Was reading the sunday papers when i came across 1) the contract for services of honeytrappers and 2) the expectations of Singapore women on their dates.

1) There are already many factors that test any relationship. why bother setting a trap to see if the other party will succumb? the whole affair reeks of selfishness and mistrust, as if they will only be gratified if the trap ensnares the prey. this whole concept plays solely on the vulnerability of human beings and im not so sure if the hunter will be fully convinced IF the first time round failed. try for countless times and im sure u'd succeed, with your pockets much lighter i guess. so go ahead, gratify your self-righteousness and make urself broke at the same time. it's the only logical thing to do when you are already convinced but have no evidence:) ignorance is sometimes bliss but ignorance and a dash of trust is nirvana in a day when we increasingly dont know what is what.

if you cant trust ur partner to behave, then it is already over. using honey trappers to gain evidence to get out and a fat parting sum is wholly unethical and deplorable. burn in hell, whores. human beings are creatures of affection and inundating assaults on the emotional core will cause even the most resilient to buckle, unless of course he is a saint or his emotional core has been removed. then i'd say that there is a future for androids cos we really want 101% loyalty and it may be cheaper to get a dog. it doesnt really help when you dangle all my favourite foods in front of me when im on a diet. lust VS gluttony, which is the greater sin? for greater effect, use money instead of food.

perhaps these people have failed to see that something is lacking(love, care, concern, communication) or refuse to believe that there is an inherent problem in their relationships so they are adamant that the fault doesnt lie with them. get a life. people always choose to take the easy way out. it is never easy to take the first step to communicate the problem (education takes generations!) but all it takes to point the finger is to lift it. hasnt it always been the case since the proliferation of radical extremists? disillusioned with the way the world is going(im beginning to see why), they destroy with reckless abandonment, hoping to use fear to control the people and hoping to shape the world as they really want to see it. bet historians all over the world would be turning in their graves cos we didnt see world being cocooned in peace and immense joy under the rule of adolf hitler. these are warped cases of mahatma ghandi gone wrong and im glad that the human psyche is more resilient than that.

2) even though the sample size of Lifestyle's survey is small and could be an inaccurate representation of the general female population in our beloved motherland, i have to be concerned with the random sample of 200 persons in the survey for who knows, this randomness may be a fair representation of the the huge sample space of say, 2 million(thanks squirrel!)? this is especially so when the responses resonate so deeply with most, if not all of them (JC students can only dream of such scores).

no doubt confident, assertive and practical, i cannot deny that women are equally as capable as men in most if not all aspects of life, save the inherent physiological differences. but take a look at female bodybuilders and all notions of that would go to the wind. i digress. all the talk about equal opportunities at the work place, and women rights (i dont see no men's charter or people brandying men's rights)is purely hypocritical when they expect to be treated as the fairer sex when it comes to dating. admittedly, acts such as opening and holding of doors are social graces that should be encouraged and in fact should not only be limited to the opposite gender. however, free meals, safety escort services, "celebrations" and dressing up and not having to carry handbags really seem to weigh alot on the list for ladies, but dont they only reflect a deeper sense of insecurity that underlie the facade of confidence and independence? it just screams superficiality and shallowness in mindset and thinking. and it doesnt really help that an even greater overwhelming majority of men would like to conform to these stereotypes, perhaps just for the sake of ingratiating themselves with their dates(i cant really say girlfriends. maybe girlfiends)

it is with little wonder why divorce rates are skyrocketing when relationships are based on such superficial matters cos the foundations are not deeper than 6 feet underground. moreover, putting the pressure on men to perform certain things makes it a lopsided relationship and it is not difficult to see why there are increasing difficulties in today's relationships. how long can you deceive yourselves? granted, some may argue that paying for meals, bringing her home, holding "celebrations" and dressing up and carrying handbags can be seen as willingness to provide for the other, concern for her safety, placing her as a top priority and catering to her every whim can be seen as his true devotion to the cause. ever wondered how mutual consent to intercourse is not rape but one-sided insistence is? it may be a bit far-fetched but the point is that love, care and devotion is not regimentalised but cultivated by both sides. If pandering to each and every whim comes at the expense of total disregard for the other's life then our society would be better off making the economy more robust. i cant help but feel sorry that these over-romanticised notions of courtship that come from sensational western media have been totally imbibed without first being treated (damn disney and haapily-ever-after). and in comes all the sedimentation, and what-have-you. think NEWater minus the ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis and UV light treatment. there is no harm in the a little indulgence but one must stay firmly rooted to the ground, as is apparently not the case.

Dont take all those nice gestures for granted and be sure to reciprocate in kind. after all, it takes 2 to tango.