The Social Justice movements of the regressive left have been trying to make inroads into Singapore in the past few years, with the the local chapter recruiting their acolytes mainly from the younger liberal demographic of the sunny republic.
A fair bit of media and creative professionals are most certainly of the SJW persuasion- in fact having an SJW merit badge is almost a requirement on the unofficial CV of social proofs needed to be in those circles.
While the environment in Singapore is far less welcome for special snowflake SJWs that require exact and delicate conditions to blossom, there have been some luminaries who have been doing their best to introduce American style regressive identity-politics.
Among the notable are Sangeetha Thanapal “creator” of the the term-swapped copypasta privilege theories, post-colonialist “experts” Chinese allies like Adeline Koh, poets such as Grace Chia smashing the patriachary by protesting the winners of the Singapore Literature Prize’s English Poetry being all male and what have you not.
Competition is stiff if you want to be a luminary in the field of progressiveness. Enter Kristen Han, literal card carrying feminist and journalist. Famous for protesting oppressive things such as benefits for NSmen, she now attempts to make a latest addition to her SJW CV- denouncing a radio DJ’s statements for advocating sexual harassment:
Long story short, local woman is allegedly verbally abused by a wacko claiming to be an Israeli having problems with her skin colour on a bus. Investigations are ongoing while the woman gets an interview on local radio. Radio DJ makes a joke about wanting to hit on the woman instead of physically hitting her. Kirsten Han is triggered.
The interwebz exploded over this, but most of the response appears to be largely negative with people decrying Kristen’s rather low bar for what is considered harassment. Maybe she intended to make a more nuanced point beyond painting all instances of “hitting on” as “Harassment FFS”, but nevertheless it is pretty typical feminist boilerplate on harassment.
Kristen isn’t exactly saying anything new, but this little nugget of interwebz drama is an interesting data point in how local SJWs are trying to import western style social justice here, so it’s good to be aware. Fortunately, there is a lack of local hackjob media mouthpieces to carry her rhetoric too far, with most of it being focused on anti-establishment politics. But one cannot be certain that this will alway be the case. So be prepared.
A Blue Pill man would feel a pang of guilt at her post and think something like “Not all men are like that! I have to prove to others I am not like those!”, those of you in the manosphere however, should know better and understand the underlying dynamics that drive such rhetoric from feminists.
Present day post-modern feminism pushes it’s rhetoric on many fronts- everything is sexist, everything is oppressive, women are disenfranchised by everything from men sitting with their legs apart to the air conditioner being too cold. But under all the rhetoric is an drive to maximise the feminine imperative at the expense of the masculine imperative. Understand these dynamics and a lot of feminist boilerplate takes on a new light.
For a quick primer on the feminine imperative do read up on the various manosphere articles on it, there are plenty of excellent ones. Basically the feminine imperative is the female mating prime directive in which a woman is compelled to seek out a mate with as high a value as possible, having maximal opportunities to trade up when another higher quality male comes alone. This is also what we call hypergamy in the manosphere.
Much of the feminist rhetoric on harrasment attempting to set as low a bar as possible to define it is less about about setting up social institutions and conventions to deter low-status males from making an approach. The feminine imperative demands it.
Low status males are useful as resources and labour, but never as romantic prospects. The innate disgust of being approached by a low status male draws from the decrease in social rank and insecurity a woman suffers as a result. Too many approaches from low status males and she starts questioning if she’s so unattractive that the subpar men think they have a chance with her.
“What? How dare you think you are in my league!” So goes the logic.
As such, women have a deep revulsion about being approached by men they consider under their sociosexual rank. It is an affront to the feminine imperative. The impulse to protect the imperative is so strong that it drives feminists to agitate for social institutions to deter approaches from low ranked men. A lot of the justifications attempting to redefine harassment on as low a bar as possible come from retroactive reasoning to justify their innate reactions under the feminine imperative.
Would Kristen, or many women of her feminist persuasion react negatively to a charming, high status man hitting on her? Would she post a heated status result about how she was harassed by George Clooney? One might think the reactions would be different.
Feminists want their subjective reality to be considered objective reality by everyone.
When they say they do not want to be hit on what they really mean is that they don’t want to be hit on by men they don’t find attractive.
One can take away a lot of lessons from this little piece of local drama on the interwebz. Firstly it’s that SJWism is slowly but surely trying to make its way into Singapore- maybe it will die out before it finds any roots as the cultural contexts for Singapore are too different for a bunch of upper-middle class english educated latte liberals to overwhelm. They just don’t understand how most Singaporeans actually think.
But one will always do well to be vigilant- just look at how far SJWs have managed to co-opt movements like Pink Dot.
The other is that this is a useful case study in feminist rhetoric and the underlying logic of the feminine imperative that drives it. As a Red Pill man your job is to stick to your masculine frame and resist feminist attempts to redefine the terms. Deny the reality of their subjective experience and show to others what a terrible idea it is (for men especially) to be subject to the subjective emotional whims of women on a societal scale.
First harassment is just hitting on a woman, soon it will be just looking at a woman, soon it will be just to be near a woman. You’ve seen it happen in the west, don’t let it come to pass here.
And as a final take away. Here is one chap trying to hit on a woman, but under two different presentations. Which one is harassment? Watch and learn some Red Pill truths: