There you have it. A star is born in the SAF by the name of Brigadier General Gan Siow Huang. Finally the opposite sex has cracked the brass ceiling previously only thought possible only for men. Granted BG Gan was awarded an overseas merit scholarship. Yet she made the very difficult climb up the ladder, and showed men what she is truly made of. It’s even more impressive that she is the mother of three daughters.

All this preamble brings me to this. If BG Gan can do it, I believe that other female Singaporeans have it to succeed in the military as well. Thus all Singaporean women must be made to serve NS, either in the military or in other forms such as medic or engineering. This would be truly good for nation building. After all, why only have the boys do all the work.

Let me provide three benefits of why women should be doing NS and reservist cycles.

1) Men would now no longer complain that they lost their girlfriends to FT, since girls would be in NS with them. These love birds could also procreate during NS which would boost Singapore’s declining birth rate.
2) Having women in the military enables the PAP to balance the ratio of men to women. Conscription solves the problem for LHL immediately.
3) Women with dual citizenships have been getting away for too long. Many have obtained foreign citizenships and traveled in and out of Singapore with them, without serving NS. Men who chose not to serve NS do not have this privilege. If they re-enter Singapore, even with their foreign citizenships, they would be arrested on the spot. This needs to change. We need to make it equal. Both men and women who do not serve NS cannot ever step back into Singapore ever again. Either we don’t allow at all for both sexes, or we relax this rule going forward. Perhaps those who have emigrated and have foreign citizenships be allowed to return for social visits only.

Next up… NS for all PRs.

National Slavery

Check Also

Can We Call Ourselves Fair When We Don’t Recognize LGBT Couples?

Min Shan tried to assure Singaporeans that sexual orientation do not influence policies. But why is 377A still around?