belated support

 

 

(source)

 

Yesterday – May 17 (Singapore time) – was International Day against Homophobia. This is a belated support for the fight against the civil discrimination against the LGBTQ community as well as the criminalisation of homosexual activity in certain parts of the world.

 

Singapore is one such nation who should repent for its societal apathy towards religious discrimination of the LGBTQ community. Most if not all in the christian and muslim communities in this country view homosexuality as a “sin” and do not accept practising LGBTQ people into their communities.

 

The government is also responsible for keeping an outdated law which makes any form of homosexual activity a crime.

 

Shame on Singapore.

 

*******

chinese charlatans

 

Yahoo! Singapore recently red-tops itself when it gives attention to the lowbrowed opinions of some self-deluded sinophiles who bleat their superstitious wares to mostly housewived intellects. One suspects the Yahoo! reporter herself to be a follower of such pseudo-scientific babble.

 

 

It does not take a scientifically unschooled geomancer to cock-talk about the Marina Bay Sands’s trinitarian structure as symbols of luck, prosperity and longevity when reasoned common sense can already foretell economic abundance from such a behemoth of vice as the Marina Bay Sands enterprise. Besides, one wonders how shallow the dollar-eyed chinese can get when they seem to be interested in nothing but prosperity and fortune, good luck and abundance. What about respect for the human individual? Human dignity? Freedom of expression and conscience? Equality of all before the law?

 

Marina Bay is Singapore’s hub of prosperity: Fengshui experts

 

This same chinese-speaking geomancer ostriches himself further by mumbling nonsense about the Singapore Flyer being a symbol of a water wheel which rotates to bring in “positive energy” which is “contained” in the Marina Barrage. Huh?

 

 

And while the Yahoo! reporter seems to suggest to her readers about the bloke’s “experience” of forty years in the business and thus lends credibility to his goobledygook, any epistemologically-trained person can tell her that antiquity does not determine truth. It is commonplace to listen to similar loud-hailers by chinese apologists about the “long” history of the Chinese people, about the ancient-ness of its “sciences” such as TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine), geomancy and astrology – as though the longevity of these superstitions hint at their truthfulness. If anything at all, it simply suggests the gullibility of homo sapiens to want to believe in super-natural and extra-terrestrial causes of worldly events.

 

One can check out the “business” of this self-deluded crackpot via his campy-named website, Oriental Fortune 21.

 

It becomes more obvious as to the superstitious affiliations of this Yahoo! reporter when she interviews more fortune-telling crackpots. One of them opines that the reason behind Marina Bay’s economic success in recent years is that it forms the “mouth of Singapore”, a supposedly important aspect in “landform” geomancy. Come on – the economic success of the Marina Bay area is due to the excellent judgement of our Singapore government and all of the relevant financial and economic principles it studies and employs to come to that proposal.

 

One wonders if these charlatans would bleat the same tune if it is the opposite situation. Perhaps they will weave some other cock-and-bull story about how the structures of the area spell bad “feng shui”.

*******

survivor: workplace

 

Pre-adult testosteronians and estrogenians may sneer at the prospect of playing kabuki in the workplace, but the nine to five gloomy upper-lipper simply yawns. He knows better than to be shish kebab in an Eli Roth straight-to-video bleeder. The priests of shrink at the University of Greenwich are now preaching the results of their latest study that people who express their authentic selves at the workplace might just be excommunicating themselves from the Jacobian ladder.

 

This is neither novel nor revolutionary. Singaporean employees are traditionally stiff upper-lippers in the workplace who do not mix the professional with the personal. Swing and punt if you must, fuck that underaged call girl if you so wish, but do not get caught! It becomes anathema if you happen to be a government official, a headmaster or a member of a prominent business family. Recreation sucks for people in high society.

 

It is not only about escaping the omniscience of Big Brother and CCTV. It is also about workplace politicking. While many of us try to get our assignments and tasks done well and on time, there are others whose job scopes seem to be more than just their area of expertise. They suck smelly cocks and lick stinky pussies. It is not only the superior’s genitalia that are vulnerable – I know. I’ve been there.

 

They may go down on you, but don’t be scammed – they will sodomise you the moment you are not looking, and leave your arse torn and scorched. I know. I’ve been there.

 

All because of that promotion. That salary raise. That overseas opportunity.

 

While my mates tolerate and are able to accommodate to the realities of workplace hypocrisy, I cannot. The neurons in my brain misfire every time I play Survivor: Workplace and the personality disassociation somehow squeezes my emotions desert-dry. I remember an incident in which I had no choice but to be double agent to two colleagues so as to twister the charcoals of conflict between them. That was the only way I could tai chi their oncoming collaborated assault on me (the walls have ears, you know). I could pull it off because I have one of those forever-young, sometimes blur-like-sotong faces that could only mean boyscout naivete. Many people do not realise that beneath the naive boyscout facade lies a potential misanthropic serial killer.

 

It is no wonder I favour Professor X over Wolverine, Sherlock Holmes over Captain America and the shrewd geek over the dim-witted college hunk.

 

Still…I prefer not to play mind games. It can be addictive and egotistically empowering, especially when one witnesses the efficacy of such conniving. And it monsters you to view people not as human beings who should be treated with dignity and respect, but as pawns on the chessboard to be used and manipulated.

 

That is NOT right.

 

 

*******

shame on singapore

 

The Chijmes landlords has morally cowered to the self-censorship of the lunatic public by forcing Creative Insurgence to cancel the Escape Chapel Party.

 

Chijmes Chapel Party called off

 

There is nothing more to be said.

 

*******

escape chapel party

 

Singapore continues to anally rape its nonreligious citizens with its syphillic brand of multireligious “tolerance”, one that strangles our civil freedom to opinion and expression. Singaporeans are brain freezed into glazing only at the Disney channel when it comes to religion (and politics) while nonreligion is open market and can be AXNed by anyone at any time.

 

Many of us are now frostbited to be self-censoring and hypocritically respectful, tickling the scrotums of religious “sensibilities” even if some of us would rather be fingering the heathen. It is just not right. It is immoral.

 

Advertiser Creative Insurgence has for more than a week red-carpeted its campaign for the coming Escape Chapel Party to be held at the Chijmes Chapel this Saturday at 9pm onwards. The party is a spur to promote UK-based “Escape” nightclub brand to the region.

 

(source)

 

 

Even this one is as benign as my cheeky daughter playing peekaboo under the bed covers. It is as holy as stupid sheep. But many Singaporeans seem to disagree, most of them, I reckon, bleeting among the local roman catholic community. They claim these visuals of beautiful nuns are “offensive” and “in bad taste”. Many even filed reports to the police (!!??) and the various local ministries.

 

Creative Insurgence is perhaps trying to give a tongue-in-cheeky humour to the party, since it is held in a former religious convent and that coincidentally, this week is the fucking holy week. The organisers originally wanted the party to be held over the Spring Festival weekend in January but due to circumstances postponed to the next public holiday, namely the coming Bloody Friday cum Walking Dead weekend.

 

As expected, the organisers promptly apologised to the phallus-crowned supremo of the catholic diocese in Singapore, a Mr Nicholas Chia, whose office is devilishly located a few nun-jiggle steps away at the Cathedral of the Good Shepherd. They also recycle-binned the nuns from their main website.

 

This is Singapore, and this is how the pasteurised version of the blasphemy law is enforced in this peaceful and loving multireligious country. The absence of criminalisation does not make it any less vile. What if vice versa? Can freethinkers and atheists file reports to the police if we find posters about evangelistic meetings and christian outreach programme to the non-christians offensive? We have a right to be offended, don’t we? Can the LGBTQ community squeal their offence over schools that promote anti-gay agendas in their sex education programmes?

 

The above pictures are already so mild. I think I shall leave you with these:

 

(source)

 

(source)

 

There are more fucking nuns, literally, out there, but I shall have the christian virtue of self-control and just stop here.

 

*******

my apologies…

 

Parental hormones must have egg-yolked my cerebral cortex yesterday as I threw the Bush-ian shoe at the Singapore Police Force. It turns out that the supposed successful childnap in Tampines was a cruel boyish wolf cry. I am not feeling very bright now.

 

Tampines Child Kidnap rumour a Hoax

 

It may or may not be one of those societal mythologies we call urban legends on the urge of evolving. And at my age, I did not realise that yesterday was the first of April.

 

Still, the Ang Mo Kio incident rattles on, with the police currently investigating. We also do well if we can be vigilant with our children at all times. Singapore is getting a bit too tight around the collar these days.

 

*******

email to some friends

 

Hey guys,

 

The recent revival in chinese nationals attempting to steal our sweet young darlings in Singapore is as fist-clenching as they are testicle-squeezing. One woodpeckers the head at the apparent dimwittedness of our particularly and uniquely Singaporean,which is to say, world-class, numero uno, the incredible and fabuluso Singapore Police Force – in allowing these 21st century genghis apes into our peaceful, low crime-rated, pseudo-democratic shopping heaven of a country.

 

Big Brother, to use the deliciously orwellian phrase, has only begun to nod to the will of the common Singaporean by blabbering bull about immigration policies, which in the first place, is supposed to be the One Ring that rules our wonderfully manpowerless economy. It seems that the highbrow-loving People Action Party is now bedevilled to fling this Ring into the ashes of Mount Doom.

 

It will be, to use a theological term, one hell uva effort to hold back the chinese barbarians as they invite themselves into our country. Sinophiles, or the self-proclaimed butt-kissers of chinese culture, often pontificate, albeit very wrongly, of China’s very ancient and thus must be good, historical legacy. Any discerning bloke can tell these racial fanatics that countries like Greece or Egypt too have very antiquated histories – but look at them today. The goodness or rightness of a thing is never determined by the mould on its history books. A country that imprisons its own people for simply opening their mouths against its government, or worshipping in house churches, or participating in activist art; a country that murders its own for the most peculiar of “crimes”; is not a country I will want to associate with. Let us remember how its power-lustful leaders arrested every and any journalist or writer it could locate around Beijing during the day s prior to the 2008 Olympics, just so that they can silence any investigative reporting and deceive the world into kowtowing to China’s olympian spectacle. More like a chimera.

 

Animal lovers too, cringe at how the monsters cull the more than a few thousand doggies and kitties just so that the Beijing streets could be childcare, disneyland-clean for the world to see.

 

It fools no one that its people who are trying to wring a living in sardine-canned Singapore is now trying to steal our sweet young things for money. There was an attempt in Ang Mo Kio several weeks ago. Thank goodness the mother pinched a glancc in time to behold a strange woman walking her son away.

 

There was another, reported in Simei. And probably a couple more of which I am clueless.

 

And recently, a chinese thug grabbed a malay darling off the bench and dump the lass into the back of a van. This took place in Tampines Street 20-something. There were even police roadblocks in the area.

 

It does not take an einsteinian brain to realise there is something amiss on our clean-and-green low-crime streets – yet the Singaporean police is shutting its orifices and playing dumb. Concerned parents receive no answer from the PAP-puppet. Singaporeans have the right to know so that young parents can take the necessary precautions. It is flamboyantly stupid for Singapore to play the nanny all the time by censoring truth so that it can be more palatable to the public. Singaporeans are brighter than that. Besides, since we cannot hold strikes or protests in democratic Singapore, don’t worry – we will be goody goody and not create a ruckus if the police just come out and make the childnappings prime time news.

 

Anyhow, just remember to hold your young darlings close to you at all times.

 

Oh dear, I am getting paranoid again.

 

*******

is this the way to go?

 

“Our long-term goal is to prohibit smoking in all public places except in designated smoking areas…our aim, in collaboration with the Health Promotion Board, is to work towards a future where Singaporeans consider smoking not only detrimental to health, but also socially unacceptable.”

- Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State, Singapore

 

I am scared. Urinating-in-my-trousers scared.

 

I am fearful that a time will come in Singapore when not only the subjects of religion and the People’s Action Party are exempt from intellectual criticism (in the name of religious harmony and autocratic pseudo-democracy respectively); but also civil and social morality, which would be force-fed to the man on the street through devious propaganda and emotionalistic advertising.

 

The State cannot and should not behave like the orwellian Big Brother, dictating to its citizens what is right and wrong, moral or immoral, socially acceptable or not. To play the health card on smoking is one thing, to enforce its abstinence is another. It no longer takes the highbrow, in 21st century Singapore, to know of smoking’s deleterious health effects. Nor does it take a President’s Scholar to know the bad effects of massive caffeine consumption on the nervous system, or alcohol on the liver, or bad cholesterol on the heart.

 

It is hypocrisy to demonise tobacco while there are more Singaporeans under the addiction of Char Kway Teow, Roti Prata, Laksa and Nasi Lemak, not to mention KFC, McDonald’s and Burger King. What about alcohol, which many supposedly mature adults consume, to their mental and emotional demise?

 

Some might argue that while alcohol, caffeine and cholesterol-laden foods might harm the addicted glutton, cigarette smoke harms not only the smoker but the innocent angel who happens to be close by. It appears idiotic to notice passive smoking while blind to the numerous incidents of domestic violence, exacerbated by alcohol abuse? Or the emotional abuse of family members due to a loved one’s poor health caused by gluttony? Or for that matter – the addicted gambler who now has more opportunities to commit his dirty deed in Singapore?

 

Or even the Taoist practice of burning “hell money” incessantly during the yearly “ghost” month, which pollutes the environment (and we still talk about going eco-friendly) as well as irritates the respirary systems of many? We choose to keep silent because it is “religion” – and religion somehow escapes any form of criticism even if it harms the environment.

 

Singapore might as well ban alcohol and casinoes and all forms of fatty dishes and fast food from its shores. And even the nose-tickling and lung-churning practice of burning fake money for imaginary dead people.

 

I do not smoke. I dislike gambling. But I am addicted to coffee, and a self-professed lover of sinful Singaporean cuisine. I love lots of sex too – and fantasize about fucking multiple women in multiple exotic positions. But since I love children, and got married as a result, decadent orgies and wanton adultery will never be my portion. Sexual faithfulness to my wife was part of our marriage vows, anyhow.

 

And I reckon many Singaporeans are guilty of the same vices, and would do well not to cast the first stone by demonising smoking into something more than just an unhealthy habit.

 

*******

 

orwellian evil

 

Lad magazines are rare, if not extinct, in Singapore’s officially prudish and ruling party-controlled newstands. Even the lustier ones like For Him Magazine (FHM) and Maxim are controlled by Big Brother – anything resembling the genitalia or the tits are opined as pornographic – which more than anything reveals the clerical immaturity of the authorities.

 

And the citizens. Remember the commercial walls of Orchard Road and their beautifully depicted male modeled muscled abbominals? Many among the public were pontificating about its abdominal obscenity, oblivious to the enlightened snickers of the discerningly educated few who are scratching our heads, wondering what the fucking fuss it was all about.

 

The perpretators of such ignorance are often the religiously motivated, drugged by a peculiar moral logic which rests on ancient texts instead of science and reason. Yes, primarily the ancient and thus very ignorant books of the monotheistic trinity of religions.

 

It baffles the common sense when any subject from politics (anywhere in the world except Singapore and the idiotic Asian lands) to football to Greek mythology can be slaughtered in the abbatoir of public discourse but NOT religion. The people “of the book” seem to be one very schizophrenic mob who would wince and weep at any jibe, profane or not, at their icons.

 

It is totalitarian, to say the least. It is the epitome of the orwellian vision of dystopia. It is evil.

 

Three days ago, the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) squealed like a hurt flesh of infant swine against two articles published in the latest edition of FHM. I didn’t know the council reads FHM. Godless and evil men like me do not even read FHM. I read the King James Bible. Really.

 

FHM pulled off shelves, editor apologises

 

The NCCS statement claimed that the articles “make fun of the Lord Jesus Christ” and “…hurt the sensitivities of the Christian community.”

 

Hmm. Does Bishop Dr Robert Solomon, president of the NCCS, who with three other leading clerics signed the statement, really know what he is talking about? HOW IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ARTICLES IN FHM TO HURT THE FEELINGS OF CHRISTIANS? UNLESS CHRISTIANS READ FHM.

 

Oh, I must be very ignorant then. I didn’t realise the godly christians in Singapore read FHM. There must be some good holy stuff there which I am not aware of which edifies my christian brethren. Must be the beauties of God’s creation.

 

Ungodly men like me only read the theology journals and Rowan Williams. And Marcus Borg. And John Spong. And George Orwell. And Evelyn Waugh. And Charles Dickens. And Ian Mcewan. Sigh.

 

Apart from the two blasphemous articles, perhaps I should start reading FHM. NCCS thinks it influences the christian community.

 

*******

 

his simple life

 

While ninety-five per cent, if not hundred, of Singapore’s ruling regime live in relative luxury and own at least one private property, the freedom prize-winning Dr Chee Soon Juan lives in a three-room flat in one of the oldest housing estates in the country and drives a nineteen-year-old Nissan sedan car.

 

(source)

 

Dr Chee, given his circumstances as an embattled activist for democracy in a country that is ruled by a vicious empire which is no different, in principle, to any contemporary autocracy in the Middle East; does not draw any salary, apart from the earnings he gets from selling his books to individuals and bookshops as well as the occasional foreign university research fellowship. One wonders how he manages to keep his house in order with his homemaker wife and three young children.

 

I used to be one of the many Singaporeans who find him profoundly odd and a nutcase. But not anymore. If ever there was a cause worth fighting for, it is the cause of freedom.

 

REAL FREEDOM.

 

I salute you, Dr Chee.

 

And thanks to Yahoo News for this piece of precious reporting.

 

*******

 

when will the singapore government (PAP) stop its bullying??

 

Our Great Leader, the Holy Prime Minister, successor to the Holy Father of our beloved Lee Dynasty – all praise and honour to Him – exposes his real nature last Sunday when he issued a legal letter to the editors of sociopolitical website, TR Emeritus (TRE), commanding them to withdraw an article which apparently accused the government of partiality (cronyism), when it appointed Our Great First Lady as head of the Asian investment firm, Temasek Holdings.

 

PM Lee sends lawyer’s letter to editors of TR Emeritus

 

The Great Leader, in the letter, reminded TRE of the government’s (the People’s Action Party) terrible and awesome powers, as was demonstrated by the numerous defamation suits it waged against international newspapers and periodicals, such as the Far Eastern Economic Review, and won.

 

And so our Great Leader warned TRE that a similar fate would await them unless they withdraw the article and post an apology on the website.

 

This is Singapore, my motherland and my home. An autocracy which masquerades as a democracy only in theory. Our people has no power at all in deciding how the country is run. Isn’t this what democracy is all about – power of the people? Although I do not suspect any foul play during vote counts, it does not take a rocket scientist to realise how disparate the arena is during election campaigns, with the ruling regime having an obvious advantage over the opposition by constantly fiddling with electoral boundaries as well as having more press and media coverage.

 

TRE has withdrawn the article although it has yet to post an apology, as our Alex Au had done in his blog, Yawning Bread, when a very insecure Minister decided to play the defamation game on him over some rumours about his moral indiscretions. Competent and intelligent as he is, the minister does not realise he is digging his own grave, at least in the eyes of netizens, by using the law to bully Yawning Bread into silence.

 

Dear PAP, if you are innocent, just say so – and debunk the allegations once and for all by speaking the truth. There is no need to emotionally and psychologically abuse and bully Singaporeans into withdrawing their comments. Where is civil discourse in all of this? Why the need to use the law to threaten and frighten us?

 

WHEN WILL THE RULING REGIME STOP ITS BULLYING TACTICS?? When will the PAP stop its thuggish ways on its people like a hysterical parent brandishing a chopper over mischievous children?

 

The Holy Father, peace be upon Him, claimed in the past that any political accusation against the government taints their reputation and as such a legal victory, via defamation suit, would always be the right thing to do as it vindicates the ruling regime. Besides, this is politics. Shouldn’t we be unscrupulous against our political “enemies”?

 

Our Holy Father thinks he is Cao Cao living in ancient China.

 

On the contrary, the megalomaniacal antics of the PAP has time and again allows itself to be exposed to the world as a strangely first world country with third world ethics.

 

Mature individuals pay attention to constructive criticism and simply ignore unwarranted and unjustified ones. One does not see the governments in the US or UK lash out against all the rude and critical comments made of them by the many newspapers and tabloids.

 

Human beings have the right to say anything they want, even if such speech is irresponsible and rude. This is life.

 

And it takes a mature and self-secure government to accept it.

 

*******

 

this IS christianity in singapore…

 

(source)

Thailand. The land of the free. The constitutional monarchy with a very well-loved and respected King. The country of smiles.

But did you know? Thailand is a place of little true joy. Buddhism is so much a part of the Thai national identity and permeates into every level of society and culture that only about one hundred Thais accept Christ each year in the country of over 68 million people.

Do you share the burden of being that one small change agent, bringing the gospel to the Thais, one at a time?

With its many temples and monks, it is hard to ignore the fact that Buddhism is Thailand’s national religion. With only 16% christians, most Thai students see christianity only as a foreign religion. The land of smiles needs to hear the gospel message. Come and share with Khonkaen University students that Jesus is the way, the true and the life!

Go Change. World.  

 

For someone who lives under the christian subculture in Singapore, it is easy for me to mock the online cacophony over the poster above as white noise. In fact, I invite any practising christian in Singapore, to challenge me on this – that the above IS REPRESENTATIVE, very accurately indeed, of grassroots christianity as subscribed (orthodoxy) and practised (orthopraxy) in this country.

 

NUS student group says sorry for insensitive remarks

 

For anyone blissfully ignorant of Campus Crusade for Christ (CCC), of which the NUS (National University of Singapore) campus branch is responsible for the above advertisement (which caused much noise in the online community), it is an evangelical parachurch organisation founded by an already deceased William (Bill) Bright. Its main purpose is to spread (really, to proselytise) the christian religion all over the world. It has many branches, with sub “ministries” in tertiary campuses, all over the world. The main polytechnics in Singapore, namely Singapore, Ngee Ann, Temasek and Nanyang, have CCC ministries (I am not sure about the newest polytechnic, Republic) along with the two main universities, NUS and NTU (Nanyang Technological University).

 

I was a member in one of those branches during my school days.

 

And so let anyone accuse, dishonestly and deceptively, that I have no credibility to assert what I am asserting now. In fact, in the deluded madness of my youth, I wanted to enter the seminary to become a pastor. This led me to years of personal study and research (and anguish) into christian theology, biblical studies and historical criticism (which eventually led me to my free-thinking secular humanism). I suppose that is one of the reasons why I am still earnestly interested in the academic study of the bible.

 

Now, contrary to what CCC Singapore as well as the rest of the christian community who want to distance themselves from CCC claim; the theological premise which undergirds the alleged poster has always been constant in christianity, at least as practised and believed in this country; which is namely, that the person of Jesus Christ, as the Son of God (jews and muslims would disagree), is the ONLY way to personal salvation (of the soul) and thus upon death, the ONLY way to an eternity in heaven. This means that in the perception of christians, buddhists, muslims, hindus and free thinkers are all DAMNED to an eternity in hell. Full stop.

 

Now, a conniving dishonesty comes when a non-christian confronts the christian in a media or national capacity.  It is common for the christian to make the non-sensical statement that it is not up to him to judge anyone – only god knows – the destiny of all men. No streetwise christian would be so daft as to state the truth point blank that the poor interviewer will be damned to hellfire. But this is a red herring which distracts the public from the real issue – what does christian theology teach?

 

Classical christian theology has always been religiously exclusive – there is only ONE TRUE religion – and ONE TRUE scripture. It is precisely this very deluded view that compels practitioners to proselytise non-christians as much as possible – they are really sincere about it – they want you to go to heaven!

 

So let me be clear. Any christian who claims that CCC is not representative of christianity is being deliberately dishonest.

 

In making this assertion, I am not claiming that no christian in Singapore disagrees with the bigoted exclusivity of classical christianity; there are perhaps many who do privately. But as an institution and a social movement in Singapore, christianity is religiously exclusive, and theoretically unaccepting towards other religious or nonreligious traditions.

 

There is no point in interviewing, let’s say, a spokesperson for the National Council of Churches in Singapore. Or some lecturer in Trinity Theological College Singapore. Folks like these do not represent the average church pastor, let alone the christian person on the street. In classic Singaporean style, bishops and theologians would offer politically correct and nuanced views on the matter, deflecting any potential conflict.

 

Politically correct spin are nothing but half-truths and testicle-licking lies.

 

Anyhow, the alleged poster is very tame by my book. Just drop by any of the tongue-speaking, hand-raising, demon-casting and chriss angel-like magic mumbo-jumbo charismatic megachurches in Singapore and you will see that Jesus Camp and Teen Mania is more closer to the truth than meets the eye.

 

*******

 

a shrewd political move?

 

Some have lauded the recent expulsion of the Hougang MP by the Workers’ Party (WP) as a brave and shrewd political move. They have “taken, boldy, the moral high ground”, to quote Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Eugene Tan, the assistant professor of law at the Singapore Management University.

 

The expulsion was carried out in response to a very immature Singaporean society which still holds on to very quaint ideas of public civil service and its supposed moral standards. The media cannot seem to keep their partisan hands off the poor gentleman and his personal life. It was also his mistake to remain silent amid the media silliness…he should either reaffirm his innocence, if he is, or come out in the open and confess to his indiscretions and apologise to the residents of Hougang.

 

The latter would indeed place him on the moral high ground. I will applaud him for the moral courage and the strength in humility to be transparent to the people.

 

UNLIKE the schemes of the ruling regime…which only “appears” CLEAN because they are craftier and more skilled in covering up their tracks. I always believe in the adage that there can be no senseless smoke without fire…and the disparity is so obvious for any discerning individual – the media is so quick to pick up on any rumour of moral indiscretion on the part of the political opposition but if it comes to the ruling party, ALL IS SILENT.

 

Of course, the testicle-squeezing silence can be attributed to the classic Singaporean fear of being legally sued by the ruling regime if there is any sign of criticism (think of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, Chee Soon Juan and Alan Shadrake). The capacity to sue has nothing to do with moral innocence but with resources and power, full stop.

 

We are not fooled, though. Until the day when the Internet is cruelly and senselessly censored and squashed (thank goodness for twinkles of humanity in our current PM) by the powers that be, netizens in Singapore would always be the watchdog against a government that is constantly suppressing our civil rights to free speech and expression.

 

Are Singaporeans so naive as to think that the PAP (People’s Action Party) is really that CLEAN and FREE of moral indiscretions? Have you ever wonder why the people of Singapore are in the dark when it comes to the families of the ruling regime, apart from the Lees? We are hardly acquainted with the kin of most of our parliamentarians, let alone MPs and those on the ground.

 

A very good strategy, if you ask me. If the public knows next to nothing about the personal life of their leaders, there is no way we could hold them to account for any moral indiscretion, if they exist.

 

Contrary to propaganda, the truth is really out there. In the worldwide web.

 

While there is still hope for a liberal society, and a fairly liberal internet, please traverse far and wide for the truth.

 

Before even the Internet is unjustly censored.

 

*******

 

brouhaha over the wrong things

 

It is disturbingly contrary to human decency when the recent public brouhaha over a police investigation of an online prostitution syndicate lingers on the ballooned fact that many of the clients were high-level professionals and civil servants instead of the more pressing problem of human trafficking and “illegal” prostitution practices, at least in the case of self-righteous Singapore.

 

Commercial sex is a crime in Singapore, if the pimps and sex workers practise their trade in places other than the designated legal zones, namely the redlight district of Geylang and some parts of Desker Road, I think.  Wanna-be sex workers have to be “registered” and assigned to the appropriate brothels. This makes freelance sex workers criminal. This makes social escorts who offer sexual services criminal. This makes offering sex services in massage parlours illegal. This makes sex workers roaming around the casinos in Marina Bay Sands criminal. As such, internet-savvy sex workers become criminal too.

 

All of the above are rampant in Singapore, despite all the moralising masquerading as laws.

 

My views on commercial sex (think of Amsterdam) notwithstanding, I personally find it to be grossly immoral to shine the spotlight on the clients instead of the perpetrators, as is the case of the online syndicate that was recently busted by the police. What crime has the clients committed, apart from yielding to their libidos and physical lusts which are but biological?

 

A husband who pays to have sex with a professional lover betrays the conjugal trust of his wife, if she has such a deal with him in the first place. I know of some wives who don’t mind. But this is a private problem between husband and wife and should be viewed as such.

 

Why the loud-mouthed pontificating if he happens to be a school principal? Does that makes the waiter or nightclub owner paying for sex any more moral?

 

A teacher is salaried to teach. Why must he or she account to the institution for recreation he or she does on the bed? Why must a high-ranking lawyer, for that matter, account for his lunchtime trysts when his area of competence and training lies in the interpretation and application of the law?

 

Civil servants, teachers and doctors are not priests or monks. Sexual fidelity or abstinence is not part of the job description. Does it matter if a female teacher happens to moonlight as an exotic dancer or social escort? What is it to you if a managing director of a statutory board pays to be spanked and whipped by a beautiful naked woman every weekend?

 

Really, it is none of your fucking business.

 

Such concerns are misplaced. What of the poor women who might have been deceived into coming to Singapore for better prospects but baited to be hookers instead? What about the potential abuse these women may have encountered by their pimps?

 

Come on Singapore. Quit pretending. 

 

“Illegal” forms of prostitution are rife in Singapore for decades and would continue to be so as long as the human race has the itch to propagate and procreate.

 

Stop pretending that our ministers and civil servants are holy men and women with no vices.

 

Stop pretending that our lawyers, doctors and accountants are boring automatons with no social or sex lives. Yes, they may be married and thus have faithfulness issues. But that is a personal vice or character flaw.

 

Give them a break and let them reconcile with themselves and their families. Life is too short to throw stones at our fellow homo sapiens.

 

*******

 

 

can we really look toward a multi-party government?

 

Singapore is as small a nation as it is young, a 46-year-old full stop on a world map, not counting the years between its official founding in 1819 by a Sir Stamford Raffles of the East India Company and its separation from the Malayan Peninsula in August 1965.

 

The first generation of Singaporeans lived through the labour pains of a seedling nation to the turbulent years of its adolescence and has since appreciated the competence in which the founding men of the PAP wield their iron fists adorned in velvet gloves.

 

They knew it would take the cunning genius of a Lee Kuan Yew to reign in a diverse immigrant country and lead it to where it is today – a multinational corporation with over seven million workers.

 

The younger generations, with me among them, will never understand the complexities our ancestors faced and thus may never see beyond the bias we already have of a perceived one-party autocracy. We blame the PAP for its control of the media and the press. We bemoan our legal system which still uses an archaic and barbarous form of criminal punishment. We wonder when will our society stop stigmatising the LGBT community. We wish we could have more liberties in expressing ourselves and speaking our minds.

 

And so we root for the political opposition like the Workers’ Party, the Singapore Democratic Party, the Reform Party and the Singapore People’s Party. We cheer for our champions in the likes of Chen Sao Mao, Low Thia Kiang, Chiam See Tong, Kenneth Jeyaratnam, and even the Freedom Prize-winning self-professed liberal democrat, Chee Soon Juan.

 

They loom large before us as our patron saints of political and civil liberty, and we listened, enraptured, by their rhetoric. We get drunk over the preachers who scream the loudest, we shriek alongside some of them when they conquered Aljunied GRC last year. But the chimera of the reel world aside, when the banal and mundane sets in, we start to witness how the scraps start to fall from the rusty junkyard that they really are.

 

If these blokes cannot even keep their houses in order and their respective parties united, can we trust them to lead the country? Tsk, tsk. If you want to play with fire, you should prepare the extinguishers. Will democracy – the power of the people – be nothing but a dream we erect like sandcastles on the beach?

 

The lesser of two evils will get my vote. And it is no surprise who the devil would be.

 

*******

 

what is wrong with incest?

 

Really. Admittedly, I would certainly not wish to have intercourse with either my mother nor my sister (in-laws included) due to perhaps cultural and societal reasons, but I do not find any convincing justification for criminalising incestual intercourse between consenting adults.

 

Let us put aside the issue of child abuse in the case of intercourse between a parent and a young child, or rape in the case of a forced penetration. These acts would properly be classified as crimes of child abuse and rape respectively.

 

But the very act of sexual intercourse between consenting adult kin or siblings, apart from the cultural stigma, do not cause harm or injury to anyone, let alone becoming a civil crime.

 

Yes, given the knowledge we now have of biology and genetics, it would be immoral if incest was the medium used to produce offspring as there is a higher probability of the offspring having congenital birth defects. It would be inhumane to deliberately procreate despite the knowledge we now have. But what if birth control was used, or for that matter, a guarantee that procreation would not occur, such as the sterility of one partner?

 

Would that be a CRIME?

 

Sibling marriages were very common in certain ancient societies, despite the biological consequences, especially among royalty. This makes the current disdain for incestual relationships nothing but a result of cultural and societal conditioning, not some innate moral code in the human psyche.

 

Often than not, when morality is used as a reason, it would be the religious foolishness of applying an ancient religious text to a modern situation. And it does not take a genius to realise the folly of such a practice, with so many evils against humanity done in the name of religious texts and creeds.

 

Anyhow, there is this recent case of a 24-year-old Singaporean woman being sentenced to a year’s probation because of incest with her 48-year-old biological father.

 

It was a consensual act between father and daughter. While any intelligent individual would expect a similar sentence (at least in draconian and conservative Singapore) for the father, it comes as a shock, to put it mildly, that the father was put behind bars for three years since last January.

 

This is a case of sexual discrimination, full stop. While perceived sexual crimes are often attributed to the folly of the male species, that is not always the case. Why put the blame on the man when many a time the woman is also at fault, if not more so, by purposeful seduction?

 

What if the perpetrator is an underaged (in the eyes of our local law, that is) girl who lies about her age so as to effectively prostitute herself to men? Why convict the man with having sex with a minor when the fact was that he thought otherwise and that he was deceived??

 

Times have changed. And so should the Woman’s Charter. Women in Singapore enjoy the same liberties, if not more so, as their men and are as likely to indulge in the same carnal pleasures, with the same prerogatives. Many also make commercial sex, albeit part time and discreetly, a lucrative trade of choice. Does that still make the men more guilty than the women??

 

Then again, life is not fair. And for the life of me, it has always been so.

 

*******

 

horror and holiness

 

As barbarous and inhumane as it may seem to the casual observer, it is not surprising that homo sapiens can and often do commit acts of atrocity towards one another. Tens to hundreds of millennia have attested to the bestial nature of our species, however evolved our brains might have appeared to have undergone.

 

Any student of history will be keenly aware of the oceans of blood that were poured due to our species’ thirst for territorial conquest and domination, let alone the kaleidoscope of brutality and horrors that were performed in the name of religion, the state and sheer megalomania.

 

And thus it is no surprise when one reads of human cannibalism, mutilation, torture and vampirism in the papers, let alone infanticide, homicide, paedophilia, necrophilia and all forms of criminal and sexual deviation. They may horrify the sensible decent ego in all of us, they may stab our evolved human consciences to moral awakening and they may even shake us up to want to make a difference in our world.

 

Yet to constantly present humankind as a species of innate or even potential goodness and greatness misses the point. Such rose-tinted visions of our kind often results in delusion and horror whenever we encounter empirical evidences of our baser instincts and cruelty. We love to watch weaker animals than ourselves get tortured and squirm in our hands. We love to relish the pain of another as we systematically engage in inflicting damage after damage.

 

We are animals after all.

 

As in the recent case of a ten-year-old Singaporean boy who was physically tortured by his own relatives (his mother is in jail) – many are horrified and saddened. As a parent myself I was horrified by the actions of the boy’s family – and true to my animal instincts (as were many others) – I wished I could DO THE SAME to the perpetrators and perhaps more. Insert hot coals into the grandaunt’s vagina? Slice off her nipples and pull out her fingernails one by one? Put the entire family into a gas chamber and slowly enjoy their choking demise?

 

Proud as we are, many who read this might become self-righteously crossed at my explicitness but hey – don’t we all at some moment in our lives “wished” ill to someone because of some incident only known to us? Don’t we at some point imagine GETTING EVEN with that colleague of ours who backstabbed us, who sabotaged us, who slept with the boss, who flirted with the manager?

 

Of course – the difference between the average Tom or Mary on the street and the criminally devious is that the latter ACTED out to its logical end his/her thoughts and emotions whereas the former assumed a higher level of morality and conscience. We know that despite the underlying tension, human morality has also evolved to a point whereby we have somehow innate in all of us another desire, another inkling, another sense; that somehow it would do no good to our species as a whole if we go about killing or harming one another. Life would be better for all of us if we help one another and practise the golden rule (which was never the province of only the christian ethos).

 

And then out of the rubble of all these morality games come the one “great” idea that seems so antithetical to biological natural selection, that seems so “out of this world” in its ethos and vision.

 

Unlike the golden rule of the Jewish-Islamic ethos, unlike the tit-for-tat morality of the humanists and the free thinkers, one ancient sage proposed that instead of defending ourselves against our enemies and naturally hating them (as even some humanists would propose), we should, of all things, LOVE them..!

 

Yes…there is nothing figurative or metaphorical about it – the message is as clear as the sun that energises our solar system. A Jewish peasant-preacher by the name of Yeshua (another form of Joshua) or more popularly known as Jesus, encouraged his followers to love their enemies and do good to them!!!

 

And many after him (and probably even alongside him in other cultures) have since preached the “Kingdom of God” on earth…a radical message of love, compassion, mercy and justice. Many biologists have been puzzled by this altruism that seems contradictory to the notion of evolutionary natural selection and some atheists have even mocked it as immoral.

 

But no one can deny the power that such a vision entails – a power that has broken down walls of separation and destroyed corruption and greed, a power that has torn down eons of discrimination, hatred, bloodshed and gross evil.

 

Yes – I am not surprised that human beings can be capable of great evil. But I know we are ALSO meant for greater things. And sometimes…

 

Yes, sometimes…following Jesus can be a good thing after all.

 

*******

 

a different case all together

 

 

One would think that with all the media attention on the former YP (Young PAP) member, the probability of another incident with similar societal repercussions would be extremely low, even bordering on the impossible.

 

But within a few days, a fresh case surfaces. It involves an NSF (National Service-Full time) by the name of Christian Eliab Ratnam (definitely NOT a chinese, as some in online forums and chatrooms ignorantly assume) who apparently posted the above on his Facebook page.

 

The bordered text reads:

 

“Islam is not a religion or a race! Islam is an authoritarian, political doctrine which imposes itself by force. Any political doctrine that calls to kill those who do not believe in it is NOT a religion. Islam is not a religion! It is a ____ that glorifies _____.”

 

It seems to me that the majority of people are equating the above rhetoric with the previous case but I beg to differ. To blatantly call a group of innocent children on board a bus to a kindergarten terrorist trainees CANNOT be equated with a paragraph that opines on the perceived political nature of the Islamic religion. While the former is irresponsible and crass, the latter is an expression of opinion, regardless of its correspondence to reality.

 

Yes, I do not agree with Ratnam’s evaluation on the matter – has he read any works by islamic scholars like Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Tariq Ramadan, Abdal Hakim Murad or even the great medieval Islamic philosopher, Al-Ghazali? Has he genuinely investigated into the claims of Islam and whether or not the deluded extremists who kill people in the name of Islam truly represent Islam?

 

Has he NOT realise that the hebrew scriptures (the Christian old testament) contains numerous references to genocides, mass killings and gross violence in the name of God? And it takes just one loony individual who interprets those narratives literally and who is charismatic and powerful enough to perhaps start another Jewish or Christian war against the perceived enemies of God? Of course, no Jewish rabbi worth his salt would interpret those narratives literally and use them as a biblical sanction for wiping out secular atheist nations!

 

And so would any credible Islamic scholar of fiqh (jurisprudence) or Kalam (theology).

 

Besides, what one sees through the very tainted eyes of the media makes up about one to two per cent of the entire global muslim population. Similarly – there are extreme cults in the name of Judaism or Christianity that justifies the killing of innocent lives in order to create a Jewish or Christian society. But these do not represent the true face of Judaism or Christianity as we know it today!

 

Now – even after all the disagreements I have with Ratnam – I have to admit that without allowing emotion to take over, this NSF is just expressing an opinion about religion. Does he not have the basic right to express a personal opinion on anything and everything? I think he does.

 

And to demonise him just because of expressing an opinion – is bringing real shame on us as a cosmopolitan city state that upholds pluralism. We as a society have to learn to not only tolerate views akin to our own but also opposing views as well. That is a sign of maturity. Of course, because of his ignorance, we can attempt at correcting his somewhat bigoted notions of Islam by education, instruction and debate. We can set the record straight.

 

There is no need for criminalising him just for expressing an opinion.

 

Otherwise, we are no different from China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Iran.

 

Nations for which I have utter contempt and disdain.

 

*******

 

a step forward for singapore, i think

 

Unlike the anti-homosexual sentiments from certain fundamentalist elements of the muslim community in Malaysia, Singapore takes a remarkable step forward by not only inviting the flamboyant performer, the great Sir Elton John for a one-night concert here as part of his world tour; but also highlighted his entire family on prime time news on Channel 5 last night as well as the subsequent Singapore News tonight on Channel News Asia.

 

The bespectabled singer was accompanied by his husband, David Furnish, along with their son Zachary as they were swamped by fans at the 20th World Orchid Conference held at Marina Bay Sands. The special occasion was the naming of an phalaenopsis hybrid orchid after the British artiste.

 

Elton John Orchid, as Colourful as the Man himself

 

It was thoughtful of the news programme to even call David Furnish “his partner” and the beautiful baby boy “their son”. Such an acceptance on prime time news makes a statement that although the ignominous 377A still holds in Singapore theoretically and legally, we are not going to make criminals of the great singer and his husband even though they would obviously be sleeping on the same bed in a hotel suite in Singapore, probably being busy with baby Zachary, probably snuggling and hugging together, probably kissing and maybe even having sex.

 

We in Singapore WILL NOT be making the mistake of demonising the artiste and his family just by being the way God created them to be, homosexual men. We in Singapore are not stupid as some are across the causeway to think that just by allowing Sir Elton John to have a concert here would be “corrupting the morals” of those attending.

 

Aren’t religion about love and compassion, anyway?

 

*******

 

a lesson for secular “liberal democracies”

 

 

The above photograph shows a school bus filled with preschoolers belonging to Huda Kindergarten, an Islamic faith-based kindergarten. The caption below reads “Bus filled with young terrorist trainees?”

 

This photograph could be one among the similar thousands one would view almost every other day in Britain and the US without anyone batting an eyelid. And one of the main reasons offered for such apathy is the liberal dogma of the “basic” human right to free speech and expression.

 

This “right” to free speech apparently comprises anything and everything, from mild criticisms of the powers that be to sheer vitriolic and vulgar diatribe against religion and sometimes even race. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the Iranian-American islamic philosopher from George Washington University, made a comment once during an interfaith dialogue in the Dalai Lama’s presence in Emory University about human rights. He said that there is so  much talk about rights but almost none about RESPONSIBILITY.

 

He is right. As stewards of the freedom modern civilisation has given us, we have to be responsible in what we do with our liberties. I am so proud of civilised Singapore to have responded so swiftly and efficiently to irresponsible hate speech, whether directed to race or religion. And in the case of the above photograph which was posted by a local Young PAP member, a Jason Neo, on his Facebook page in February, action was taken almost immediately.

 

Young PAP Member quits over Offensive Remarks on Facebook

 

Of course, if there are terrorist elements lurking around in Singapore, it is our right as citizens to criticise and sound the alarm; religious or otherwise. But remarks as the above are unjustified when our madrasahs and “faith schools” are so remotely unlike some of the extreme muslim schools in the UK where male teachers were caught (by hidden camera) physically beating pupils and indoctrinating them with anti-british nonsense.

 

The muslim community in Singapore, thanks to its leadership and our government, are respectful of secular governance, tolerant of other religions and have on several occasions engaged in interfaith events and dialogue. Many are law-abiding and loyal citizens of the country they call home.

 

Incidentally, I have a muslim neighbour who sends her three young boys to a muslim kindergarten and can be seen every morning waiting for the school bus in their cute headcaps and green uniforms. They are polite, courteous and very gentle friends who greet my own children whenever they see them. Both our families exchanged red and green packets during the Chinese Lunar New Year and Eid Al-Fitr respectively.

 

The occupants of the flat before this young muslim family was also muslim – and the patriarch of that family was an active RC (Residents’ Committee) member! Shame on the Chinese living on our level, including myself.

 

This IS how politics should be done, and how a society should function. Zero tolerance for religious discrimination. It is appalling to me when prior to the Pope’s state visit to the UK, there were hordes of people behaving like lunatics, waving placards that said “Fuck the Pope…” and numerous others to that effect. Public intellectuals like Richard Dawkins and AC Grayling added their names to the lunacy as well. Is this what a so-called liberal democracy is supposed to run??!

 

*******

 

we are not convinced

 

I was rather surprised when my wife made a somewhat “sexist” remark upon watching the English language news on the telly on Channel 5 last night, in which the CEO of the Housing Development Board (HDB), a Chong Koon Hean, was highlighted making comments about the current state of HDB flats in the country.

 

 

The very first words my wife remarked were to the extent of, “oh, she’s a woman – no wonder” – it is her opinion that the fairer sex has the propensity to be thriftier with the finances and hence the predominance of much smaller flats these days. Such a comment was probably a result of the numerous occasions when we noticed how woman hawkers would often give smaller portions of food than their male counterparts.

 

Anyhow, I seriously doubt that the arguments made by the CEO in “defence” of the smaller living spaces were convincing to many Singaporeans in the heartlands. The appeal to statistics is a common ploy which hold no weight to many of us, who realised that although it is true that family size has reduced considerably over the decades, that does NOT translate into more living space per Singaporean. What convoluted logic is that??

 

Smaller Homes but not poorer quality of living

 

Besides, one has to remember that in the 1980s, the “Stop at Two” policy was already in place – with many families having to fork out monetary penalties for having a third child. So how much bigger were the families then? With the exception of the more well-to-do who would rather pay the fines than compromise on their love for “big” families, the majority of families would quietly abide by the silly China-like policy.

 

And I contend that there are still many Singaporeans like my wife and I around, who love children and who would prefer larger families but due to the constraints of living space (and standards of living here) would have to do a double take. We were just contemplating if we should have a fourth child last night – and even commented that we could perhaps resume our conjugal exercises after our third kid turns two next month.

 

But when we started to think about the university educations for all three of our darlings, and the rising costs of living, we hesitated. We might not be able to afford it.

 

Then again…the average Singaporean would never be satisfied with all the silly arguments these big time honchos make – many in our Parliament would probably be living in terrace houses, bungalows and condominiums and still drive around Singapore in cars to be able to have the credibility of persuading us of the benefits of HDB living and using public transport to commute.

 

But hey, that IS life. It is never fair.

 

*******

 

singaporean women not into good looks

 

Local dating agency Lunch Actually conducted a regional dating survey recently and some of the results included the resistance of Singaporean women to date shorter men as well as their penchant for confidence and a strong character more than physical good looks.

 

S’porean Women not open to dating Shorter Men

 

Thank goodness that even though I rank among the shorties in the male species, my darling happens to be more dimunitive than I am!

 

The results of the survey are not surprising at all since much of it is common sense, really. But of course, there are exceptional women who are very secure in themselves that they do not care one bit about their men being shorter.

 

In the physical looks department, it has NEVER occurred to me that Singaporean women value good looks in their men. If other blokes have always thought it is, I wonder how daft our men can get – no wonder many are still single. When I was in the army, I know of many men who held on to this misconception. It isn’t any wonder that many of them dated sweet young things.

 

It has always been ONLY adolescent girls who go gaga over handsome pop stars and TV hunks. Many if not all grew out of this childish preoccupation and realise that gorgeous hunks do not make good husbands. In fact, it is many of the geeks and nerds you know in school who become the opinion-makers, movers and shakers of the world and not the brawny college hunk who are often clueless about everything except girls and silly sports.

 

Yes – women do appreciate beauty and handsomeness – they would often comment about how handsome or how good-looking a particular bloke is, but that’s about it. It is simply observation, whereas when it comes down to qualities to look out for in a mate, good looks would often be a bonus rather than a priority.

 

*******

 

superstitions at work

 

 

It was just yesterday morning when representatives of eight major religions in Singapore gathered together to recite prayers of “blessing” on the Bedok Reservoir, in which a recent spate of suicides occurred. In fact, an hour before the religious gathering, another body was found in its waters.

 

Although the suicide toll in so brief a period of time at one specific venue is cause for concern for Singapore society, it should not be the reason to indulge in superstition – suicides are caused by factors both psychological or mental as well as societal or cultural – and the predominance of one venue over others is nothing more than a combination of natural factors such as coincidence, residential demographics and what my wife recently remarked – if one commits suicide in Bedok Reservoir, public visibility is 100 per cent guaranteed.

 

To require a gathering of religious leaders to “bless” the reservoir is tantamount to resorting to superstition as a solution to the problem. Suicides are NOT caused by “evil spirits” or some “evil aura” in any particular place – there is no need to invoke the gods. It reveals much more about the state of society in which we live, the trivialities of chasing after the wind, the silliness of men and women to lust after power, wealth and the vanity of the human condition. It simply reveals the futily of pursuing things that do not matter.

 

A culture of pride and pollyanna-ish falsehoods is what Singapore society is – that we are all born to succeed and win in life, that we can all make it big and rich and prosperous if we only try our darn best. Now – I am not trying to advocate pessimism, just a big reality check. Life is NOT fair, and that is a FACT. Although education can level out the playing field, society cannot and will not function if everyone is a “winner”, whatever that means. Values like success, wealth and victory are all relative categories, they do not exist in a vacuum. If there is success, there is ALSO failure. If someone wins, it means there is someone who loses. If one is rich, it means there are many others who are less rich than him/her. It becomes a misnomer, a non-sensical statement to say that “everyone is born to succeed”.

 

I know people like Adam Khoo would be shaking their heads now. Of course, otherwise motivational NLP charlatans like him would have no business. It is good to have a positive mindset, to cultivate a good working attitude, etc – but one has to be sober enough to be aware that NOT everyone can reach the stars just by trying his/her best. That IS life. It is only when we can accept our lot in life do we become fulfilled in our own selves and our own stations.

 

Besides, suicides are part of the human condition. They are morbid for the soul, yes, but nature is impartial and apathetic. It just is.

 

And thus, there is absolutely NO USE to utter empty words to the air, as though some deity or deities would reach down and stir the waters of the reservoir a bit, getting rid of the spirits of death that dwell therein.

 

DO SOMETHING about it!! Create awareness for psychiatry and psychological medicine. Create awareness of depression. Create awareness of certain charities and welfare organisations. Cultivate a society that is empathic to pain and suffering, tuned in to compassion and healing, instead of selfish ambition and more economic nonsense. So what if Singapore is “prospering” economically – as China seems to be currently doing – when many human beings are still suffering and unwanted?

 

Value our fellow human beings. They are all we have, for above us…

 

is only sky.

 

*******

 

slave masters in singapore

 

I applaud Archbishop Nicholas Chia, the leader of the Roman Catholic community here in Singapore, for encouraging Catholics to apply the Golden Rule when it comes to their domestic helpers.

 

He did this on the occasion of World Migrants and Refugees Day.

 

Weekly Day Off for Maids only Fair: Archbishop

 

The maids in Singapore are a sorry lot. Their employers apparently want to have their meagre money spent on the maids stretched to its full worth by forbidding any rest and respite for these poor aliens, miles away from home. While most of these Singaporeans have a good two days’ rest every week, their own maids have no choice but to work 24/7, at the mercy of the families they work for.

 

Some even have to put on shoes and clothes for their employers’ primary school children, an utter DISGRACE. Primary school children are old enough to put on their own clothes and tie their own shoelaces, let alone feed themselves.

 

Thank goodness slavery is a thing of the past. Otherwise Singaporeans would be the first nationality to jump on the bandwagon.

 

*******

 

i am chinese but my “native” language is english!

 

Our senior statesman, the grandfather of modern Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, was at a dialogue last Friday with some 4000 Chinese entrepreneurs when he commented that chinese Singaporeans should speak Mandarin to their children at home so as not to allow the future generations lose touch with their ethnic tongue. He also revealed as to how he made efforts to speak to his grandchildren in Mandarin all the time. Besides, in the context of Singapore, children will learn English in schools anyway.

 

Lee Kuan Yew: Mistake to Lose Mandarin at Home

 

His remarks reminded me of my former employer, whose eldest and third children were raised with Mandarin at home and apparently this affected their Mandarin competence in a very positive way – both excelled in Mandarin as well as English in school! Their second son however, was raised in an English-speaking environment and alas, he grew up disliking the Mandarin language.

 

Such a method might work for some families but not all. Human beings are not born with equal intellectual and linguistic capacities – there are some who would be able to be masterfully literate in more than one language but the majority of humankind would probably master only one. And in this sense I am refering not to a practical ability to converse and read minimally which among most chinese in Singapore would never be a problem, but a genuine MASTERY of the language in both speech and word. Such an endeavour would be very difficult indeed as one has to be able to “switch” modes of thought in multiple languages.

 

My wife came from a Hokkien-Mandarin speaking family (as would a majority of people in those days) and learnt English only in school. But although she can converse in both languages fairly well, I wouldn’t label her as literate in either English or Mandarin! She cannot write Mandarin competently nor can she write in the English language without more than a couple of grammatical, syntactical and structural mistakes. So – is she competently able in both languages?

 

And I contend that most Singaporeans would be like my wife – average in both English and their second language – and not like my employer’s children. Many would also be university-educated (as was my wife), but cannot speak or write competent and excellent English. And this is NOT good in my books. I would rather be a MASTER in one language than a Jack of two.

 

Anyhow, what about families akin to my own? My native language is English, full stop. Although ethnically chinese, I was only exposed to the Mandarin language from primary 1 onwards – both my parents have always been English-speaking, with my father conversant only in English, Hokkien and Malay. This runs contrarian to whatever talk Singaporeans have on mother or native tongues. Besides, as a fourth generation Singaporean, it is illogical to equate my cultural and societal roots with China whatsoever.

 

Take for example the contemporary black community in the US or the UK. They are ethnically African and are probably descended from African slaves or immigrants either a century or several decades back. But do many of them speak their “ethnic” tongue? Of course not. It would be illogical and irrational to expect them to do so.

 

Similarly, much of the caucasian population in the US are not of “pure American stock”, if there is such a word. The only pure Americans would be the native American indians. Many of the whites would probably be of European descent, may it be Italian, Dutch, Scandinavian, Russian, Czech, Irish, Scottish, etc. But do any of them speak in their ethnic tongues? Unless they personally decide to learn their ancestral tongue, most would only speak the American language and probably Spanish as a second language, of any at all.

 

No European or African would blame an American or Briton if he/she has no clue about their ancestral language. No one would expect them to do so anyway. So what’s the difference here in Singapore? Why all the irrational fuss about our “mother tongues”, as though our native language has to do anything at all with the race which we were born with – as though we had a choice in it.

 

I have no choice in my being an ethnic Chinese with Peranakan roots. But since I am four generations away from China – and Malacca - why would I be expected to know Mandarin??! Is it immoral if I can’t utter a single word of Mandarin as a British African would not his african tongue?

 

Come off it, you chinese chauvinists in Singapore. Anyway, this applies to the other races as well. We are all Singaporean first, not Chinese, Malay, Indian or what-have-you. Quit playing the race game as though it is something morally important in this globalised 21st century world. This is Singapore – and you should be expected to be literate in ENGLISH competently, more than your Mandarin, Bahasa Malay or Tamil or Hindi.

 

*******

 

some deaths that i cannot forget

 

 

The tragedy occurred three years ago and I could still remember the shock and consternation that raged and bristled under my skin as I read about the incident in the newspapers in 2008. Last night, memories of the shock flooded back as I watched the reenactment of the same tragedy that took the lives of two innocent 16-year-old boys on Channel 5′s programme, Unnatural, hosted by local actor Darren Lim.

 

Teen Medium made Suicide pact with Friends

 

William Ku Witaya, 16, had been practising as a Taoist medium for a few years already, under the supposed guidance of his grandmother, a former Taoist medium herself. As a medium, it was common to see her convulse and shake in epileptic-type seizures as she supposedly became “possessed” by whichever “spirits” that took over her body at the time. A common “deity” which possessed her would be the “monkey god”, a fictional and mythological character in ancient Chinese as well as Indian folklore.

 

One wonders how on earth a fictional character, out of pure myth, could “possess” a human being – it is akin to summoning the spirit of Spiderman, Sherlock Holmes or Superman. Basically, it is non-sense and metaphysical rubbish.

 

So young William took to the ways of his grandmother and wanted to be a medium himself. He began to practise the art himself, and in the presence of his secondary school friends, managed to invite the monkey god to possess his body, and allegedly “healed” a lady suffering from some knee pains by writing some gibberish on a piece of special taoist paper, burnt it and dissolved the ashes into a glass of water, from which the lady was asked to drink.

 

Hmm. First of all, there is no evidence at all to suggest that there is any medical efficacy to pure carbon and soot being mixed in water. One is simply ingesting poisonous chemicals.

 

Secondly, there is also no evidence that will conclude definitely that the lady was actually “cured” of her persistent ailments – no medical report was furnished, no evaluation from any medical practitioner, no tests done on her alleged knee.

 

Anyhow, William’s confidence as a spiritualist rose. His friends also began to trust him as an elder brother and spiritual “hero” of sorts.

 

One delusion led to another. William began to claim that the gods had told him that he would be sent on a “special mission” to be a demon slayer. He also claimed that the world would end in 2012 if certain demons in the underworld were not defeated in time. He also claimed that the gods told him that he and his friends were specially chosen for this mission.

 

Sigh. The problem with such god-talk is that there is no empirical way to determine whether the person in question is really listening to the voice of deity or not. It is always more probable that such individuals are simply delusional and mentally unsound. But it seems that one cannot make such a criticism when it comes to religion. It is “sensitive”, or so they say.

 

The inconsistency in their reasoning becomes evident when two scenarios are posited. If the gods are telling you to be good, do good, heal someone, help someone, love someone, etc; then somehow the medium is hearing correctly – it is truly god. But if the gods happen to tell you to kill someone, kill yourself, predict the end of the world, etc; then somehow the medium is hearing incorrectly – it is not god.

 

But one has to be consistent – either way – it is delusional and mentally unsound. To hear voices from spirits and gods do not correspond to the reality of the world – and that is enough to define such experiences as delusional. Period.

 

The evangelical christian world is no stranger to such delusion as well, especially in the pentecostal or charismatic world of prophecy and holy spirit guidance. In all probabilities, these deluded people are listening to nothing but their own thoughts and desires, not the voice of god or the holy spirit.

 

Anyhow, gullible, impressionable and intellectually dysfunctional as teenagers usually are, his friends believed William, hook, line and sinker.

 

And some went as far as believing him when he made further claims that in order to be demon slayers, they have to kill themselves in order to pass on to the other side.

 

And as the account goes, the date was soon set for the alleged suicide and the boys, failing to secure the entry to the rooftop of William’s flat, decided to do it from William’s home itself, via his room window.

 

Some boys chickened out (good for them) and other factors notwithstanding, William and his right hand crony decided to jump first, which would be followed by the next pair and soon and so forth. But after seeing William lying SO DEAD on the ground below and the other boy moaning and groaning, a bloodied mess on the ground, all of the other boys freaked out and decided to call an ambulance.

 

Alas that boy too died on arrival at the hospital.

 

Two innocent lives could have been spared if only sound logic and clear-headed reasoning won the day, instead of the idiocy of supernaturalistic shenanigans. Being sceptical is being intellectually healthy. It is believing that one cannot believe in anything without sufficient empirical evidence. And it is always the safest bet.

 

And contrary to what Taoist spiritualists may say, such spirit possessions are really nothing but advanced forms of play acting, induced by trance-like states of the brain.

 

It is also no surprise that the majority of Taoist spiritualists and practitioners are Chinese-speaking and scientifically illiterate individuals who do not have much formal education. A solid education in the liberal arts and sciences would definitely make sceptics of most of them.

 

*******

 

 

singapore’s obsession with sex

 

 

What the fuck is wrong with Singaporeans these days? The public seems to be so obsessed with sex that they are seeing phalluses and pussies all over the place where there is none.

 

In the wake of the Abercrombie & Fitch advertisement, some Singaporeans are suggesting that the above advertisement is even more vulgar.

 

So, which ad is more indecent?

 

What the…? Although I realise where the company in question, which specialises in brazilian waxing, is driving at; the notion of vulgarity is ALL IN THE MIND. Such advertisements make life all the more exciting and interesting – playing on images, suggestions, euphemisms and the like to get important messages across.

 

It is really ridiculous to label such attempts at creativity in today’s world as vulgar or lewd when there is already so much sexuality on display in the media. Who are you trying to fool?

 

The people who would detect the so-called “vulgarity and lewdness” of such advertising would be mature adults in the first place, and what are the chances that these very adults would be so influenced by such advertising that they would become sexual psychopaths? Would we become molestors and rapists over night by being exposed to such advertising?

 

Let me suggest that there is more explicit sexuality on television these days of which children have exposure to than any advertisement in shopping centres or on Orchard Road could ever do. So shouldn’t MDA do something about it, like banning “sex” scenes even on Channel 5′s The Pupil or any of Channel 8′s drama series? Although these “sex” scenarios are never erotically explicit, children who watch such programmes with their parents can “get the idea” rather quickly – far more easily than advertisements like the above poster!

 

I wonder if any primary school child would be able to decipher what the above poster suggests, other than a fur bag that is opened?

 

Come on.

 

Sometimes I wonder if it really requires a lewd mind to interpret and suggest lewdness in an image.

 

The people who think that these advertisements are vulgar are probably vulgar themselves, sexually repressed individuals who have no way of expressing their sexual energy due to their misguided notions of an archaic morality that should have been discarded a long time ago.

 

We should be civil and logical in our discussion about sexuality in society. As mature adults, we should be able to handle a variety of sexual expressions in society, may it be erotic advertising, sexually suggestive images or prose, or simply creative eroticism at work. None of these are sexist, racist or homophobic to say the least. Whether it is the male or the female body – the human form is beautiful and sensual. Visual expressions of such beauty is art and should never be perceived as degrading to either the female or the male.

 

*******

 

singapore behaves just like another islamic theocracy

 

I posted an entry in late August commenting on an advertisement in Orchard Road depicting the beautiful abdominal muscles of a male model. There were quite a number of people who found it rather distasteful and lewd:

 

Is this Advertisement Distasteful?

 

I defended the advertisement by highlighting a letter sent to The Straits Times about the supposedly “lewd” nature of the piece and pointed out fallacies inherent in the letter.

 

It now seems that even the powers that be in Singapore is yielding to the the stupidity of the public, claiming that the advertisement has breached certain decency guidelines and thus decided to suspend the advertisement.

 

Abercrombie & Fitch Advertisement at Knightsbridge suspended

 

MDA backs ASAS call to remove Abercrombie & Fitch Ad

 

COME ON Singapore.

 

There are some who claim that it borders on indecency the moment the portion below the navel line is revealed. This is ridiculous – and I am not easily deceived by such nonsense – the navel line rule is a rule that Islam propagates for its men – the region between the navel and the knee is prohibited from exposure. So if someone brings that up in public discourse, he/she would in fact be using religion and not reason and sound logic to defend what it means to be “decent”.

 

So what about swimming trunks then? I am aware that there are indeed some muslim men who would not wear swimming trunks for apparently that line of religious reasoning. But the majority of decent men out there still wear swimming trunks to the pool or the beach and there is no hue and cry from anyone that it is indecent or lewd.

 

If the Abercrombie advertisment would be taken off, we might as well ban swimming trunks altogether.

 

This is SECULAR Singapore. And it is behaving like another Iran or Saudi Arabia, with all of their sexual paranoia and ridiculous islamic fascism. It will never be a genuine first world city if it continues to subscribe to archaic forms of morality that have no place in the 21st century.

 

*******

 

“steamy” games?

 

 

The photograph above captures a moment in one of the many games played by the freshies in the orientation programme of the Singapore Institute of Management – University of London (SIM-UOL), held last month.

 

SIM’s Orientation Games are Sexist and Humiliating

 

And in a report presented by Stomp, an amateur, citizen-generated news outlet organised by The Straits Times, one “Stomper” which goes by the name of Zerocool, went on a tirade against such games:

 

“Why do they even allow such lewd games? They are sexist, irrelevant and humiliating, especially to the girls.

 

What do these steamy games have anything to do with being a student at SIM?

 

Are the organisers so desperate…that they have to resort to such indecent games?”

 

Three adjectives were used of the games here, namely lewd, steamy and indecent. What is so lewd about blokes in push-up positions with their lassy counterparts lying on the ground? What is so steamy – in other word, erotic – about the above picture?

 

Let me be INDECENT then. I do not see the blokes groping the breasts of the gals. I do not see any tongue action, french kissing, heavy petting, dogging or buggering of any sort. Now, if the games indeed require blokes to french kiss gals; then I would question the moral integrity of the organisers.

 

But this?

 

Such accusations speak more of the individual who made them than the issues themselves. It is akin to fanatical muslim men who claim that any sight of female skin, even if it is just the shoulders, can turn men on and thus women should cover themselves as thoroughly as possible.

 

It is my contention that such games are harmless fun. They are very common in varsities all over the world, let alone in Singapore. The intention of such heterosexual pairing is simply to incite some feelings of discomfort, which is just part of the thrill and fun. As there is no explicit sexual activity involved, there shouldn’t be any cause for alarm or worry.

 

Zerocool, or any other Singaporean whose opinion is similar to his for that matter, are simply sexually repressed individuals who still hold on to archaic codes of morality that have no place in the 21st century world.

 

They are overreacting to something that should be the least of their concerns and worry. Or unless they secretly harbour the wish to be participants of the games themselves…but since they are not and perhaps cannot due to some erroneous moral code (probably religious in nature), they go on a tirade instead.

 

Of course, in situations where the girl or even the bloke is very uncomfortable with the game, they should be allowed the choice of not participating. Then again, peer pressure among adolescents and even adults can be very strong. Human beings can sometimes be as daft as sheep, having a herd mentality that does not want to lose face or lose out with the rest of the pack.

 

Silly, really.

 

*******

 

not religion?

 

It was a good thing that CEO Isabella Loh, of Wildlife Reserve Singapore (WRS), clarified that she was NOT a christian, of which many netizens were suspecting her of, due to some comments she had made about “devil worship”.

 

She clarified that she is a buddhist.

 

Wildlife Reserves Singapore apologises to President

 

Halloween event cancelled not due to Religious reasons

 

But the statement that WRS gave to the press that the event was cancelled NOT due to religious reasons is somewhat dubious.

 

It is dubious because Ms Loh has yet to elaborate on the exact content of the feedback, of which I suspect have to do with “reasons” that are not coherent with current global standards of humanistic morality, secular humanism and empirical research; but loosely based on so-called traditional “family values”, “wholesomeness”, what is “good for society and family” (as though harmless horror fun can be detrimental to the moral fabric of society), etc.

 

It is a no-brainer that perhaps those “feedback” did not actually contain words like “religion” or “christian values” or “islamic principles” as Singapore, thanfully, is a strictly SECULAR country where issues regarding the public have to be discussed rationally, with alternative views defended based on publicly available evidence and reason, NOT sacred texts or sacred principles. Such appeal to authority is no argument at all.

 

Then again – the folks who often espouse “traditional family values” are usually the religiously motivated. Thus I will still reject the claim of WRS that reasons to cancel Halloween Horrors are not religious.

 

Ms Loh apparently also commented to her management team regarding the “controversial” nature of Halloween, citing the example of some schools in the United States that banned its celebration.

 

How ignorant can she get – the United States, for goodness’ sake – much of their population even think that evolution is controversial! She should have realised that although the US is a secular nation with a secular constitution, in all practical terms, it is still a thoroughly “christian” country with christians having a lot of power in the political arena. There are schools in the US who still teach pseudoscientific stuff like Intelligent Design! It is no surprise that some of these evangelical idiots might want to ban Halloween at all costs! I know for a fact that some christians, even in Singapore, who will believe that all the gore, blood and spook in Halloween, is somehow inspired and instigated by the devil so that he can have an influence on the people through their innocent celebrations.

 

Bah!

 

Halloween aside, it is now almost a well-attested public knowledge that European countries like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Finland have one of the most peaceful societies in the world. But they also have one of the least religious societies in the world – compare them with the United States – and it seems that religion is doing the US more harm than good.

 

And surprise, surprise, some of these Scandinavian nations have one of the most anarchic, brutal and “devilish” (if you want to use that term) death metal bands around! Death metal is a genre of music that is often characterised by lots of gothic, dark and biblical imagery of devils and demons, gore and blood, etc. But these bands do not go around spreading the message of evil and murder to their fans! It is a very ignorant stereotype which religious people make of alternative lifestyles like goth and such.

 

In fact, it is mostly the zealously religious who spread the message of hate and evil – who are the ones who love to oppose same-sex marriage? Who are the ones who love to see “God’s Law” imposed on the societies of the world? Who are the ones who believe that everyone who does not follow their code of beliefs will go to hell? Who are the ones who burn people at the stake just for contradicting them? Who are the ones who would kill people like death metal band members if they were living in the middle ages? Who are the ones who would rather obey their “gods” than love their fellow humanity?

 

You and I know the answer.

 

I suppose I got carried away again. Sheesh. Back to the WRS and Halloween Horrors.

 

It isn’t the apologies that we want to hear, Ms Loh. It is the REINSTATEMENT of the event, Halloween Horrors, for at least this year, if not the next. Although this cancellation would not have any detrimental result on the Singapore Polytechnic students’ gradings, THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE! The emotional abuse has already been executed. All the hard work that have been put – and they cannot even showcase it to the public! The pleasure of an artist is twofold – the pleasure of the creation and the process as well as the pleasure of interacting with the audience. By cancelling the event, the public can never get to enjoy the fruits of the students’ labour.

 

I have a family too – and my children are all young, too young I reckon, to appreciate and enjoy the fictional horrors of halloween. But that does not mean that I have to forbid them from doing so with the reason that it will harm them morally. There is nothing unwholesome about fiction and make-believe. Such art is neutral and it often takes an idiot to interpret such art and turn it into the rubbish and decadence that some moral pedants love.

 

It might be a shock to some parents, but I expose my young children to films like The Walking Dead. Of course it is not something I relish doing in the sense that I allow them to watch every episode. But I would not switch the channel if the kids happened to be still awake. And I would explain to them that IT IS ALL MAKE-BELIEVE. The zombies, or “monsters” as kids would like to call them, are NOT REAL monsters.

 

And you know what, my five-year-old son and four-year-old daughter understands. By explaining it to them, and exposing it that it is NOT REAL, I am telling them that ALL HORROR is fiction. And so are any supposedly paranormal phenomena – they are all bullshit.

 

I am appalled by some parents who create a climate of fear for their kids by telling them not to go into the dark, for it is scary, there are ghosts there. For Holy Mother’s sake! There is no such thing as ghosts. Full stop.

 

By the way, Ms Loh also made a statement regarding her feelings about the event, that she found it too scary.

 

What??! Since when Halloween has to be sugar and nice, meek and mild? Sigh. I am trying darn hard not to sound sexist now, but it seems that if she is a bloke, she would not have made such a silly remark. No bloke who’s worth his prick would think of cancelling something just because he finds it too scary for his taste!

 

Personal taste and business do not mix, my dear.

 

*******

 

 

i suspect wrs is not telling the truth…

 

 

Wildlife Reserve Singapore (WRS) has suddenly cancelled its annual Halloween Horrors event, just two weeks prior its scheduled opening, to the consternation and shock by many.

 

The reasons for the cancellation, as offered by the spin doctors of its website, are thus:

 

The Halloween Horrors event is cancelled because of the negative feedback received from corporations, the public and the media about the event, especially over its relevance in relation to conservation.

 

Wildlife Reserves Singapore (WRS) will focus on organising more family-centric activities, which will include new youth-engagement and interactive activities and events.

 

In place of Halloween Horrors next month, we will organise a special Deepavali experience at Jurong Bird Park and Singapore Zoo. It will offer a great occasion for us to spread our message of wildlife conservation through educational and engaging family-oriented activities.

 

The website also mentioned that:

 

WRS will refocus our energies on events and activities with family wholesome themes and festivities like Moon Nights, Deepavali and others.

 

It is very weak-willed of the management to simply cancel something because of “negative feedback”, especially when those feedback might not necessarily affect the event’s profitability or marketing potential. Organised since 2006, Halloween Horrors have been proven to be quite a lucrative event here in Singapore, let alone in many parts of the world where Halloween has been part of their tourism marketing strategies.

 

Economy or tourism aside, I don’t see why the theme of Halloween cannot be imaginatively adapted to resonate with conservation. It is fallacious to argue that just because Halloween, at its face value, is perceived to have no relevance to conservation, should thus be scrapped. In its place, WRS decided to organise a Deepavali event – to use WRS’ argument – what has Deepavali got to do with conservation?

 

Of course, the organisers can tinker here and there to make the event somehow related to conservation – but so can Halloween!

 

I suspect that there is more to this whole fracas over Halloween than meets the eye. Relevance to conservation is just a red herring to mislead the public from perhaps the real reasons behind the cancellation.

 

WRS’ statement about “family wholesome themes” is revealing. Does the “negative feedback” have anything to do with Halloween not being “wholesome” enough for families to enjoy, childhood fears notwithstanding?

 

Does the negative feedback have anything to do with Halloween being “not good” for children, having some unwholesome connotations?

 

Come on – like the Hungry Ghosts Festival – Halloween is a harmless custom rooted in fiction. Of course, regardless of what some people might believe about these cultural customs, there is really nothing empirically true about them.

 

I really suspect that among all the naysayers of the event, a high percentage could be the modern fundamentalists of religion, trying to impose their bigoted and very ignorant views on the public.

 

And I really sympathise with the 17 or so final-year students of Singapore Polytechnic who helped to plan the event as part of their final-year projects. All their sleepless nights and tight schedules just to meet the deadlines of WRS. The potential worth of their portfolios for their future careers.

 

Furore over Halloween Horrors’ Sudden Cancellation

 

Really, even if WRS decides to cancel the event, why not do it from next year? That would be a more logical thing to do.

 

I will not be surprised if this was indeed the handiwork of christians and maybe even muslims in our midst. Only people like them can cook up something as immoral and evil as this.

 

*******

 

 

 

drag queen of singapore finally comes out

 

 

He denied it adamantly twice before. But he finally decided to take one of the boldest step for himself by publicly admitting that he is homosexual.

 

Kumar publicly admits he’s gay

 

Kumar has been one of the most enigmatic and popular figures in Singapore’s entertainment scene – his meteoric rise came with the RaRa Show in the ’90s on primetime telly.

 

Although his homosexual or at least bisexual tendencies seem quite obvious to the majority of the public, coming out as part of the LGBT community in Singapore is no stroll in the park. Despite her public relations tagline of being a first world and cosmopolitan city and all that, Singapore is still a barbarous nation through and through.

 

Apart from its laws regarding the death penalty (even the US has many states abolishing this archaic law) as well as its fascist-like censorship grip on the news media, this medusa also makes LGBT sex a crime, which is akin to criminalising an individual of a different race than oneself just because.

 

It was also a shame and a disgrace for the Singapore authorities to criminalise a British journalist simply for writing a book criticising the use of the death penalty in Singapore’s legal system.

 

Hmm. So like the crazy Ayatollahs of Iran who issued a fatwa on celebrated author Salman Rushdie for simply writing a novel which they are apparently offended with in 1989. Singapore is not unlike such regimes in this respect.

 

There are also societal underpinnings that are not so favourable to the LGBT person – many ordinary Singaporeans still view homosexuality as a sexual deviance and something that is morally evil, probably promulgated by religions such as Christianity and Islam in the country.

 

With ninety-five per cent of  christians in Singapore being tied to the evangelical-fundamentalist view, it is no surprise that christianity in Singapore represents homophobia through and through. Thank goodness a dose of the Enlightenment has been experienced and no christian here would think of really imprisoning gays or executing them simply for practising what they are born with. Unlike places in Africa like Nigeria and Uganda.

 

There is also this strange view that homosexuality is a Western phenomenon, whereas there are Chinese scholars who believe that homosexuality had been a crucial aspect of ancient Chinese civilisation.

 

Like any other civilisation in times past and present, really.

 

With this as a backdrop to Singapore’s inherent prejudice against alternative lifestyles (sexual orientation is NOT a lifestyle choice, by the way), no wonder Kumar had a difficult time coming out.

 

There are many more in the entertainment scene like him, fearing to come out and fearing society’s so-called traditional or religious wrath on them. Popular host, comedian and actor Hossan Leong is one of them. No one really knows if the relationship he is having now is a same-sex relationship or a normal one. He also attends a Pentecostal church almost every Sunday, and so for those who knows his “christian” background might believe he is indeed a heterosexual. But then again, no gay will think of coming out in a Pentecostal church in Singapore! The pastors might then think of exorcising some demon of homosexuality from you!

 

Hairstylist Addy Lee is another one. And so are TCS 8 actors Chen Hanwei and the hunkily gorgeous Qi Wu.  The former is a very very obvious candidate for gaydom, but in Singapore, one simply live and let live. One can be a gay, as long as one does not try to be a hero about it.

 

*******

 

rich and arrogant, short and ugly

 

Apparently, the above is what a 26-year-old mainland Chinese woman, by the name of Zhang Miao Yu who works as a pub singer in Singapore, was quoted to be saying, by the China Press, about Singaporean men.

 

Yet in spite of such negative remarks, this same lady still desires to hook up with one as she perceives our local blokes as financially stable and affluent. She wouldn’t mind all the lavish gifts her men splashed on her, along with the flashy cars in which they drove her.

 

Give Me My Singaporean Man!

 

Then again, the blokes whom she meets in her line of work are probably a minority of the entire blokish population in Singapore – the ugly rich businessman – whereas there are many more dudes in downtown Orchard Road that would make any male escort green with envy!

 

Still – such news is but confirmation to many of us blokes that chinese women are nothing but money-minded bitches who wince in private at our fat bellies and small pricks while praising sweet nothings to our faces when we buy them diamonds and gold.

 

Thank goodness I have married an incredible lady who is none of these.

 

*******

 

nailbiting finish

 

It was a nail-biting finish, a race of which the eventual winner grazed the tape by the sheer chance that he was pushed at the starting blocks, by the “invisible” hands of the gods.

 

Without which he would most probably succumb to the wrath of the rabble, the mob, the people; for they have been rooting for the first runner-up – the REAL choice of the people.

 

Nevertheless it often seemed that such races are rigged, pawns in the hands of a conniving chess master, the holy sovereign who dictates the players who will grace his game of cat and mouse, cards and dice.

 

Nevertheless, these are but speculation on the ground, which are often without justification. But then again, they sometimes have an echo of truth. Half-truth, maybe.

 

As expected, the venerable Dr Tony Tan became the President-elect of Singapore. As expected, the gentleman doctor came in a close second. And as expected, the tag team of prime time hooligans came in third and fourth – with the Chinese-educated mumbler an incompetent fourth.

 

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to predict the results of the recent Presidential Election – any taxicab driver would tell you the same thing. That is the state of our political scene. Singaporeans don’t want rabble rousers and Martin Luther wannabes. The ordinary decent citizen in all of us are appalled at the way Tan Jee Say portrayed himself in his campaign, a thug through and through. Pig-headed, he kept trying to redefine the role of the Presidency and as such created the infrastructure for his own downfall.

 

Come on Jee Say. Singapore is NEITHER the United States NOR the United Kingdom. And I sincerely desire that it will NEVER be. We are intelligent enough not to be moved or manipulated by empty rhetoric. And although much of the blogosphere may support your liberal cause, I am but one of the thousands in Singapore who prefer stability, security and serenity in our lives. Freedom of expression? Freedom of speech?

 

At what price?

 

No strikes please. No protests please. No random mugging on the streets at night please. No rampant recreational drug use, please. No picketing please. No scientology please.

 

And as someone who is naively disgusted with politicking of any kind, I was appalled when I discovered that Jee Say was actually part of Kin Lian’s team before deciding to go for the prize himself. Hmm.

 

Anyhow, I was wondering about the outcome if these two clowns did not enter the race in the first place. As a “statistician”, Kin Lian should have known his chances even before attempting to make a fool of himself in the public square. A miniscule 4% of the votes? Holy Mother of Zeus and Jesus and all the saints of myth! Just give some of it to Dr Cheng Bock – and he would have slammed the conceited former Mathematics professor to the ground.

 

Really…I prefer a Nathanesque presidency. A Wee Kim Wee one will also do. My image of a President in Singapore is someone who is grandfatherly, compassionate, kind, impartial to party politics, people-pleasing, people-loving, etc. So what if it would be a “powerless” role? Perhaps there is more than meets the eye with Jee Say. Does he want some political power for himself?

 

Sigh.

 

Although I was mentally prepared to crown Dr Tony Tan as President, my heart jumped when rumours abound that at the 80% mark of the vote count, my dear Dr Cheng Bock was leading. Humble and wise Dr Cheng Bock. Kind and old Dr Cheng Bock. This is what a Singaporean President should be, in my eyes, at least. You want a revolutionary? Then fight out in the General Election!

 

Either way, Singapore will be in reliable hands. At least Dr Tony can hold his own in the international arena. Yes, he is calm and collected, thoughtful and gracious in speech. Relatively articulate as well.

 

So let us not look back but strive forward and support our President-elect, Dr Tony Tan, as he embarked on his journey as Head of the Republic of Singapore.

 

*******

 

 

polling day

 

Today is Polling Day and I will be heading down to the polling station assigned to me to cast my vote at the ballot box.

 

As all of our children are too young to stay at home by themselves, we would be bringing them along to the station. We have already decided to do so first thing in the morning – as soon as the polling station opens at 8am.

 

We would then head to the nearby coffeeshop for breakfast.

 

Who shall I vote for?

 

It will be Dr Tan Cheng Bock, the gentleman diplomat. The ideal President of Singapore, in my opinion.

 

And finally, I’ve persuaded my wife to vote for the same, after watching the final broadcasts of the four candidates last night. As usual, I couldn’t endure Kin Lian’s speech for the whole ten minutes, so riddled with phonetic errors and mispronunciations. As for Jee Say’s, it seemed that his Rafflesian background did him no good in the area of philosophy, debate and argumentation.

 

Besides, he was an economist or some financial honcho anyway. Such blokes are never known for their astute reasoning and intellectual prowess. I wonder what made his crony Nicole Seah from the opposition comment that he is a “brilliant thinker”.

 

If he is a “brilliant thinker”, then Lee Kuan Yew is god.

 

My parents would be rooting for Dr Tony Tan. As would most educated and reasonable folks from that generation.

 

Either way, Singapore would be in good hands.

 

*******

 

pray to vote for the right president

 

If you think that I would agree with the title of this post, you are dead wrong.

 

In fact, I am all contrarian to this erroneous proposition that presupposes an excuse NOT to think and NOT to weigh and grapple with the issues.

 

Many a time when such a statement is offered among christians, what is subtly meant is to ask whether the candidate is a “christian”. This would ensure, perhaps only in theory, that the candidate would propose ideas and policies that are in line with his religious convictions.

 

That is precisely the problem with yankee politics – what evangelicals in the US want is a “christian” president, a “christian” government who will lead the nation to “follow god”, as though that is the moral thing to do. One who is acquainted with history will bemoan the fact that nations who claimed to ”followed god” often behave the most immorally towards other nations.

 

In our local context, christians would be praying for the right candidate to be our next President. And many are wondering among themselves if Dr Tony Tan is a “christian”. And what about Tan Jee Say - rumours abound that he IS a “christian” – otherwise why all this talk about “moral authority” and “absolute conscience” (whatever that means)?

 

But of course, we all know that Dr Tan Cheng Bock IS a “christian” – a Roman Catholic to be more specific – which I reckon will not go too well with the evangelical wing in Singapore. But Catholics have a GOOD track record in the public square. They are often very accepting towards other religious views and are known to be devoted to secularism as a political ideology. Most of the time, anyway.

 

Religious views aside, what is vital for us as citizens of Singapore is NOT to pray, but to THINK carefully and weigh the relevant issues such as the country’s stability, economy, multi-racial and multi-religious social fabric, etc before heading to the polling station tomorrow.

 

Christians cannot vote for somebody JUST BECAUSE he or she is a christian! Chee Soon Juan is one example of a lunatic who happens to be christian.

 

And if the recent polls are anything to go by, online Singaporeans seem to prefer a President who questions the government more often. This would favour Jee Say and Kin Lian.

 

But after all is said and done, my bet would be on Dr Tony Tan who would clinched the presidency - although my heart goes with the medical doctor. The wiser generation among us would select someone with a GOOD track record of political leadership and experience as well as someone with the decorum and dignity to pull it off.

 

Jee Say is but hot air and white noise. Although he is now trying to allay the fears that he might be too confrontational and hence impede the political process, if public appearance is all we can go by, for now; nothing he says can soothe me into believing that he is all for cooperation. I have seen people like him. Once a boss, always a boss. A former CEO like him would want to hold the reins, would want to get things done HIS way.

 

Cooperation? A load of chicken droppings.

 

Besides, he kept trying to reinvent the constitution by claiming for the presidency powers that are not to be! The President of Singapore is a position NEVER MEANT to act as a “check and balance” to the main government. In fact, he is the unifying figure OF THE GOVERNMENT. He is also not THE VOICE for the PEOPLE, as the ah seng Kin Lian would want the Presidency to be.

 

Singaporeans is making a very grave mistake if either of these two thugs are elected into the presidency.

 

Besides, I cannot imagine my President speaking in very poorly articulated English while dining with international heads of state!

 

My wife, I think, would root for Dr Tony Tan while I myself might vote for Dr Cheng Bock. Both will do fine for Singapore, in my books. We need experienced, wise and sensible people, not brash gangsters.

 

*******

 

 

about kin lian & jee say

 

An interesting discussion among the four local presidential candidates was aired recently at 8pm on Channel News Asia. It was moderated by the channel’s managing director and former chief editor, Debra Soon.

 

The interview panel included the ambassador-at-large at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Special Advisor at the Institute of Policy Studies, Professor Tommy Koh; and Janadas Devan, the Director of the same institute.

 

Impressions only, Dr Tony Tan cut a much more competent and dignified figure than the other three with Dr Tan Cheng Bock holding his own as an experienced and wise figure in the Singapore politcal scene. Kin Lian was at his incompetent best, fumbling with his words due to his obvious language impediment, filtered through rather incredulously with that impish grin of his. As for Jee Say, he was bullish at usual, crossing swords on one occasion with the interviewers over the interpretation of the role of the president.

 

For so many years, the President of Singapore has been viewed by many as a unifying figurehead of sorts, a wise and congenial grandfather to the people (with the Prime Minister as the stern father and executioner). Although he has certain powers accorded to him, many do not view his role as a “check and balance” to the government.

 

In fact, the idea of another centre of power will be detrimental to the governance of Singapore! I don’t want a President who constantly cross swords with the cabinet.

 

This is the impression I receive from both Kin Lian and Jee Say. Contrary to what they say, they do not seem to be able to get it right when it comes to the role of the President. Dr Tan Cheng Bock was more honest than some when he commented that there are just certain things that the President cannot do.

 

Besides, at the time of the programme (which was recorded, obviously), Jee Say was having a rally at Toa Payoh Stadium. And it was said that he had a list of “guest speakers” who would be there to support him – and many were opposition party members. 

 

What INDEPENDENCE was he talking about? A self-defined independence from the PAP? A genuinely nonpartisan candidate would try NOT to associate himself with ANY political party, PAP or otherwise. Citizens who do not want to get the boat rocked, like me, would see his campaign as a conspiracy from the opposition to get a foothold on the government via the presidency.

 

And I will not allow that to happen. If I can help it.

 

My vote would be for either Dr Tony or Dr Cheng Bock. Hmm.

 

*******

 

presidential election

 

The campaign trail has started for our four presidential candidates, and it would be a race against time for these men to earn the trust and faith of their fellow citizens before the 27th of this month, the day we would be going to the ballot box.

 

Unlike the US, the President of Singapore is more like a constitutional monarch, having no real ministerial authority except the supposedly “custodial” responsibility of protecting our nation’s financial reserves as well as some veto responsibilities here and there.

 

Similar to the Queen, our President acts more as a unifying figure among Singaporeans, a figure head of sorts.

 

But of course, as with all politics, much goobledygook is made about the “importance” of the President in Singapore life.

 

Really. The real authority lies in the Prime Minister and his cabinet.

 

Anyway, who should I vote for? I am kind of apathetic towards the local political scene, where I suppose it has been a once bitten-twice shy proposition for me. Singapore is one teeny weeny nation – how many competent and trustworthy leaders can we get? Honestly, a multi-party governmental system is not the way to go for our country.

 

It will just make it worse. Contrary to what all the liberal wannabes in our midst say, freedom of speech and expression (as interpreted by the liberal democratic West) will ruin Singapore and allow anarchy free reign.

 

That will not be genuine freedom for me. There has to be a middle ground somewhere. While I do not want Singapore to go the way of the draconian theocracies of the Middle East or the oppressive communism of China; I do not wish for Singapore to be like the UK, France or even the US, where strikes, protests and public rioting is common, thereby disrupting the stable and quiet life of citizens who want to have no part to play in such uncivilised troublemaking.

 

Back to our local scene. So far, all of the opposition parties that we have are useless. They are empty vessels that make white noise, nothing more. Can they really build a nation the way Lee Kuan Yew did, from “third world to the first”? Do they really have the interests of our country, our people at heart? Or do they have a liberal agenda up their sleeves, masquerading as alternative voices so as to play to the gallery of the common people who knows next to nothing about politics?

 

Hmm. Who shall I vote for?

 

For one thing, I am turned off by the poorly spoken English of Tan Kin Lian, and to a lesser degree, Tan Jee Say.

 

Besides, there is this vulgar air of “ah-seng-ism” about the former Tan, the way he wants to “challenge” the government by being the “voice of the people”. Sounds so propagandish, so unruly, so uncivilised, so crass. Perhaps as someone who is raised in an anglophone environment, I simply cannot stomach poor English speech and prose from a public figure.

 

The latter Tan, on the other hand, comes across as too young and too bullish for the post. He smells of the opposition, through and through, despite his claims that it is a nonpartisan race.

 

All in all, these two blokes do not make a dignified public figure head for me. I would feel ashamed if either of them is my president.

 

On the other hand, both Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock speak relatively well. Both have a quiet and dignified air about them which exudes confidence and humility. And both have a vast depth and breadth of experience in politics among themselves. This gives me security and makes me trust in them more than the former two louts.

 

I like Tony Tan for his experience and statesmanship. I like Tan Cheng Bock for his emphasis on multiculturalism.

 

Who shall I vote?

 

I’ll just wait and see.

 

*******

 

thugs deserve the harshest punishment yet

 

A 65-year-old Singaporean man was bashed up by a group of thugs when he asked them to smoke somewhere else instead of the very narrow stairwell landing on the second floor beneath his third floor flat at 31 Seah Street.

 

The man was obviously distressed by the second-hand smoke.

 

Hooligans beat up Elderly man

 

If the thugs weren’t drunk or under the influence of some other substances, then they were but barbarians – surprise surprise – to see them in 21st century Singapore. Call me naive, call me childishly so, but such an act is appalling and it violates the good common sense of any decent human being.

 

I hope the long arm of the draconian Singapore legal system catches up with these clowns.

 

*******

 

 

FREE the dolphins

 

 

Over 100,000 Singaporeans have pledged their support to free the 25 dolphins that are kept in captivity in Resorts World Sentosa.

 

More than 100,000 people against Dolphins in Captivity at RWS

 

I have done so too, via Change.org. Please add your name to the petition and join the cause to free our fellow mammals and stop humanity from committing the sin of specieism.

 

*******

 

it is about time…

 

It is good news indeed to know that a few of the pastors as well as lay leaders in City Harvest Church Singapore have recently graduated from Trinity Theological College Singapore (TTC) with divinity degrees.

 

City Harvest pastors, members obtain degrees from TTC

 

It is time charismatic christendom learn that their pastors and preachers have to be trained theologically, let alone be biblically literate.

 

It is detrimental to the church when the preachers and teachers are poorly informed about church history, philosophy, other church traditions other than their own, and most importantly, how to handle the christian bible accurately and properly.

 

Although there are some institutions which are popular haunts of independent charismatics, like the Tung Ling Bible School, Rhema Bible Training Centre Singapore and even City Harvest Bible Training Centre; such institutions are very poor academic choices for biblical scholarship.

 

They are but bastions of anti-intellectualism and parochial indoctrination. Many graduate from these places with no knowledge of the original languages, no knowledge of biblical criticism, no knowledge of inter-faith engagement, etc. Alas they even pride themselves as being more “on fire” for God, as though zeal can make up for any lack of intellectual rigour.

 

New Creation Church should learn from City Harvest’s example and send their superstar pastor Joseph Prince back to school.

 

At least then he will stop pretending to know greek and hebrew.

 

*******

 

ncc and its community outreach

 

The People’s Association of Singapore has recently applauded New Creation Church (NCC) Singapore for its contributions to the community.

 

Here are some of the contributions that NCC has made:

 

• took part in the Orange Ribbons celebration in 2010 to show support for racial harmony
• contributed over SGD$98,000 in cash and sponsorship to the Bright Homes programme of the Central Singapore Community Development Council
• gave SGD$20,000 to Tentera DiRaja Mosque to improve its own outreach programmes to the malay community
• contributed SGD$50,000 through the Singapore Police Force towards benefiting the less fortunate and needy through the Community Chest
• donated SGD$100,000 to ChildAid to help underprivileged children
• contributed SGD$10,000 to the Football Association of Singapore’s charity event
• contributed SGD$50,000 to the Yellow Ribbon project to help rehabilitate ex-offenders
• contributed SGD$10,000 to Japan for its relief effort
• contributed US$20,000 to New Zealand for its relief effort
• contributed AUD$15,000 to Australia for its relief effort
• contributed SGD$10,000 to Indonesia for its relief effort

 

 You can check The Christian Post Singapore Edition for the full report.

 

Although there is much disagreement with the extreme fundamentalist views of NCC, praise should be given when it is due. This church should be applauded for its contributions to the local community as social justice is a vital element to the Kingdom ethos of Jesus.

 

It is also commendable that NCC gives without any expectation or intention of proselytising, which is VERY common among Christian ministries and community programmes.

 

*******

 

 

criminalised for having sex

 

The draconian “conservatism” of our Singaporean culture is at work again.

 

This time, criminalising a private and consensual encounter of erotic love between two adult individuals. It is sad that they were probably too poor to rent a hotel room and hence resorted to having their tryst in the bushes instead.

 

Couple Fined for Having Sex in Public

 

Or they might have wanted to spice up their sex life by copulating in a “public” place. Whatever the case, I wonder as to the degree of “publicness” the couple is in. They did not screw in the cinema, that’s for sure. Neither did they bang on the bus or the MRT train.

 

Apparently, no one else in the “public” noticed their deed. Only a nosey night guard who must have secretly harboured some voyueristic delight in hearing the moans of pleasure in the bushes. He should have just closed his two eyes and gone on his way without reporting it to the police.

 

Many Singaporeans would disagree with me on this but what rationale would they base their decisions on? A legal code that is archaic and crude? Personal tastes or beliefs about chastity? Come on. It might be reasonable if the couple was grinding and humping in the void deck of a HDB block or in the lift. Or maybe in the middle of a busy pavement in Orchard Road.

 

Young children may chance upon them and witness an act that they do not understand.

 

But in the bushes in some desolate park in the night? Come on.

 

The police might as well patrol East Coast Park at night to catch couples making out on the beaches or in their flimsy tents. The police can also explore the carparks in the vicinity where girlfriends are sucking their boyfriends’ cocks in the “privacy” of their cars. Or for that matter, all the parks across Singapore in the dead of the night where they might get the chance to see some sweet young thing stroking the cock of her young hunk until he moaned in climax as he shoots his semen all over her hands and maybe even face.

 

You get my drift.

 

Live and let live. If it is not rape, ignore them. Let them do what they want as long as it is not rape, sexual abuse or paedophilia.

 

*******

 

 

charged for “wrong” crime

 

A 22-year-old Singaporean woman was recently charged on two counts with committing an obscene act with an 11-year-old girl.

 

No details were provided as to what the “obscene” act was but I wonder if the conviction was proper and accurate. Isn’t the charge suppose to be “underage sex” instead?

 

Woman Admits Obscene Acts with Girl

 

The “victim” (it was consensual by the way) was only 11 years old – only a child.

 

Such a charge simply shows the archaic perspectives of the Singapore legal system towards homosexuality. The crime in the above case is underage sex, not homosexual sex!

 

*******

 

 

grammatical correctness

 

The Speak Good English Movement (SGEM) has been running for more than a decade in Singapore and the theme for this year is “Get It Right!”. It focuses on encouraging more Singaporeans to speak grammatically correct English more consistently and in most, if not all environments.

 

SGEM wants Singaporeans to speak grammatically correct English

 

We are also encouraged to “correct” poor English whenever we encounter it by pasting sticky notes on signages and posters across the country.

 

Act on Poor English

“Correct” sticky notes to be pasted on bad signs

 

It is a good way to start but I personally think it hinges on a false premise that written and spoken English have the same standards. If the history of the English language has something to teach us, it is that spoken language often comes first and then the written. It is always the written that evolves out of a need to record down a language for posterity.

 

Standard English refers to the written form, not the spoken. Even the so-called “standard” keeps evolving and changing. With our social norms and culture vastly changing around us, much of my generation’s “standard” (Standard British English) has evolved into an adulterated mixture of American, Singaporean and British, in that order. So what standard are we talking about here? Noah Webster’s standard? Henry Fowler’s standard?

 

There are subtle differences in grammar between American and British English (apart from the spelling). Workers in an American company would be forced to communicate using only American English whereas workers in a local company would be using the defaulted British English that we were brought up in.

 

Anyway, spoken language has no “standard” in the same sense as the written. Besides, “correcting” poor English on public signboards and posters is simply engaging in exercising one’s standards in written English. Everyday speech is another thing all together.

 

Everyday speech is spontaneous and real-time interactive – we do not have the time to edit and revise what comes out of our mouths. We are also engaging in conversations in real time – it is common for us to pepper our sentences with fillers such as “hmm”, “er”, “okay…”, “oh I see”, etc. We will also tend to mirror the speech habits of those we converse with so as to be able to “connect” with them better.

 

These are not bad things per se. They are all part and parcel of speech.

 

Hence sometimes, it is NOT wrong to speak grammatically “incorrect” English in our daily conversations with friends, family and colleagues. If you speak to everyone you meet on the street as though you are speaking from a lectern all the time – that is POOR social interaction!

 

But of course, written language or formal language for presentation purposes are different. They have to be edited and revised as they are not spontaneous and they do not involve one-on-one conversations.

 

I guess appropriateness is the key. One has to know when and where to use standard or colloquial English.

 

*******