Man-flu

Finally, a gentle prod at the social fabric of our society. Long overdue; highly necessary. In a rather risque -- by our standards, surely -- move by the Singapore Press Holdings, a journalist has reported on the emergence of a very special strain of flu that hits men harder than it hits women. Surely, you would almost immediately hurl yourself into reasoning, the innate biological differences between men and women must be the cause. Stop! Read the article just a little further.

Hardly a trip down the path of scientific discoveries, the journalist was merely lamenting on the weakness of men: how they would whine and sniffle whereas women would just powder their noses and carry on with life when something as mild as a common flu strikes them both. Subtle, but nevertheless an intentional prod.

Now, if this had happened in a country like America, residents would be madly up in arms boycotting and cursing the backward, primitive mindsets of the people in the company. The oppression of the women, the slavery of the blacks (pardon me; "African-Americans"), the trappings of religion -- all have been concepts that the American people have long loosed the shackles of. Somehow, the mere underlining of such gender differences is reminiscent of such ancient discriminations; utterly condemnable! Yet, because the undermined gender is now the male and not the female, perhaps it might not quite be the same. After all, we have seen how the powerful female-whimpering men images have had a rather strong appeal, as evidenced by the fair share of the Hollywood market devoted to such: Kill Bill, Charlie's Angels, Tomb Raider... So perhaps, for I do not know.

Still, we digress. For even on Singaporeans I am not an expert; what more America? But still, I have a good 20 years of experience, and that surely counts for something. And so: what then of Singapore?

Fortunately, we have displayed a rather pleasing moral high-ground standing. Ignoring the implications of such an article, everyone has exhibited a knowing sense of ignorance. No one has written in to defend the men; none too to support the claim. Perhaps, we think to ourselves, we as a people have indeed matured. Feeling proud and glad, we then flip the page forward, a smile on our hearts. Every hope suddenly crumbles. For there, splashed across a full page, is a rather vivid discussion of the spelling of "skool" as a brand-name.

You then become lost: why would people fight over a slight injection of creative deviation and yet not care about a far more vicious swipe at who and what they are? Perhaps you then realise that there could be 2 reasons: 1) We are not literary advanced, and are unable to catch the nuanced provocation or 2) We do not care. Either way, you shake your head in shame. Perhaps, a slight sad smile spreads across your face: some things never change.

Or maybe, there really is some science to it, and I have over-read into the article. For the sake of hope, I sincerely hope so.