Reactions show need for education
Some online critics claim the lyrics are "no big deal" and sung in jest. Their argument trivialises and normalises sexism and rape, while justifying sexual assault as retaliation for infidelity.
Also, it indicates apathy and desensitisation towards the issues, resulting in some seeing nothing wrong with the behaviour.
Then there are those who argue that the verse is sung within the confines of the army. But locale is not an excuse.
Surely, there are many other ways for soldiers to cope with compulsory conscription and fatigue, as well as raise morale, without putting down women.
Some argue that the Association of Women for Action and Research is intrusive and prudish. This should not detract from the work it has been doing in raising awareness of prejudice, chauvinism and their normalisation.
There is no need to ascribe inferiority to women as a means to state one's masculinity.
National servicemen are obligated to bear arms as part of state-sanctioned violence in the name of national defence. Sexual violence and its rhetoric have no place in this.
We could perhaps reflect on how we have long taken for granted certain historical liberties taken by males with regard to attitudes and behaviours towards females.
The reactions to the ban show that we are in dire need of some education.
Ho Chi Sam