I read with interest about the comments (The Sunday Times, Nov 20) on Ignatius Low's article ("Doing the unthinkable"; The Sunday Times, Nov 13).
This lady (Ms Linda Heng) protested about how Mr Low had "glorified" Annabel Chong and that she was "disturbed that such blatant endorsement is allowed to be published in a main-stream newspaper". There was also another lady, Ms Tan who commented that "youth may get the wrong message" after reading Mr Low's article.
I'm sure Annabel Chong is no stranger to most Singaporeans (the non-ignorant ones that is) and what she did - her "infamous" sexual marathon back in 1995 - is still very much a highly controversial act. (PS did anyone know that she was gang-raped?)
I felt propelled to speak in defence of Mr Low because I felt what he had endorsed is Annabel Chong's (or Grace Quek, for that matter) courage to break out of societal conformity and to take the road less travelled (or not travelled). I would think that by comparing her achievements to that of scaling Mount Everest or swimming across the English Channel, he actually meant that the common thing about all these accomplishments are the fact that they are unprecedented. And that not an ordinary individual can achieve that. He applauded her for her courage to take the risk to make that choice.
Whether or not her actions are accepted, that is purely a personal choice.
And for the part about Mr Low's article being allowed to be published in a main-stream newspaper - is Ms Heng trying to say that main-stream newsapapers only have room for main-stream ideas? So what's the point of reading articles if you know from the start that they would offer no new insights or perspectives? (Now you know why SG is listed as one of the countries with least freedom of speech - because it has evolved into a mentality - a way of life for the Singaporeans- so much so that the public actually endorses that.)
Most of the comments against Mr Low's articles stemmed from how he had "glorified" the "immoral" or "promiscuous" act - but isn't sex part of everyday life? He is not trying to promote sexual promiscuity.
I think Ms Heng and Ms Tan definitely should stay in Singapore - because I would believe their views represent the mentality of the typical Singaporeans - the narrow-minded-ness, the intolerance for anything out of the expected confirmity or for any other perspectives rather than the "main-stream" views that they so blindly endorse.
No wonder Annabel Chong has to re-locate to US. There is no room for individuals with courage, with guts, with spirit to fight against conformity here in Singapore.
