Freedom of Choice

This is not about anarchy and the state of nature. I am a staunch believer of the social contract, and that we all need to give up certain freedoms to be truly free. But of course I don't advocate for complete state control like Big Brother. Rather, this is about agency within structure. Recently, the lectures have been about gender representations, queerness and also, a lot of talk have been going on criticising the regime of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and I find that people are going to the extremes. Seriously, can people not just respect others for their choice?

There was this reading I was doing a couple of days before about media representations and the self, discussing how women are generally represented to be a weaker sex in the media, and that there is a need for women to be strong and career-minded. It's what I see online about my dramas all the time too. Like people will criticise the female lead in Itakiss for letting her world revolve around her crush. But I seriously want to say, that's her choice so why not you just let her be? 

I absolutely agree that women should be able to make choices about their own lives. That they can choose to be professionals, or be a housewife or whatever. The number of choices and the expansion of choices is impt, and people must not be restricted about what they can do because of external impositions. So the oppression of women against their will was wrong, because they had no choice to begin with. But now that the options are open, the final decision on which choice to make is still up to the individual. I study hard, and am thinking about doing my Master's degree simply because I am widening up my choices. At the end of the day I can choose to forsake my potential and be a taitai, but that is my life, and my choice. 

So when feminists say that women cannot want to be housewives, I find that an imposition on the choices women can make. Yes, I know you're fighting for the rights and opening up more options for those who wish to be successful career women, but do you not think that at the same time, you're restricting those who simply wish to find simple joys in the home? Isn't that just another form of oppression, forcing them to stay out of the home rather than in it? Men can be successful in their professions, and so can women. Women can choose be family-driven and so can men. Who are you to say that women have to step out into the world, when maybe choosing to be at home and be a loving wife and mother brings them the most joy? 

So what if all the female leads in dramas love their male leads and support them in whatever they do instead of caring for themselves? It's not like they were oppressed and not given other options, they just happened to choose a more traditional path, so there. Although I agree on the impact it may have upon the minds of little kids who are yet unable to think for themselves, I still don't like the idea that they must do something else. 

Firstly, I don't understand why LGBT people are labelled queer. They don't happen to look physically different from all of us, just that they don't choose their partners like the majority of the cis-gendered people do. Even the people who are physically different shouldn't be queer. I'll just refer to them as queer cos that's their official name in academic anw.

Secondly, I can't understand why the queer people call the cis-gendered cis-scums. Seriously, I have no issue with you if you happen to fall in love with someone else of the same biological sex as yourself. That's really your sexual orientation with all those neurons and whatnot functioning in your head. And so if my brain tells me to fall in love with someone of the opposite sex that makes me a scum? That's just carrying things to far. I can't force you to love the opposite sex, just like you can't force me to love a same-sex, so let's just be respectful of each other's wiring in the brain, ya. Neither of us are scums for choosing one way or the other.

With this, I want to say that the Pink Dot event is not living up to what it claims to be. Their slogan is supporting the freedom to love. But then all over their website and the event, they promote LGBT love;
I thought supporting the freedom to love means supporting love, no matter cis-gender or trans-gender. But not promoting one over the other. In the video, the general public are the more sane ones, thinking of love as a universal. But the deejays on stage are the ones who are making the event warped.

State Laws
Back to the social contract with the state. What about all the issues Singaporeans face being under a dictatorship? If being under a dictatorship means I'm so free to do whatever I wished, then I think it's actually much better here than in a democracy. I have a passport that can take me practically anywhere I wished to without problematic visa requirements; I have a bureaucracy that takes care of my safety so I am free to do as I please, any time of the day; I have fines which teach me how to behave like a decent human being.

All the rules and regulations seem highly imposing, but if you think about it, they simply tell you to be considerate for your fellow human beings. No pets on board the train, others might be allergic to fur; no spitting on the sidewalk, it may cause illness to others; no talking loudly in the library, students are studying, etc. Basically, anyone who lives politely and sensitively to other people around them will not get into trouble with the law, so it doesn't make a difference whether or not the rules are there. And if it doesn't matter, then it is not restrictive.

I know my political orientation is highly obvious, but go ahead and support all the other parties available, as long as you are rational about your reasons, then it's good for you.