I would like to thank The Straits Times for publishing the article "Racial, social identities will continue to pose a challenge, observers say" (Jan 14).

Not having attended the Singapore Perspectives conference, I am glad to have got some key takeaways from this article.

I felt, though, that two quotes in the article could have been given more context and clarified.

The first is a quote by Non-Resident Ambassador Mohammad Alami Musa, who heads the Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, saying that "people of no religion... are going to (want to) have a seat at the table, because they believe that even without religion... (they) have the wisdom and this moral sensibility to contribute to public reason and morality" and that this might be contested by religious groups. I was somewhat surprised that this is something that might be contested.

I'd have liked to read more about what made Mr Alami say that (which may have been backed by conversations he had with community members).

The second is Chapman University professor Joel Kotkin's opinion that he finds the concept of white privilege "absurd", noting that there are minority groups like Asian Americans with more education and income than some white people.

There are differing opinions about the concept of white privilege, and I felt that the writer could have done more to provide a more complete view of it.

Asian Americans having more education and income than some white people does not necessarily mean that white privilege does not exist.

I also think he misses an important consideration, that it often takes Asian Americans (and all other minority groups) a lot more effort to overcome racism and discrimination to achieve the same things as a white person.

I am glad to see discussions about race, religion and gender identity in Singapore. I believe more of these are needed for Singapore to be a truly inclusive and equitable society.

Mabel Low