12.08.2025
Reader challenges “Ladies’ Code” remark
A reader offers candid feedback on GC’s “ladies’ code” remark, questioning outdated gender expectations, emphasising mutual respect, and urging alignment with modern gentlemanly values.
.jpg)
Kebaya, Javanese-style traditional clothes for women, and its male counterpart beskap. (Photo for illustration only).
Dear GC,
Some friends advised me not to send this feedback, suggesting it might not be well received. Still, I feel it’s important to express my perspective, particularly in response to your remarks about “ladies too had a code.”
I agree with your phrasing, but you used it in the past tense - had - which implies such a code is no longer relevant today. This raises the question: why do some men still expect women to follow it? The definition of what makes a lady should come from women themselves, not from men, and certainly not from an outdated set of rules.
Whatever your reader Mr. Faiz has experienced is, in my view, less about insecurity and more about mutual respect. Words carry weight, and I would encourage careful consideration when discussing matters relating to women, as phrasing can sometimes be perceived differently than intended.
You’ve also stated that “many men find themselves manipulated by partners who don’t reciprocate those values.” May I ask how you reached that conclusion?
Regarding your statement, “True infidelity is not a swipe, a scroll, or a double tap,” I believe this risks normalising certain behaviours online that may be inconsistent with honouring women. This, in turn, may undermine the very code you wish to uphold.
I share this feedback not to criticise, but to provide my honest opinion in the hope it will be considered constructively.
Whether you choose to act on it or not is, of course, your decision.
