Worker’s Party coming into the hijab discussion

 WP is calling for a national conversation on the hijab issue after the Malay community met up with Chee Hian and Yaacob. The conclusion on that meeting did not go down too well as nothing changes, not that there must be a change if the situation does not warrant it. While there could be or could not be a national conversation on this issue, or another one sided conversation initiated and led by the WP this round, I would like to draw a few premises that I think could be useful in this free for all talk shop.

There are two premises that we must strongly guard, ie our secular national ethos and our cultural heritage. In an attempt to deal with a matter like the hijab that could transcend religion and culture, it can be tricky and even sensitive to some. If we can keep the lines of secularity clearly in the picture, we may have to define how far we can and want to go before hitting the OB markers, things may be more manageable. We do not want to allow every other religion to want to have their religious ways in a secular society and environment. We do not want, as an example, a group that insists on wearing drappy grey and head shaven in the office, male or female. We do not want people who insist that they cannot shave nor cut their hair for both sexes. Let’s keep our society a secular one and let religion be practiced at home or in one’s private space. The common space should be kept secular.

We must be proud of our cultural heritage, the way of life of the 4 major racial groups that founded this island. We do not want to integrate and compromise our way of life with the new migrants. We are not migrants. Our forefathers were and that is their story. We are stayers. Migrants are temporary visitors that are here and may not be here tomorrow. Migrants have no homes or countries of their own or have abandoned them. This is our home. We are the owners and we decide and must dictate what we want our country to be and how we want to live. The visitors or migrants must accept our way of life.

We have so many new migrants coming in and with their huge numbers there will be a time when they would want to demand to be recognized, their religions, cultures and ways of life. Singaporeans, the first movers in this country must be the top priority and must call the shot. We decide. Foreigners, new citizens and migrants must accept our terms and not the other way. Don’t like it they can go elsewhere.

The hijab is also a cultural thing, part of the Malay custom and baju. Correct me if I am wrong. It should be addressed from this perspective, to protect and promote our cultural heritage. Promoting the use of the hijab on religious grounds will open the Pandora box for all and sundry to make their special and unique demands that would be difficult to accept and may not be tolerable.

The Singaporeans must keep our cultural heritage as a part of us. We must promote their use as our way of life. We do not want to be China Chinese, India Indian or Arabs. In the course of time, there could be things from the foreigners that are useful and good and would gradually take form. Let that be. We can be flexible to allow the good stuff to be a part of us without compulsion or legislation. Good stuff will be good stuff and will be welcomed and accepted by the populace. Let our unique identity survive and thrive on its own without being pressurized or being harrassed by foreigners and foreign influences.

We are Singaporeans. This is our home. Let’s talk hijab.


Anonymous said...

"... we may have to define how far we can and want to go before hitting the OB markers ..."

Who in Singapore decides the OB markers?
I always thot lies and untruths is the OB marker.

Anonymous said...

Just dont understand what's the BIG HOOHA all about.
Be flexible, when at work, follow the work rule. Want freedom for covering or revealing the body, go ahead after work and after school.
Everything must complain? If Bhuddhist wants to work as beef butcher, so long as he qualifies as a butcher, no reason to reject him. If a Chinese restaurant has vacancy for waiting serving non halal foods, it obviously will welcome anyone able to serve to fill the post. However, there were complaints that employers set requirements for Chinese Speaking Staff. What is wrong? In a Chinese restaurant, not only Chinese speaking is a pre-requisite requirement, I will even say serving staff should be able to read Chinese. However, there shall be no need for the Chinese Restaurant to state non- Muslim should not apply for the job athough I am sure it will not reject the applicant if he/she is willing to take the job. Many complaints of discrimination just dont make sense.
There are many girls with hijab wearing skin tight shirts and pants that show off the shapes of their cleavages. How does that commensurate with the Religious Purpose of the Hijab. Btw, I am aware that there are those who use the Hijab as part of their fashion and their freedom to use it as such should be respected.
I agree with Redbean that Religious Practices be delinated from work related matters and best be practised within oneself in ones' own home and places of worship. No one should force another to accommodate ones' personal requirement.

Be fair.


Anonymous said...

@ Patriot 10.20 am

//Be flexible, when at work, follow the work rule. Want freedom for covering or revealing the body, go ahead after work and after school//

Ya lor.

If eskimo come want wear their own attire here how?

Also if some liberal foreigners come want wear less during work say only bikini then how?

Must explain patiently to all have a conversation make all understand PM Lee think long term and most importantly maintain harmony and peaceful united Patriotism for SinkieLand despite some lousy policies dished out.

Pro-oppo does not mean anti-SinkieLand!

Anonymous said...

Indonesian Muslims are working in Chinese Restaurants serving non-halal foods.
HERE IN SINGAPORE, we have hundreds of thousands of MUSLIM Indonesian Domestic Helpers working for NON-MUSLIM Employers with some eating the same foods as the families.
Does the Muslims in Sin want Laws to ban them working(in Indonesia as well?).



Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Why is Workers Party ONLY interested in a TRIVIAL MATTER?




Veritas said...

Hijab is not the traditional fashion for Malay unless you want to talk about a minority. The traditional dressing for Malay women are Sarong or some dressing similar to Dayaks or Kalimatan Malay are wearing.

Very few Malay woman hijab their head in the past. I was a teacher in a school. I look at yearbooks. Before Malay teachers wear secularly just like Chinese.

Then around early 2000, many Malay hijab their head in sudden great numbers, altough malay women are hijabing gradually since our independence.

I put the blame on
1) Radicalization of Malay
2) PAP flawed policy.

The hijabing of Malay in 2000s is due to tudung issue, then brought up by Teo Chee Hean also.

Peranakan PAP minority policy is better than UMNO, but if the real Chinese are in charge, it will be better.

The Peranakan has a very narrow minded view of racial issue.

Veritas said...

How would I prefer to solve the Malay women hijab issue.

I do not think hijab is nice. I certainly would want to get rid of it. (The western women way of head scarf is much nicer and I enjoy looking at it sometimes)

You cannot make the Malay women get rid of hijab by fiat. They will be victimize with grievances.

PAP are stupid.

Getting rid of hijab by fiat will cause a siege mentally of Malay. The Malay perceived the PAP is going after their culture. They will have other civil disobedience.

The Malay mass hijab in 2000s is a good example. Because Chee Hean screw up "tudung issue" in 2000, the Malay respond by hijabing themselves, to protest.

Fucking westernize peranakan has no brain, and I wonder if there is no operational cold store, will they be leading this country.

I predict Malay may cling more and more to Islam, as a rally point against fucking PAP. Then we all in shit.

And many other PAP policy make Malay hijab. I have Malay female colleague who took on regional role. None of them hijab. And if it is a marketing role, the Malay girls are as fashionable a model.

My solution to end hijab is not by fiat, but by giving Malay opportuinites, to move them up in economics ladder. Today, opportunities are given to FT, especially FT Indians.

Imagine if we put 100,000 Malay girls to regional sales and marketing position, will they hijab? They will be busy flying here and there attending party.

Not only they wont hijab, they will come and feel superior against those who hijab.

These educated Malay will have more choice of mate as they dress nicer. They will reproduce. Those hijab malay girls will have few chances of reproduction and they will be breeded out.

The solution to Malay hijab problem is to stop FT policy, move up Malay salary, give them education, make them expose to the world. If this can be implemented, within 10 years, they will be evangelist against non-hijabing.

Anonymous said...

Hoi veritas

Leave the peranankan's out of it. Don't be an ass, fun fuck every peranankan's, what have they done to you.
Leave the blog free of accusation.

Veritas said...

Singapore culture is definitely peranakan and not Chinese. Even our fake national language -- English testify that.

99.9% of Singaporean do not know Chinese history and today, most speak English as their mother tongue.

Singapore is peranakanized.

I am a true Chinese, cultural and genetically. If true Chinese are in charge, things will be much better.

China is emerging.

Peranakan are still licking up their old colonial masters. They think white man will be there forever. They still despise Chinese.

Today Thailand Cambodia Laos and Malaysia are pro-China. Singapore despite being "chinese" majority are pro USA.

This is because perankan still wet dreaming. Within 50 years, Singapore will be much sinicized as China is going to save us from the enslavement of peranakan.

Anonymous said...

Are the blacks in us from africa, come of your dream shit, what we have is a phase of singapore history, not china's history, if you open your door you might see it, how can you know when your brain is fill with spike.

Give it up, ass, since when are you qualified to speak for all the chinese, are you still sleeping on wooden boxes.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Veritas or anyone should be proud of their own heritage. Word of advice to Veritas, it is not good to attack people so harshly.

Any Malay brothers or experts in Malay culture care to comment about hijab being a part of Malay culture? I remember vividly that the Malay headscarf or hijab were smaller and made of very light material, usually worn by the more mature and elderly ladies. Mostly they were white, light or bright in colours.

And the men would be in their songkoks.

Veritas said...


The link shows you Cairo University girls from 1950s to today.

Many Islamist always like to spread a lie that people before are more prude. They are wrong in many ways. Cairo is the seat of Al Azhar, the highest equivalent to pope in Suni institution.

ALL women in Cairo university during 1950s are not hijab but today 90% of woman is hijab.

Hijab is never part of a large majority of Islam country-- other than the most reactionary and corrupt Saudi.

Egypt was the top intellectual center of Arabic world. They used to be non hijab until western backed sadat and Mubarak came, and keep one eye close on Islamization to cover their corrupt rule.

The link show princess fawzia of Egypt. She is not hijab. I have a few pics on Malay woman in the past but I think it would be more interesting to show pics of Egypt, the seat of the highest Suni authority.

Veritas said...

Sorry princess Fawzia pic on the link below.


Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Thanks Veritas. I think this issue can be discussed in a mature manner. And I hope the persistence to wear hijab is not religious in nature. If that is the case it would be difficult and I too would not view it favourably.

I look at religion as personal and private matters, a matter of choice. And I hope the matters of state and the general public should be secular and not be encumberd by religious undertones. With so many religions have their pulls in different direction and with very strong emotions can be difficult to handle.

Veritas said...

Personally I am never against Hijab although I think it is not beautiful. I am not insulting Muslim. The purpose of hijab to put it point blank is to reduce the sexual attractiveness of women so that society remain moral and man wont be tempted.

This is reiterated by many cleric. Put to make woman less beautiful.

The western head scarf is design to enhance beauty.

A lot of Indonesian woman is not hijab. The reason of hijab in Malaysia and Singapore is because UMNO promotes Islamism more than Indonesia. Our malay has more connections with malaysian malay, they follow.

Not only that a lot of Iranian in the pass are not hijab. Today, hijab was impose to them by ayatolah.

But I kind of like the way persian woman wear headscarf. The persian head scarf is just a larger version of western headscarf. The hair are not secure. You can see the hair line sprouting out from the headscarf.

I think it is beautiful. Also persian woman dress up in a lovely way. They wear headscuff and a skirt up to their knee. Then they may wear a jeans to cover their leg.

I think they are really beautiful even when they cover up.

The Malay hijab secure the hair. Followed by a long lose dressing all the way to ankle.

No opinion.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Veritas, I think you have not been looking. The modern and well designed hijabs here are very attractive. You may have the idea that they looked like the burqua or some of those ugly things.

The hijabs here are adorned with jewelry and decorative items, and the cloth is of various patterns, colours and designs.

Veritas said...


Its all right to have different opinion about beauty.

I think Chinese 3 foot lotus not nice also. Others may think its nice.

I will attack 3 foot lotus and hope that no one think I am against Chinese culture.

I am first of all, a progressive socialist. I sought the well being and enlightenment of human being.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

I will disagree with you on the 3 foot lotus: )

But I will agree with you that the 3 inch lotus is the ugliest thing and a very cruel thing concocted by the wicked men to control the women. It is an act of oppression, to incapacitate the women. A primitive barbaric custom.

Anonymous said...

off topics ....


how can one give up one's staple diet to favour another be considered harmony???

maybe .... gracious is a better term


Anonymous said...

make sure you don't give up your food to wolves in sheep skin.

agongkia said...

"I am a true Chinese, cultural and genetically."

I enjoy reading most of your contribution here except that I think true Chinese should not display the photo of an angmocharbor with low cut.
Maybe you can consider putting on CheongSam:-)

agongkia said...

Why is Workers Party ONLY interested in a TRIVIAL MATTER?
I told you here times and again,you just cannot expect much.
Only ready over such issue.

b said...

Whether people want to put on a hat or not is up to them so long as the hat does not pose any danger or health issues. There should be free will.

In my opinion, in this kind of hot weather, it does not make any sense to put on those hijab except to attract the growing of certain lices and bacteria. Maybe a cowboy hat makes more sense.

Anonymous said...

To Agongkia:

The Co-driver and the Driver got to be be replaced. They stay in the same cabin and work hand in hand. The paxs are badly neglected.


Veritas said...

Whether people want to put on a hat or not is up to them so long as the hat does not pose any danger or health issues. There should be free will.


What if we let PAP 100% control what we suppose to dress?

Tomorrow, PAP may say Cheongsam is confucius ethnic or Manchu dressing, then ban it under sectarian ground.

In my opinion Malay women should decide on what they want to wear unless they cover up totally. The government should hands off.

But I support some entity right to control organization dress code.

For example I support bosses right to control dress code. If a Malay woman got fired as a marketing and sales manager because she insist of wearing hijab, we should support the boss.

If a Malay women insist of not taking down hijab upon the demand of security officers on certain check points, she is liable to be denied access.

In short, government hands on. Devolute the power of dress code authorization to society.

b said...

'anyone should be proud of their own heritage'

- a lot of heritage is bullshits and acquired through merciless killings, tortures and extermination.

- human beings should always based their heritage on rationality, scientific findings and not based on fear, bullshits, myths, superstitions. It should constantly be reviewed, challenged and kept up to date.

- we live in a world constantly changing. Seasons come and go and no two seasons were the same.

b said...

'What if we let PAP 100% control what we suppose to dress?'

- Btw, the voters have already gave pap almost 100% control. They do have this legit right to decide. Whether it is morally right or wrong is another thing.

Anonymous said...

What if some of the FTs from South America jungle tribes in SinkieLand and insist on just wearing a leaf covering their crotch with strings tie around their waists?


Would it be more carefree, natural and convenient for them during work in case they need LS? With normal modern office wear, they may not unzip fast enough for urgent call of nature. So how? Can or cannot?

Veritas said...

That is why I am saying we must not hand over 100% of our dress code authorization to PAP.

That also mean PAP can have certain rights in deciding our dress code. For example, PAP can ban niqab. Also it will have a right to ban nakedness in public.....etc.

If a Sikh want to carry a parang on the street (Sikh religion sanction parang carrying), it got to be banned as well.

A mature democracy need fine calibration in social contract. That requires highly educated and highly intelligent citizen. What I see is PAP try make us stupid. So we will always be oppressed. Also we will be fooled by some mad man preaching superstitious.

A socialist will want everyone to be clever. A socialist want progress in human being.

So join me as socialist

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

There shall be freedom of attire to be worn by any individual. Organisations, not only uniform groups, but private and public institutions should also have their rights to how their staff should wear. Schools should have the right to decide what their students should wear. Don't comply, free to go.

In Rome do what the Romans do. In Singapore do what the Singaporeans do. In an organisation, do what the organisation expects you to do.

The individual has the right to refuse to accept the rules of organisations and are free to dissociate from the organisations. No individual shall dictate their personal taste on other organisations.

How ridiculous can it be if an individual because of his cultural or religious preference refuses to put on the uniform of the police, armed forces or other legitimate organisations?

Free to choose your dressing and your way of life but not to impose on others your way of life. No one is compelled to join an organisation if he does not want to abide by the legitimate requirements of the organisation. NS is an exception.

The secular law of the state is supreme.

virgo49 said...

Bro, when you are drawing 15k per month for a five year term, why rock the boat, now Sampan and stand to lose collecting the balance remunerations.

Anonymous said...

The hijab wearer should be free to wear it any where she likes. Everyone shall respect her freedom to do so. The hijab wearer should also respect the freedom of other people and their institutions. If they have guidelines on acceptable office or factory wear, the hijab wearer shall not insist that she be allowed to be the exception.

You expect others to respect your right you must also respect others of their rights.

Are the muslim community demanding that the uniform groups make exceptions to allow them to wear hijab that is not part of the uniform?

Anonymous said...

The '3 inch lotus feet' was pure oppression on the Chinese Womanfolks. It was inhumane treatment that Mao Zedong put a stop to it and made it punishable on anyone forcing it anyone.


Veritas said...

There are certain public institution where I do not support hijab. Uniform group is one. Another is the public school students before tertiary level, aka from Primary to JC. Reason being schools students are uniformed, and all students attire should be regulated.

Today, all school girls are mandated to put on pony tail if they maintain long hair. This is to maintain school discipline. I have seen my students let go their hair during events. They are hottttttt.....etc. These girls are already developed and may cause a lot of distractions.

Since the public school restrict the human rights of secular girls in showing their hairs, same should be apply to Muslim girls.

Unfortunately, many Muslim cannot see far enough. The 2002 tudung issue manifest this. The Malay girl refuse to take down tudung and they felt victimize.

Should we support Malay girls wearing tudung to public schools given they can always go to madrasah? The schools should have the right to impose uniform. Unfortunately many Malay do not perceive it this way. After 2002, there is a mass hijab movement.

Also I support Sikh take down turban in schools and uniform group to be fair.

Also I foresee some problem if we allow devolve hijabing to society. I suspect that one day some Muslim girl who work on sales and marketing may cried "racism" if she is fired for refusing to take down hijab.

The conclusion is we need to integrate Malay more, especially economically. If we continue to issue fiat against Islamization, Malay can only Islamize more. They will use Islam as a rally point against secular institution.

First the FT policy must stop. Economics opportunities should be given to Singaporeans. If the Malay are given regional jobs, higher education, sooner or later, they will be secularized.

Veritas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Veritas said...

Right now, I see something coming if PAP refuse address the problem of Malay underclass. Malay will rally around Islam.

2002, Malay rally around Tudung students who insist of to cover up to the extend of dropping out. They never see that secular girl students are regulate in their hair-styling and are forced to put on pony tail.

So PAP even though a little flawed in racial policy has actually allowed Malay to hijab in many public organization just that it was not advertise.

They have actually let Malay hijab in a lot of public institution. PAP are quite flexible in many ways.

First MOE Malay teacher already hijab liao.

But what if Malay now ask PAP to regulate private sector, including hijab in beauty contest, and make it illegal to fire a hijabing sales and marketing girl?

Will they get more and more radicalize for every failed petition?

Is Singaporean ready to walk into hospital and get serve by hijab Malay instead of sexy young non-hijab girls?

Will boss fired Malay customer officers because of losing business as client prefer to be serve by competitor's sexy customer officer. Will Malay complain discriminate when they get fired in such manner?

By opening the society to debates, we can then progress. The bottom line is, we need to integrate Malay more, to prevent them using Islam as a rally point.

Anonymous said...

@ 9.14pm 7 nov 2013 PATRIOT

// The '3 inch lotus feet' was pure oppression on the Chinese Womanfolks. //

Despite this, it did not stop a young lady from attaining supreme political power at the age of 26 until she died at 73 years old from 1861 to 1908. She is Empress Dowager.

You think Sinkie women with huge ugly feet like great fool, pangsai jampang woman and the 老鸡母愚腐neesoon can ever achieve that despite their feet not bound?

Do you think they have ever "plp" u know whose to claim up? No?

Anonymous said...

* climb up, typo .........

Anonymous said...

@ 9.14pm 7 nov 2013 PATRIOT

// The '3 inch lotus feet' was pure oppression on the Chinese Womanfolks. //

Oppression of any kind will only be condemned by history when all are done and dusted.

Anonymous said...

@ 9.14pm 7 nov 2013 PATRIOT

// The '3 inch lotus feet' was pure oppression on the Chinese Womanfolks. //

Oppression historically is short term and ephemeral. More often than not, it is unsustainable and one way or another ended overturned by the tide of history somehow.

All men trying to stand in front to defy the waves of history suffered the eventual fate like Mohd Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Hosni Mubarak. It is still wiser to be a benevolent ruler than a tyrannical despot .......

Anonymous said...

@ 9.14pm 7 nov 2013 PATRIOT

// The '3 inch lotus feet' was pure oppression on the Chinese Womanfolks. //

More oppressive, tragic and unbelievably sad than "3 inch lotus feet" is "3 mm pea size brain".

The women under the Manchurian rule are probably far more fortunate than many modern men. For them, only their feet are binded by their tradition and custom.

It is far more "gruesome, ruthless and tragic" when the brain of men are " binded " from as young as 18 months when they are "fostered" to nurseries during the day by their working parents.

At least the women still had 3 inches feet. Some or many modern men have only 3 mm pea size brain when they reached adulthood after more than 20 years of "brain-binding". Which or who is more oppressive? You tell me lar! Unfortunately, there is no chairman Mao in sight to liberate these men ......

Anonymous said...

The Fates of the Manfolks in Sin appear to be worse than the China
Women with bounded feet.
Brains are shrunk to pea size and
balls will soon disappear like



Anonymous said...

I am a square peg. I demand the world to make all holes square to fit me. I am very reasonable. I do not demand that you be square like me.

If I can't get into a round hole, it is your problem. You create the problem for me.

I am not the problem.

Anonymous said...

Matilah should be the Man
to restore the MANHOOD
back for the Sinkie MALES.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

anon 1026:

Please lah, kawan. Dun suka suka put "duty" or "obligation" on me. Please dun conscript me for "national service"...again. I ROD long time already ;-)

I quite enjoy a fucked up world. It is very entertaining. No need to fix anything -- just let everything go to shit. Damn funny lah.

Don't you agree?

Anonymous said...

Anon 10.26 am

Somebody obviously talking to himself at 10.26am then appear at 11.04am ........

A person with real manhood doesn't go around trying to hype about his impotence ....... or rather his prowess. Could it be the other way round?

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

WOW. Trying to bait me izzit.

Try harder. Your kung fu is weak.

b said...

We should also have non halai menus from macdonalds and burger king. We are not muslims but having halai menus enforced on us all the time. Secular?

Anonymous said...

Has anyone seen how the Malaysian policewomen and women soldiers with their tudung on? Has anyone seen the Arab women footballers running in the field with their tudung on?