I love controversy...
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.
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.
