Considering Bloggers: Gopalan Nair, S’porean Skepticre: Gopalan Nair's, Singapore's fear factor. The hidden commentors.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Gopalan, yesterday, published a brief statement under the heading, ‘Say it like a man’, and advised commentators,
‘To all out there who comment on the Internet. Say it like a man, if you are one. Identify yourself. Who are you?’
I dispatched a polite comment stating that perhaps he ought to reword the title with, ‘Say it with conviction’, or something to that effect as the phrase, ‘Say it like a man’ is quite sexist. However, he chose to moderate this comment out of existence - along with another comment that attempted to explain one of the causes for that bemoaned in, a preceding article entitled, ‘Singapore's fear factor. The hidden commentators.‘ Perhaps he thought he was being upstaged.
I would not expect him to leave my comment there as it might not look good on him to have committed such an oversight and have his attention brought to it by someone whom has yet to earn the dubious accolade of being arrested by the government - to local activists, being arrested for political misbehaviour is not unlike a holy anointing reminiscent of the papal anointing of the Holy Roman Emperors of the past, or how, in Mafiosi terms, one ‘makes one’s bones’...i’ve often thought that if i was the government, i would make it a point to arrest the wrong people so that the people might confuse them for great leaders - but I thought Gopalan would have at least replaced the ‘man’ with that suggested above. Strange. I thought this bloke was into egalitarianism. But then again, it seems, at least from these instances, that Gopalan is quite the Confucian in that he operates by learnt biases as opposed to reason, doesn’t take kindly to contradiction, or receptive to novel ideas and approaches. That said, I have to give Gopalan credit for some of his other articles which are certainly of the right spirit.
Well, with regards to the sexist title, I’d say, c’mon Gopalan, Be a man, and try some Womanly empathy mate. I’d say you’re a size 10.
re: Singaporean Skeptic's, Changing landscape of religion in Singapore
Singaporean Skeptic, today, in a post entitled, ‘Changing landscape of religion in Singapore’, stated, with regards to the question,
“And will the Indian and Malay religious ratio continue to remain static?
I think it will remain unchanged for the ethnic Malays but not so sure about the ethnic Indians.”
Surely people can’t be that ignorant. ‘Indian’ does not denote ‘Hindu’ - or perhaps S’porean Skeptic meant something else. If ‘Indian’ did denote ‘Hindu’, then Buddhism wouldn’t exist. In case the reader didn’t get that, the logic goes, if all Indians are Hindus, then an Indian wouldn’t have started Buddhism, given that Buddha was an Indian whatever some pictures and statues depict. But then again, i’d say that Buddhism is one of the schools of thought within the Hindu faith given that Buddha was attempting to improve on the Hindu system and not subvert it, and utilised many approaches and concepts that were and are a part of Hinduism. Perhaps it’s people’s ignorance of Hinduism that leads them to perceive either as separate faiths. This is not unlike the various Christian denominations being derivatives of the initial one.