I have been getting lots of googles from people looking on more information on Ms. Chng Zhenzhi. For those interested in the original Sunday Times article where Ms. Chng's remarks originally appeared, you may get the photo archive (of the article, not the woman) by emailing me within the next seven days, until 30th May 2005. Yes. Limited time period offer only.

SingaporeInk has the relevant portion of the article from Sunday Times, 22nd May, in which Ms. Chng clarifies her words. Piecing and matching together what was written in the two articles can be quite a piece of work.

22nd May:

I said “they are fine until they enter national service”, in response to a question about whether I find Singapore men whiny. My point was that the only occasions I noticed whining was when they were talking about their national service experiences. When asked what they complained about, I said “minute things” as I did not wish to expatiate on what they had shared.

I did not imply that every male scholar I know has whined about national service. Nor did I say it was unacceptable for national servicemen to voice their opinions or displeasure.

15th May:

Once they enter NS, they complain a lot. I didn't know that guys could talk about the most minute things.

"They" in the 15th May article appears to refer to Singapore males, and is in direct contradiction with her later words, since it obviously is a generalization which includes "every male scholar" she knows. "Minute things" and "private things" are also entirely different. I wouldn't use the former as a replacement term for the latter when I don't wish to "expatiate", but maybe that's just me. Furthermore "voic[ing] their opinions and displeasure" sounds like a euphemism for whining and complaining, which was the entire point of the 22nd May article.

22nd May:

When asked if male scholars are easily bullied by female scholars, I said I did not have any example to justify such a statement. [...] I stated explicitly and repeatedly that I did not wish to generalise.

15th May:

It's quite obvious that the female scholars are more aggressive, Type-A, go-getting types, while the males are more soft-spoken and tend to be easily bullied by females.

Although the 15th May article indeed provides no example that Ms. Chng cited to support her point, her words were nonetheless clearly a generalization. Perhaps she was quoted out of context, but it is rather hard to see how she can say what she said on 15th May and still claim to have "stated explicitly and repeatedly that [she] did not wish to generalise".

A victim of sensationalism by Sunday Times, or a woman who can't make up her mind and is backpeddaling? We may never know. Rereading the 15th May article, I remain convinced that Ms. Chng's words were not quoted entirely out of context, though I am extremely certain ST did some creative finangling of their own, in their inimitable journalistic style.

22nd May:

Editor's Note: Ms Chng was quoted accurately by our reporter, and an A*Star official said as much in a conversation with the reporter after the remarks were published.

Quoted accurately? Maybe. But like what Jeff Gates said, "context, context, context".

Filed under: Singapore, News, Politics