problem.


Senior Member
Oct 11, 2004
Same thing herre. An assumption are based on the if the female gives birth. There many childless couples now a days. Ladies can simply choose to live life without the burdon of having a kid.


Dec 20, 2002
Planet Nikon
Gymrat76 said:
Last I checked, so were you :bsmilie:
If you've been following all those marriage threads, you'd figure out why. :bsmilie:


New Member
Aug 17, 2005
hErE lAh
Wah espn so pretty still single?!?
//that's not u in ur avatar?//


Senior Member
Feb 15, 2003
Outside the Dry Box.
Visit site
dennisc said:
hey hey, do not underestimate the power of the wedding ring! it's the smallest handcuff ever invented! :bsmilie: joking
and the most effective wireless network ever, and comes with a foolproof WEP, etc verification system built in... and only problem is that, not everybody install this module even thou they have it...


Senior Member
Oct 24, 2002
Freezing Upp Thomson/Mandai!
right on bro! hehe. I don't expect females of today can cook anyway. I think she just came out either from the cave or woodbridge. In fact, I do all the cooking for the gal (and a pretty good cook, ahem).
Oh well, like they say, women are just like doctors. You know why?
Because doctors in the past used to feel your pulse. Nowadays they just feel your wallet. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom