ContemplAsian

Atheism – Science and Philosophy of God’s Nonexistence

2010-09-18T19:20:00.000+08:00

Guest Post by Ivan

*The following article has been written by Ivan and strictly reflects his personal opinion. This article should not be interpreted as an attack against any religious organization or individual.

The existence of a God has often been widely debated. As a nonbeliever of any supreme being or creator God, I will attempt to bring the scientific evidence against the possibility of a God or transcendental form of consciousness beyond the limits of neurological processes.

Philosophy

Before I begin discussing about the various evidences for the nonexistence of God, I will first discuss about the fundamental philosophy regarding the debate. First of all, the existence or nonexistence of a God cannot be proven. If a God does not exist, then obviously its nonexistence can never be proven. As an analogy, if I say that there is a Chinese teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars (Russel's teapot), can anyone disprove me? Of course not. Likewise, no one can prove if it exists. Of course, we know that it does not exist because nothing proves its existence. On the other hand, if a God exists, we can never prove it unless the God decides to show itself to the world. Despite this impossibility of proving or disproving God, it is still possible to provide evidence for and against each side to add to the argument. Like the Chinese teapot analogy, an absence of empirical observation would mean that its nonexistence would be accepted unless proved otherwise.

However, the important thing to note at this juncture is that the debate revolves around evidence that shows how probable or improbable God’s existence is. It is in this post that I will give evidence for the latter in the form of scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

Part 1: The Origin of the Universe

One of the most important arguments put up by theists is the concept of the first mover, or primum movens. The idea is based on the axiom of causality which would logically indicate that a set of causes for the universe’s existence would extend to infinity, which is impossible. In order to solve the problem, theists would invoke the idea of a God. This idea is augmented by the law of conservation of energy, which states that energy in a closed system can never be created nor destroyed.

However, an important philosophical argument would render this concept false. Since the laws of physics, as well as the axiom of causality, is created at the time of the big bang, it is perfectly possible for energy to be created out of nothing and spontaneous creation to take place without the need for physical laws to be fulfilled. It is the nonexistence of causality and physical laws before the big bang that permits spontaneous creation to occur. Presently, it is thought that a hyperspace exists to allow such spontaneous creation of an infinite number of galaxies. I will discuss this on more detail later on.

Part 2: The complexity of the Universe

For most people, space is simply the black sky that hovers over their heads every night. In the past century, however, the magnificence of our universe has started to reveal itself to science. To put things into perspective, the observable universe is calculated to be 93 billion light years across (one light year is equivalent to 9.46 trillion kilometres), with the Earth being at the centre (since the calculation of the horizon is based on Earth’s perspective). In the observable universe, there are approximately 8 quintillion stars, with the sun being just one of many. I derived this number from the calculation of the number of galaxies observed by the Hubble ultra deep field, multiplying that value to the area of the night sky, and multiplying that number to the number of stars in one galaxy. This is a staggering number indeed, and it shows that Earth, being only a tiny speck of dust in the great cosmic depths, is not as special as it was once thought to be.

The universe has a beautiful set of physical laws in terms of mathematical aesthetics. Equations are always symmetrical in terms of the values on both sides, the golden ratio is found naturally in organic life, and the precise arbitrary constants of the standard model allow the existence of stable matter for life to exist. I have realised that many theists enjoy using the complexity of the universe as evidence for intelligent design. Of course, all becomes clear when the anthropic principle is understood.

First of all, the laws of the universe are undoubtedly perfect for life to form. Should the mass of the proton change by a tiny fraction, stable matter would not exist. The Earth has a perfect atmosphere and temperature for life to evolve, and the laws of physics and chemistry drives evolution in a positive direction. However, this apparent coincidence is actually based on a sort of observation-selection bias. If the conditions of the universe (and Earth) were not perfect, there is absolutely no way that life could exist. If life did not exist, we wouldn’t even be here to ponder about our existence. In today, modern physics has begun to unravel a world that is much stranger than we thought. Most scientists now believe that there is more than just the three dimensions we know today. In total, eleven dimensions are thought to exist, with only the limits of sensory perception limited to the familiar three causing the illusion that higher dimensions do not exist. With this, it is also thought that an infinite number of parallel universes exist alongside ours; each with a different set of physical laws that determine how the universe works. Using the anthropic principle, we would then realise that only habitable universes can contain life. Since life is indeed formed upon rare chance, we would assume most universes to be devoid of life, or even stars. Likewise, it is only through habitable conditions of Earth that life could exist here.

Another argument related to the anthropic principle on a planetary scale is the low probability of abiogenesis. According to creationist statistics, the probability of a protein molecule forming by itself is less than that of a hurricane sweeping through a metal scrap yard and assembling a working Boeing 747 (Hoyle’s fallacy). However, when we look at the staggering number of stars in the universe, it is obvious that this probability is overcome easily. Furthermore, the 15 billion-year old universe would have provided sufficient time for this to occur. Most importantly, however, the autosynthesis of liposomes and microspheres (membrane-bound RNA, believed to the earliest form of life on Earth) has been performed in the laboratory. This shows that the probability calculated by the creationists is not accurate in the first place.

Another argument that is often put up by theists is the apparent beauty of nature. To them, the grandeur of the sunset and breathtaking views of Earth from atop a mountain is due to the work of intelligent design. However, what they fail to take into account is the fact that our brains are adapted to the Earth and universe that we inhabit after four billion years of constant evolution. As an analogy, us humans would often feel repulsed at the sight of a female cockroach. To a male cockroach, however, the structure of a female cockroach is perfectly and beautifully designed. This was a requirement for reproduction and their survival as a species. The most important thing about this analogy, however, is that it shows how beauty is only the result of adapted psychology. This means that the mathematical and aesthetic beauty of the universe is the byproduct of evolution and not a creator. This brings me to my next point on evolution.

Part 3: Evolution

The theory of evolution is often one of the most widely-debated topics as it directly challenges the claims made by the Christian genesis. Although evolution is described as a ‘theory’, it has as much doubt in biology as quantum physics had in physics. This is important to note as many creationists argue that evolution is ‘only a theory’. By their definition, atomic theory and the theory of relativity would be only theories. As an analogy of scientific theories and facts, the constant rising of the sun in the East everyday is now established as a fact since all observational evidence proves it. If, however, the sun rises in the West one day, the theory would be proved wrong. The same goes for evolution: to date, all scientific data supports it. However, it is very susceptible to being disproven because a single evidence against it would render it untrue. In fact, the theory is supported by a massive amount of evidence which I will now put forward. At the same time, I will also clarify some of the misconceptions about evolution based on the people who argue against it.

First of all, what exactly is evolution? Evolution is actually the process whereby small changes in the form of genetic mutation occur along every generation that produces a substantial shift in genetic composition of an organism from its distant ancestors and is naturally selected due to its chances of survival. Evolution is a gradual process that occurs in every generation. While the genetic composition of the offspring is almost genetically identical to that of the parents, small changes in genes over hundreds or thousands of generations would eventually cause a significant change in the observed characteristics that differentiate the descendent species from the ancestral species. Traits that are beneficial for an organism’s survival is selected preferentially due to the fact that organisms with beneficial traits would survive better and hence be able to reproduce. Over time, constant sexual reproduction would cause beneficial genes to be spread across the entire population of a species, causing a shift in the genetic composition.

It is important to note that all organisms are transitional species between two others. Due to the fact that evolution is a gradual process, transitional fossils exist to show the smooth transition of one species to the next. In the case of humans, the chimpanzee-like australopithecines evolved to species with the genus homo, such as Homo erectus and homo habilis right up to homo sapiens as shown by fossil evidence. Although many creationists maintain that evolution is false because humans evolved from monkeys, it is important to note that modern species do not evolve from modern species. Rather, humans and monkeys share a common ape-like ancestor. In fact, all organisms share a common ancestor with one another. The only difference is, the greater the difference in genetic composition, the more distant that common ancestor is.

Another important evidence for evolution, besides the transitional fossils, is the experimental observations of evolution occurring in the laboratory. Known as the Escherichia Coli Long term evolution experiment, twelve containers of the bacteria are allowed to grow in a nutrient broth of glucose and citric acid. Due to the rapid rate of reproduction, a small sample of the bacteria would be extracted from each container daily and allowed to reproduce to the original amount on the next day. The rest of the bacteria would be frozen for observational analysis. The experiment has been going on for over twenty years, and has recently reached the 50,000th generation early this year. The significance of this experiment is that the results showed ongoing evolution in all of the different containers. The bacteria in each different container would take a different evolutionary path due to random mutations. The results were indeed stunning. At first, the original bacteria sample could only thrive on glucose as the source of food. However, one sample suddenly managed to evolve and utilise the citric acid mixed with the glucose in the nutrient broth, resulting in a sudden surge in bacteria count for that particular flask. This shows that ongoing evolution can and has been observed, and the fact that it is done based on empirical methods would mean that evolution can be directly verified.

Intelligent design, besides having only a few arguments, has much evidence to disprove it. In human males, the vas deferens (the tube carrying semen from the testes) loops over the ureter before making its way down to the penis. This is unintelligent design as the looping of the vas deferens requires the wasting and channelling of more resources to the building of the extended tube. From an ecological perspective, this is a detriment to the survival of the organism as the resources used could be channelled to other areas that would have otherwise improved other aspects of survival. From an evolutionary point of view, however, all becomes clear. In our ancestors, the scrotum was located above the bladder. After millions of years of evolution, the location of the scrotum ‘moved’ downwards to its present position due to the benefits of having it exposed to the ambient air which is of a lower temperature. During this process, the vas deferens would have to loop over the ureter by that path.

Another evidence of unintelligent design is from the ecological perspective of a forest. In forests, and especially in tropical rainforests, trees compete for sunlight by growing taller than the other trees. Although resources are wasted to increase the tree’s height, the benefits of gaining more sunlight for photosynthesis outweighs the extra resources used. From the perspective of a single tree, this is a requirement for competition. From the perspective of the entire forest, however, large amounts of resources are wasted: if all the trees did not compete with one another, the resultant intensity of sunlight falling on the surface of the trees would still be the same. As an analogy, spectators from a concert might start to stand to get a better view of the performance. However, since their act of standing up would block the view of the people behind that person, the people sitting behind would thus stand up to prevent the person from blocking their view. Over time, everyone would be standing up and the result would still be the same. From an evolutionary point of view, the wastage of resources is due to the fact that evolution occurs on an individual basis and not as a whole.

Part 4: Morality

Many theists disregard the study of science as they think that it is the work of a devil. This is an extremely closed-minded thought. Good and evil do not exist: They are concepts created by us humans. Good usually refers to morally upright acts, or acts that seem ethical. There is no clear distinction between good and evil, as changing circumstances would change what defines both. Furthermore, behaviour is the result of both our psychology (i.e. greed, sex drive), and the living environment (e.g. bad childhood). All people are created with a somewhat similar psychology (with slight variation as a result of genetic mutation), but different living environment. Personality is determined by experiences and not the existence of a soul.

Yet, why do we stand up against injustice? The answer does not lie in a god, but with evolution once again. By feeling pity for another member of the same species, we are increasing our chances of survival. Of course, you might argue that animal-lovers are common and this would contradict evolution. However, evolution does have an explanation for it. It is known as reciprocal altruism (you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours). Reciprocal altruism refers to the apparent non-selfish act involving first helping another organism at the expense of one’s own survival. This is evident in symbiotic relationships between species. Within a single species, each organism has ideal behavioural characteristics that lie somewhere in between all-greedy and all-giving. This ensures that while an organism would aid and cooperate with other members of the species, a form of selfishness must exist to ensure the survival of itself.

Evolution cares nothing for the comfort of any organism. The many wasps sting an insect prey as a host for reproduction. By strategically stinging the ganglia of the host prey, the prey would be paralysed, thereby enabling the wasp to inject its eggs into the body of the insect. Throughout this process, the host insect is kept alive, only paralysed. The larvae hatched from the eggs would then move on to devour the meat of the host insect while it is still alive. This is indeed a traumatising death for the host insect. Yet, this is important for the survival of the wasp as it ensures that the meat is kept fresh. This is a fact of evolution, and nature does not care whether the host insect suffers a traumatising death. Justice often fails to be done. That is a fact of life that has to be accepted. Morality is merely an illusion created by reciprocal altruism. Does this mean that the theory of evolution would cause chaos in society? Perhaps it will. Theists often use this argument that by accepting Darwinism into society, injustice would pervade. This argument is also known as argumentum ad consequentiam. However, our preferences do not decide how nature works. Whether we like it or not, evolution is still true. Per contra, even if Darwinism is accepted by the scientific community, it does not mean that society would function based on its principle. This, however, is beyond the scope of this post.

Part 5: Are humans the only species to qualify the entry to heaven?

This is perhaps one of the most direct evidence against the existence of a God. Many religions assume that only humans would go to heaven. However, fossil evidence shows that there is no clear distinction between humans and apes. Transitional fossils exist with a smooth transition until the human species. If this is the case, how do we define what a human is? Humans are continually evolving, and because the process is so gradual there each successive generation can be considered genetically identical from the previous one. Yet, there exists a slight change in DNA from one generation to the other. This amounts to large scale changes over millions of years. This also means, however, that there is a loss of clear definition of a human, and thus who goes to heaven. The idea of hell is also based on a fallacy. How do we define good and bad? There is no common consensus that clearly defines the two.

Even if all creatures go to heaven, how do you differentiate conscious life from non-conscious life? You might say that this lies in the presence of a brain. However, there is also no clear distinction between what is considered as a brain. For one, some organisms contain a centralised and complex network of nervous tissue but lack what we would consider as a brain. Like I mentioned previously, evolution is a gradual process and no clear distinctions can be made. If a conscious organism is but a smooth transition from an unconscious one (as proven in fossil record), how do we define what can transcend physical death? It is unlikely that a benevolent and omnipotent God would favour a certain group of organisms over another.

Even assuming that all creatures, both conscious and unconscious, would transcend death and go to heaven (or hell), how do we define life and non-life? Viruses show characteristics of both, and the first organisms were just a clump of membrane-bounded RNA. From all the evidence above, it is thus obvious to note that it is unlikely that a God could exist. The absence of any clear distinction between all forms of life, as well as life and non-life, would indicate that it is impossible for any afterlife to exist.

Part 6: The Paranormal

Paranormal activities in the form of haunting by entities returning from the afterlife have been reported in most, if not all cultures across the globe. These cultures exist independently from one another. It is possible, however, that the idea of the supernatural has existed in the very first humans who originated in Africa. For the benefit of the doubt, however, I will assume that the ideas of ghosts were created independently from the different cultures.

If the idea of supernatural forces influencing human lives were created independently across the world, does this mean that ghosts really do exist? The answer is a vehement ‘no’. Reports of paranormal activities are more likely to be the side effect of an evolutionary byproduct. First of all, our natural curiosity towards the universe (which has benefited us by enabling us to develop technology that started in primitive humans) results in a tendency to attribute unknown gaps in information to an unknown force. For example, our distant ancestors believed that fire was the result of a God and required the adding of firewood as a way to appease it and continue producing fire. This characteristic of the human mind has far-reaching consequences that resulted in many theists arguing about gaps in science through an argument from ignorance, or argumentum ad ignoratiam.

The second cause of supernatural beliefs is the result of the psychological need to believe in the continuation of consciousness beyond death. When organisms evolved from non-conscious life to conscious life, the need for survival is transferred from a physical level to a psychological level. This results in us not being able to perceive a time when conscious activity ceases. As a result, we would tend to think that some sort of continuation of one’s self and mind would transcend beyond physical death, resulting in a belief that dead ancestors would manifest in a ghost-like entity capable of returning from the dead.

Most paranormal encounters are the result of psychological activities that stem from psychological inadequacies prevalent in all humans, such as paraedolia, or the natural tendency to look for patterns. Hallucinations are also a common cause, and are often augmented by one’s belief system. Experiments in virtual reality have proven that whenever a person enters a place believed by that person to be haunted, he or she would observe entities or objects that are not really there. This effect can be increased by the addition of electromagnetic fields and infrasound.

Reports of paranormal activity observed by more than one person simultaneously cannot be attributed to psychological effects. However, they too, can be explained by physical effects not quite understood. Human emotions are extremely powerful energies that can leave a signature at a certain location. This is often the cause of residual haunting. Although the neurological model of consciousness and emotions is not yet completely understood, biochemical reactions occurring as a result of powerful emotions such as a traumatic death might release vast amounts of energy, possibly electromagnetic in nature. If the energy is powerful enough, local conditions such as the presence of material in soil that can be easily magnetised might act as some sort of natural recorder. This energy can be replayed continuously for centuries when the electromagnetic fields interact with the brain of the visitor. Note, however, that this is only a theory and that a diverse range of scientific phenomena can account for this. The growing field of Quantum mechanics might also provide another explanation for such paranormal activity.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, the existence of a God is highly unlikely. Given all the scientific evidence, rational thinkers would easily assume that the existence of a God is highly improbable. While there is still the possibility that a God exists, our current understanding of the universe shows that it is highly unlikely that there is such a possibility. For one, a God is not required for all that we see today, and closer observation of life and the universe indicates that God does not exist.

Admin

2010-09-03T21:27:00.001+08:00

Hello everyone,

First of all, I would like to apologize for the VERY retarded rate of blogging. Time hasn’t been kind to me at all. I didn't have time to interact with you guys nor update the blog. Anyway, I managed to get a few hours off today and created a Facebook page for contemplasian. You can see the links on the right.

If you have something interesting to write, please drop me an email (which I do check regularly) and I will post them up. As for blogging, I'll be busy for the rest of the year. But I'll drop to create at least 2-4 posts by the end of this year. You are all welcome to post on the FB page. I'll try to check it once a week.

Updates: Ivan said the link isn't working. So here's the FB page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/ContemplAsian/147126831988935

Cheerios,
DM

Will Boot Camp work out for Juvenile Delinquents?

2010-01-05T14:05:00.007+08:00

After watching the cyber wars against Ah Lians and Ah Bengs at HWZ recently, I just start to wonder if the ALs and ABs know what they are doing in their life. They glorify under-aged smoking/drinking, take pride that they belong in gangs and electronic tags end up as a form of battle trophy. Many psychology theories agree that the adolescent period is the period of identity confusion where teenagers are doing their best to search for a place where they belong (regardless of whether it’s good or bad).

The main issue that got me worried was that these at-risk kids are getting a lot younger (ranging around 12 years old) and they openly glorify their actions of stealing bikes, smoking, belonging to gangs, etc in their blogs. Although I understand that there are many reasons why many adolescents turn delinquent, I have to say that most of the rehab programs lack the resources to deal with each juvenile delinquent on the individual level. Most of the rehab programs like probation, Girls' Home, Boys' Home, etc seem to be unsuitable for many delinquents because they seem determined to glorify in their “badness”. Like one professor once said to me, they probably gave up being the best of the best, so they decided to be the best of the worst because that’s the only thing they can hope to achieve.

Many juvenile delinquents (JD) are typically from low SES, broken/dysfunctional families and are overly represented in the NT population. Most of the time, they are the by-products of ill-discipline and poor opportunity. Personally, I think the growing rates of JD are due to the maturing of the “spoilt generation” of Singaporeans. This is a generation that I notice to be very spoilt- their parents give them everything they want except close parental monitoring. In fact, it has reached a stage where many parents use extremely large amounts of pocket money as a form of compensation for the lack of time spent interacting with their kids. In my day, pocket money would be sufficient for my meals only. MacDonalds and trips to the cinema were a privilege, not a routine. Many parents today don’t even know their children’s timetables or what their kids are doing in their spare time.

You can read an academic paper about factors affecting JD in Singapore here.
Although there has been a slight drop in JDs arrested over the years, I question if it is because less of them get caught, or are there actually less JDs around. In my biased opinion, I suspect the former is probably true. Given the Flynn effect, is it that hard to believe that JDs may have found a way to outsmart the criminal justice system? It’s quite possible. With the help of the internet, many people are learning and doing illegal stuff. Did you know that Youtube has a video on how to pick locks?

So the big question is how to deal with these kids? Personally, I’m in for the break and re-mould concept of shaping them again. What I propose is a lot more radical than the Boys' or Girls' home and let me clarify. What I have in mind is for the extreme JDs, the type that probably have conduct disorder, no respect for authority, no self respect and a conscience that probably went into coma a long time ago. I tend to favor discipline as the cause and solution to all of life’s problems. Boot Camp would be the best place to teach them that. Many psychologists are of the opinion that placing a group of JD together would only make things worse because they learn more deviant behavior from each other. Personally, I agree but I think the context matters. I propose an environment of mentoring and encouragement through discipline, teaching them life skills and learn that they are respected as individuals. So this is my idea of boot camp:

Duration: 1 Year

Admission Criteria: Beyond Parental Control children. They may only join the program if the teachers, counsellor, judge and parents deem it necessary.

Intake: 60 at a time. 30 male; 30 female. Divided into 3 platoons that train, eat and live together (divided by gender of course)

Entry point: No overnight bags needed. Report in as dressed. Cadet’s personal items will be removed and they will be issued a set of essential items- plastic glasses, toiletries, towel, underwear, uniform, PT kit, running shoes, boots and led to their bunkers. Male and female cadets will be shaved bald and all forms of personal adornment (i.e. rings, ear rings, necklaces) will be removed. This is to deprive all of them of a sense of identity and make them easier to train.

Program:

1. Briefing about the rules. One 5min phone-call allowed each month. Both parents and cadets are strongly encouraged to write letters. Cadets must make their own bed, clean their bunks and wash their toilets.

2. Briefing about how to wear the uniform, how to tie the boots, who is who is the camp.

3. Basic footdrills will be conducted

4. Basic combat drills, live firing and hand grenade to teach them the value of life.

5. Obstacle course to inculcate respect for others, not just authority, but peers too. Group dynamics would be a focus in these courses to reinforce the need to respect themselves and those around them.

6. Inculcate anger management skills by offering incentives for obedience and punishment for insubordination.

7. Inculcate communication skills and focus on how to express themselves in a healthy manner.

8. Have regular sessions with counsellor and psychologist to help them understand their own behavior and how to improve themselves.

9. Engage in gardening and animal husbandry to teach them the value of how to nurture.

10. Cadets will be given a pig/rabbit to take care off when they first arrive and they'll be asked to shoot their pig/rabbit 6months down the row for food. Cadets will not be forced into slaughtering their pet. It is an exercise to help them understand how their parents feel about bring up their children only to see them grow wild and face the decision of "terminating" them.

After the 3months of isolation for intensive training, they will be allowed to have a day or two off per week just like the normal NS men. If they mess that up, they forfeit that freedom.

Resources required: 1 cook, 1 on-site psychologist, 1 on-site counselor, 6 training instructors (3 of each gender) and 1 medical officer.

After the 1 year of training, a support team of psychologists and counsellors that will still keep in touch with them for up to 5 years. They will be offered a slot in skill training courses to make them more elligable for the work force. In addition to that, I propose that they be awarded with a certificate of recommendation if their instructors, psychologist and counsellor all agree that he/she is worthy of it. After this boot camp stint, I'm pretty sure they'll start to appreciate home and family a lot more.

This is my idea. I tried presenting it to someone and receive the feedback that it is too idealistic and I should get off my moral high horse. Perhaps I am on a moral high horse, but than again, its just a radical idea isn't it? I don't feel a compulsion to help these "poor souls" afterall, the fall of each one means that I stand higher in life! But the thing is, I think they deserve better and why not offer them a last chance to improve their life? I view this as the last ditch effort to save these delinquents from a permanent career as criminals or poorly paid individuals.

This camp is what I would describe as a make or break. I've met enough "retired" delinquents and career criminals (aka gang members) who regret their hey-days and spend out the rest of their lives working for peanuts at low-skill jobs. They would tell me stories of how they had many chances to live a better life but they messed up everything in their desperate efforts to become rich and powerful the fast and easy way. I will always remember their one and only advice to me: "Don't end up like me".

If you thought I'm radical, watch this boot camp for problem kids in China.

Strange Creatures Series- Do Ghosts exist? Part 2

2009-12-25T11:39:00.000+08:00

Hey everyone,

I think I love ghosts too much. Hehehe, so I'm going to post up some more ghost pictures that I personally believe to be authentic but wasn't on the weblink that I posted up yesterday. Here we go:

When I first saw this picture, I thought the kid was the one crying in the foreground. However, someone helpfully added the red circle and now you can see a little girl posing with the adults. =)

Apparently the ghostly face behind the old man belongs to his wife. Nice to know that your loved ones are still sticking around and waiting for you to kick the bucket.

Look at the state of the building. It is so heavily blocked up I doubt if anyone can go up there and yet there is a very clearly image of someone in period dress. Looks like 17th century to me. It looks fake to many people I know, but to me, I think it's real because it seems to be "glowing". The surrounding areas around it are dark and if there's a light trained on it, the surrounding areas would be lighted up as well, but that didn't happen. The light seems to be coming from the figure itself. So yeah, go figure.

In addition to these manifestations, I would also like to talk a little about object possession. It seems ghosts have the ability to possess objects and manifest hauntings through it. For the Chinese readers out there, I'm sure you'll remember your parents telling you not to pick up stuff randomly from the roadside. And I'm sure if you read Russell Lee, you'll probably recall stories of "bad luck coins" or people bringing home haunted vases, toys, etc... However our Asian hauntings are not as widely documented as the Western ones. So I have to settle for showing you guys hauntings from the West.

Robert the Doll

Robert, sometimes known as Robert the Doll, is a doll that was once owned by Key West painter Robert Eugene Otto. The doll is approximately 100 years old. The creepy thing about this doll is the owner's treatment of it. He treated it as an independent invididual and it is alleged that the doll can move on it's own. He was seen darting up and down the stairs and people could here his feet tapping on the floorboards.

If you guys aren't too young, you'll probably recall the alleged hauntings of Teletubbies and Furbies Well, I'm not quite sure about the details but I heard of rumours of the voice actors committing mass-suicides. Anyway, if you notice, no more teletubbies are on sale, no more new episodes have been filmed ever since that happened. I know of kids who still enjoy watching them, so I won't say it's due to a fall in demand... Mysterious...

You can read more about haunted dolls here. There's Mandy and Annabelle for you to read up on.

Moving on from the haunted dolls, other haunted objects are typically refered to as cursed. Let me identify some famous "cursed" objects for you.

Diamonds
Diamonds are a girl's best friend, or her curse? There are 2 infamous diamonds that are allegedly cursed and plague their owners with a string of misfortune and death. They are the Hope Diamond and the Lorenzenstien Diamond.

Busby's Stoop Chair
Thomas Busby a local man became partners with his father in law Awety in the illicit coining business at the hall. It was reported, Busby a bully and drunkard, returned home to discover Daniel Awety sat in his favourite chair and after an argument threw Awety out. It is said, Awety threatened to take his daughter Elizabeth away from Busby and return her to Danotty Hall.

Later that night Thomas Busby went up to Danotty Hall and bludgeoned Daniel Awety to death with a hammer. After murdering Awety, Busby hid the body in nearby woodland. When Awety failed to appear, a search was mounted which led to the discovery of Daniel Awety's body and the arrest of Thomas Busby.

Busby was tried at York Assizes in 1702 and condemned to hang and his body dipped in pitch and left in a gibbet opposite the coaching inn at the cross roads on the old great north road leading into Thirsk.

As Thomas Busby was being lead to his execution he is supposed to have cursed anyone who dared sit in his chair. Thereafter the inn became known as the Busby Stoop Inn and the curse of the chair was born, or was it?

It's now suggested, the Busby Stoop chair famously hanging in the Thirsk museum (so no one can sit on it) and the focus of so much fear, might not have been made until after 1840, some 138 years after Thomas Busby's execution.

It is alleged that there has been a string of fatal incidents linked to individuals who have sat in this chair during the 1970s. So beware...

Taken from here.

Strange Creatures Series- Do Ghosts exist?

2009-12-24T12:21:00.002+08:00

Do ghosts exist?

Do you believe in ghosts?

What is a ghost?

A ghost - or spirit or apparition - is the energy, soul or personality of a person who has died and has somehow gotten stuck between this plane of existence and the next. Most researchers believe that these spirits do not know they are dead. Very often they have died under traumatic, unusual or highly emotional circumstances. Ghosts can be perceived by the living in a number of ways: through sight (apparitions), sound (voices), smell (frangrances and odors), touch - and sometimes they can just be sensed. Taken from here.

Now, it is possible to prove the evidence of ghosts by capturing pictures/videos of them with cameras, capturing their voices on recorders (EVPs), tracking them down with EMF meters (electromagnatic field)or thermal cameras, etc. Some of these may be real, some may be fake. So intepretation has to come about through experience. =)

Many people they declare that they don't believe in ghosts. But I have a question, if ghosts don't exist than why is it that every culture has it's own version of ghosts? Today, when we think of ghosts, what comes into mind is a pale figure or a severely decomposing figure that suddenly appears out of no where and tries to scare you to death or kill you. This is the stereotype image of ghosts thanks to cinemas.

Based on years of reading and researching, I would say that ghosts are probably harmless and most of the time, they aren't what the movies potray them to be. Most of the time, humans are the ones that scare themselves. Ghosts are usually harmless except for poltergeists who are capable of throwing things at people and in extreme cases, scratching them pretty badly. There are some ghost pictures taken and I don't think they are fake. I've attached 2 links here so that you can read up more by yourself:
- Real Photos (or rather, no evidence of forgery)
- Alleged Ghost Pictures (Evidence of manipulation be it intentional or unintentional)

I have some video clips for you guys to see. I follow only 2 ghost-hunting shows- Most Haunted and Ghost Hunters. There is a difference between the two.

Most Haunted has a "psychic" medium in the crew and they go into an allegedly haunted location thinking that it is haunted and start to scare themselves silly. I won't make any comments about whether they faked evidence whatsoever. I would just like to highlight how their psychological state is affected by their expectations of an angry vengeful ghost. They conduct seances, complain of cold spots or having rocks thrown on them. Unfortunately the lack of control in terms of who was where at which point and the lack professional equipment like thermometers or EMF detectors left room for doubt. However, they have a parapsychologist in the team who objectively questions evidence and rarely concedes that an evidence might be paranormal unless he cannot attributed it to something else.

Ghost Hunters go in with the expectation that the place is not haunted unless they are convinced by the evidence. They don't have a psychic with them but they used electronic devices like an EMF meter or a torchlight to communicate with the "entity". They leave the device away from them and ask for responses to their questions. If there's nothing they can find in terms of video evidence, audio recordings or personal experience, they will just tell the host that the place is not haunted in their opinion. You don't see a group of people screaming and running away at the slightest noise. Ghost hunters will trace down the source of noise and try to explain it. If they can't, they'll conclude that it's probably unnatural. E.g. If there's a thumping sound on the roof, they'll send one member up to the roof and run/jump all over it. They'll try to see if they can replicate the noise. =)

So here we go:

Most Haunted:

Listen out for the gutteral "hello" at 2min++. I'll be much happier if Stuart didn't get scared to bits and investigate further by seeing if he can replicate it.

I'm going to post up the entire series on Derby Gaol. It's an old jail and Yvette seems to be experiencing a whole range of emotional outbursts (to be honest, it might be real because in places like the Edinburgh Vaults, people inexplicably breakdown into tears at certain areas). And Derek the medium seems to be pretty dramatic. If you hear Derek talking to someone invisible called "Sam", it's his spirit guide.

Ghost Hunters:

This is one of the best EVP (electronic voice phenomenon) that I've ever heard. =)

P.S. The camera guy is a guy. And there's no other female around them.

Happy watching and form your own conclusions about whether ghosts exist. To end it off, I'll include another 2 videos of my favorite comedians- French and Saunders, who created a parody of Most Haunted.

Happy X'mas!!

2009-12-22T18:13:00.003+08:00

Hello guys!!

I'm so sorry I've been to busy and ~~lazy~~ recently to post anything up. I think my brain is too tired. Because X'mas is coming up, I've decided to post up some videos to share with you guys. =) It has nothing to do with the contemplasian goals or ideals but heck, its X'mas, time to have fun yar? It's a rather macarbre collection of videos about nature from youtube that I've specially selected for you guys. Have a great X'mas, have lots of nice, clean fun.

P.S. By the time you're done watching this, you'll probably never look at turkey stuffing, cottage cheese, cream or any bump on your skin quite the same way again. *Evil Laughter*

Booomz- Staph's infection

Bot Flies

Just in case you guys have no idea what botflies are:

Funny Urophilic Orang Utan

Cheerios,
DM

Extra-ordinary people: Are they better off dead than alive?

2009-10-05T19:51:00.001+08:00

Sorry for the lack of updates, I've been obscenely busy. Anyway, today, I'm sharing some videos from youtube. The theme is basically concerning living miracles- are they better off dead than alive?. After talking to so many people who are so caught up in the miseries of their personal lives, I've decided to do a post about some individuals who are suffering more than us and hopefully, we would learn how to appreciate ourselves and those around us better. The following videos are GRAPHIC. I hope that after watching them, no one will say anythig insensitive.

The Boy with Half a Brain

Poor kid got shot in the head. It is pretty much a miracle how he survived without half of his brains. I could tell that most of his right parietal lobe is gone. That is the part of the brain that deals with sensory-motor functions. People with brain damage there have problems trying to match the real world with the perceived one. So if you had them a card and tell them to slot it into the box, they can probably describe the slot to you but can't put it into the slot. This is but one example and it doesn't occur all the time. Because the brain is such an intricate organ, damage to one tiny part alone can cause a LOT of problems.

Treacher Collins Syndrome

This is a genetic illness caused by recessive genes. When I saw this video, I was more disturbed by comments that the kid is better off dead than alive. I just wonder if that is the right attitude to have but honestly, I rather my parents finish me off if I look like that... (Yes, I'm horribly vain.)

A Woman without Arms

I really have to take off my hat to this lady. She is probably a living proof that physical deformity is not the end of the road towards a fulfilling life. =) Her determination is truly a source of inspiration. I just feel sad that there are people who rather criticize her for being imperfect rather than admire her for her courage and determination.

8 limbed girl

I always believed that whilst people should respect traditions, they should no be a slave to them. This girl is obviously no having a good life and instead of seeking help, she is denied treatment because they believe her to be a reincarnation of Lakshmi.

The Tree Man

The Man with a 20kg tumour on his face

Looking at all the people above, is it right to say that they are better off dead than alive? Are their lives worthless and meaningless just because they were not born physically perfect/wholesome? I think there are too many issues to contemplate over this.
1. Should parents have the right to let their children die naturally if they are born imperfect?
2. Does the society have the right to eliminate the imperfect people of the world (assuming social darwinist mentality is applicable here)?
3. Are the "victims" allowed a choice to live or die?
4. Where do we draw a line between "not worth living", "worth a try" and "still can cope"?

Intelligence

2009-09-21T20:29:00.001+08:00

From The Blue Sweater, posted 21 September 2009

Note to readers of ContemplAsian: Sorry, I have not been posting for some time. Here's one from The Blue Sweater that would be quite meaningful...

I was having a long conversation with De Maitre about this topic, a topic that in many ways affect all of us in one way or another.

We talked about three things, the meaning of intelligence, government by elites, and of course, this:

The meaning and purpose of exams.

What is intelligence?

It’s a question that I have addressed many times while writing posts for ContemplAsian, Maitre’s blog. But more often, I expounded on the problem of the meaning of intelligence being misinterpreted or distorted, rather than exploring the true meaning of intelligence.

We all know in our society, intelligence is measured by grades and certification. But what Maitre has persistently tried to tell me in our conversation was that there must be more to intelligence.

I certainly agree.

But the thing is, the idea of intelligence, like many things of a conceptual nature, runs into philosophical problems.

I was reminded of my Philosophy module at this point. For the module, I covered one of Plato’s dialogues, entitled Meno, part of which is a discussion between the characters Meno and Socrates on the nature of “success”.

And one thing that is in common with both the ideas of “intelligence” and “success” is that it is extremely difficult to identity the one single criterion or factor that could define the idea.

Take Meno, for example. We can be successful as doctors, as scientists, as historians, as teachers, but what is common between them? Ultimately, it doesn’t answer the question, what IS success?

Likewise, we can be intelligent in this subject, intelligent in another, but what IS intelligence? Still not quite answered.

Of course, one might just give up and say that to come up with the questions I have put up above is itself intelligence.

Next, government by elites.

It’s one of Singapore’s key ideologies - Meritocracy. Those with the ability and skills should and could manage the affairs of the state.

But this reveals a fundamental question:

Do we need elites to govern, if governance is about furthering the interests of the people?

Because here we assume the elites know our interests. But can we always be so sure?

On the other hand, if we don't have elites (or experts, to use a less loaded word), then will things turn out right for the state?

Maitre brought up the idea of separating “technical” skills from the raw ability to lead, but I can’t help but feel that this dichotomy is fundamentally ambiguous. For a start, what is meant by “technical” skills? And what is meant by the “raw ability”?

Even if we take skills to be things like knowledge in economics, public administration, etc, it doesn’t separate leadership from the elites. And even if we say leaders should have the “raw ability”, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are the ones leading.

For example, the result is the bureaucratic state, where real power lies in the bureaucrats rather than the politicians.

This reminds me of a quote: Leadership is Action, Not Position.

Last, examinations.

Maitre was critical of the exam system. Well, such criticism is to an extent justified. The exam system sometimes creates undesirable effects that affect the overall well-being of the education system.

I once wrote a post in ContemplAsian about exams. There, I explored why we needed exams in the first place. Exams are needed as a mechanism with which to incentivise hard work and penalise sloth. This is the most important reason for exams.

Of course, many states and societies also come to use exams as a measure of success and as a tool of academic advancement, but these are, to me, secondary reasons, because many societies (especially in Europe) don’t have stringent exams, but still achieve (arguably) these results.

In a line, exams are a mechanism for competition.

It is true that exams can distort the meaning of education. When people forget the purpose of education and think that they “study so as to pass exams”, then education truly loses meaning.

But I think it’s not so much the institution of exams, but the procedures within the institution.

Take for example Continual Assessment. In university, part of it is participation in tutorial. The trouble with making such things gradable is that it creates certain... how should I put it... strange effects.

This is because participation is subjective, if not downright ambiguous. What is wanted is “meaningful participation”, but what exactly is “meaningful participation”?

So we have people talking a lot, but you can sense they are just hoarding air time.

And for people with nothing or no time to say anything, is it fair to them that they be penalised?

So what is intelligence? Turns out I still haven’t answered the question...

The Battle of the Sexes- who is worse when it comes to keeping secrets?

2009-09-18T12:21:00.000+08:00

A new study has suggested that women cannot keep secrets for more than 47 hours.

Researchers found that women are overcome by a burning desire to share gossip as soon as they hear it.

They will typically spill the beans to at least one other person in 47 hours and 15 minutes.

The study of 3,000 women aged between 18 and 65 also found that four out of ten admitted they were unable to keep a secret – no matter how personal or confidential the news was.

Intimate issues, true cost of purchases and affairs emerged top of the secret-keeping list, with girls most likely to share a secret chatting face-to-face, on the phone or via a text message.

Fortunately for some though, over a quarter (27 per cent) said they forgot what they were told the following day

Taken from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6199822/Women-cannot-keep-a-secret-for-longer-than-47-hours.html

That's not all, men have been found to gossip more than women because they need an ego boost.

MEN indulge in gossip more than women about secret liaisons, inept lovers and overpaid colleagues, a study says today.

It helps boost their confidence, says the survey of American college students. Women are more inclined to pass on tittle-tattle to bond with their friends and build closer relationships with colleagues.

Presenting her findings at the American Psychological Society's annual conference in Toronto, she said the report challenged the widely-held view that women gossiped more than men. She said: "Men definitely seem to be getting more out of gossiping than women.

"We found that men felt better about themselves when they criticised another person's behaviour. It gave them a sense of moral superiority and showed others that they knew the difference between right and wrong."

Miss Hom added that rather than creating strife in the office, gossip tended to relieve the stress of arduous work and the long hours spent in front of a computer screen. She said: "It is a vital function of social inter-action. Often it helps to break the ice among people."

The findings follow a study by the Industrial Society that said gossip should be encouraged in the office by providing more communal areas in the workplace.

Prof Nigel Nicholson, a psychologist at the London Business School and the author of a book on human behaviour, Managing the Human Animal, said: "Men enjoy a gossip as much as women, but they call it networking instead."

Taken from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1311999/Men-gossip-more-than-women-to-boost-their-egos.html

Well well, it seems both genders can't keep secrets at all! The only difference lies in their motivation for revealing secrets- men for the sake of "networking" and "ego", and women for the sake of "stress relief". Personally, I never trusted both sexes much. After all, you'll never know when you'll argue with friends and stop talking to each other. And you can never predict if your former friend wouldn't spill the beans on you.

Are Singaporean parents Authoritative or Negligent when bringing up their children?

2009-09-18T11:08:00.002+08:00

This post will be an extension of my previous post- "Should the parents of Ah Lians/ Ah Bengs be blamed for their deviant behavior". This time I will focus more on the parenting techniques identified by psychologists and what kind of children do they create.

Have you guys realized that over the past 10 years, there has been a sudden boom in the market for family/parent related magazines, forums and websites? In my opinion, this sudden surge in parenting interest could be due to the following factors:

-More highly educated parents who believe in the virtue of using “science” to establish the “best” parenting style for their children.
-Guilt that parents aren’t spending enough time with their children
-Increased social pressure to be nothing but the best. So parents want the best kids and hope to achieve that through the best parenting approach.

So what parenting styles are there? A psychologist named Barumrind came up with the concept of a tripartite classification of parenting styles in 1967 using four orthogonal dimensions- consistent discipline, maturity demands, destructiveness and encouragement of independent conducts. This results in 4 types of parenting styles: Authoritative, Authoritarian, Permissive and Neglecting.

This model is way too US centric anyway. =) In local Asian culture, beating children who are naughty is NOT considered abusive as long as it doesn't cross the line of causing the child long term emotional, psychological and physical trauma/injury. In the US system, they don't hold to the "spare the rod and spoil the child" ideology, so Asian parenting styles are classified as Authoritarian parenting simply because they lack the element of warmth. The Asian and European perception of warmth differs greatly. To Europeans, warmth/love is expressed through physical expressions of affection, such as hugs and kisses. To Asians however, warmth/love is expressed through less "intense" means such as cooking herbal chicken soup, nagging, caning a child when he/she is naughty, etc.

It is commonly excepted that the Authoritative parenting style is the most effective, especialy if parents adopt a democratic approach to parenting (as suggested by Baldwin et. al. in their 1955 paper). The democratic approach refers to parents who communicate the demands of the real world to thier children instead of their personal demands.

Given the penchant of Asian parents issuing orders to their children on what to do and what not to do, punishing disobedience with physical (canning), emotional (locking children out of the house) or verbal (shouting) aggression, Europeans think that Asians only practice the Authoritarian style of parenting, which generally creates more obedient and submissive children who appear to be less spontaneous, curious and creative. However, I would like to question- are Asian children obedient and submissive because of their parents or because of cultural norms?

Ask any Asian parent and they will tell you that they cane their children because they love them not and it is for their own good. Asian parents would also say that they make decisions for their children because their children are not ready to make an informed choice. These examples clearly violate the typical American belief that punishing children would result in nothing parental abuse in the long run and that children should be given the independence to make their own decisions in life.

In other words, Asian parenting should resemble the Authoritative model, so it should be within healthy boundaries. Unfortunately, the model does not account for additional factors such as parental kiasu-ism and having the fostering of parenting duties to maids.

To me, I think Singaporean children are over stressed by their parents' expectations of them. Furthermore, given our traditional beliefs, many Singaporean children today can't differentiate between what they want and what their parents want out of them. Somewhere, somehow the line got blurred along time. I think it’s just plain sad that many of the teenagers I’ve met don’t know what they are doing in life. They are just caught in the web of confusion stemming from a loss in life goals.

With the increased affluence among Singaporeans stemming from having both parents working full time, I would suggest that many Singaporean children suffer from emotional neglect even though their daily needs are met by their maids. For one, their parents return home late at night tired and irritated from a hard day at work. They usually spend a little time with their children but do not want to be bothered by their children’s constant demands for attention. I’ve seen parents telling their kids to go watch TV whenever their kids try to start a conversation on mundane stuff like “Daddy, Mummy, today my friend had a birthday party in school! We had a lot of balloons, than her parents brought ... … …” (you know children and their endless capacity for chatter).

I think Asian parents need to move on with time, given the exposure to western ideals that their children gain from watching television, young children today expect their parents to express more caring questions that most American parents typically portray in movies. These questions could be as simple as “how was your day in school?” or “did you enjoy yourself with your friends?”. This expectation failed quite badly in the face in typical Asian brusque mentality where the most likely question that children receive when they reach home after school would be “do you have any homework?”, “do you have any tests coming up?” or “any results out?”. That’s quite disheartening.

I also think parenting standards have dropped a lot in Singapore. I’ve met parents, who are blissfully ignorant of their child’s favorite dish, what time the child has to go to school, and the worst sin of all, they forgot their child’s birthday. And the saddest part of all, it is often the maid who remembers all of these. Parents leave their maids to make sure that their children have been fed, showered and have done their homework. Which inevitably, leads us to this conundrum of mine once more: "Are Singaporean Parents Authoritative in their approach but Negligent to their child's emotional needs?"

Spamming for idiots

2009-09-17T10:36:00.000+08:00

I feel very inspired to do a post on spamming thanks to “hairylongcock” (HLC), which I have publically dubbed as the ”baldshortworm”, who had made the conscious effort to return to my blog, not once, but TWICE to spam my wonderful (because its free) Chatroll with meaningless messages such as “jk”, “gh”, etc in random order. I'm not categorizing this post under the "What is" series because it lacks sufficient detail and does not cover a broader spectrum of the global issue of spamming.

I must say I’m honored with the effort taken by HLC to key it random alphabets approximately 50 times each time the dear spammer pops by, however due to its unconstructive nature, I had to ban him. I must say I prefer hecklers who will scold me at my Chatroll, I’m not perfect and I need a scolding now and then to squash my big head back into size. =) I’ll be more specific and say, I rather know WHY you hate me than to see you clutter up my entire Chatroll, only for me to delete it ALL away with 2 clicks… Hardly worth the effort, isn’t it?

So these are the common variations of spam, are there others that fall under this umbrella? HLC would still fall under the umbrella of a IM spammer who sends out bulk messages in person rather through a virus trying to promote some product. Personally, I always looked down on such IM spammers, because you can tell quite a few things about them (I’ll use HLC as a case study here):

1.They are incredibly free. I think any decent person with time on their hands can think of better things to do than to come to people’s IM and leave a brandom string of alphabets behind.
2.They are hard up for attention. Obviously, no one gives a damn for HLC, whether he’s dead or alive. He’s so desperate that he is reduced into being a faceless persona who failed to market his obviously handicapped anatomy as something mightier than it actually is. You know, they said “the pen is mightier than the sword”, I say “a worm is more pitiful alive than dead”. If you don’t get what I mean, too bad. =P
3.They are very stupid. Their vocabulary and knowledge is extremely limited. In HLC’s case, all he knows is how to beg for a blowjob because no one wants to do it even if he pays them to and how to type alphabets in random order.
4.They are failures in every sense of the word. When I had a tagboard as my guestbook, HLC drew a picture of an inch long penis and called it big. As you
can tell, I’m hardly impressed and I was trying very hard to keep a straight
face when HLC begged for blowjobs.

I’ve been tagging randomly at some Ah Lian’s blogs as well as at AALT2. Thanks to my heckling nature, I made a lot of enemies, not that I care because all of them are still immature and have underdeveloped brains (a.k.a. below 21 years old). I was quite amazed that liannies like to call me a spammer. I did mention this in one of my earlier posts about liannies. For one, I don’t do BULK messages, I just leave innocuous messages like “why must you swear so much? It makes you look crude and stupid.” That is enough for them to reply “who are you to tell me what to do!!!!” to which I’ll usually post my replies and get labeled a spammer once the blog owner is tired of me. I'll leave the blog when I'm asked to nicely.

I still believe in respecting the basic rules of courtesy- "be polite unless aggression is called for" & "don't overstay your welcome". I think I need to justify myself, I produce unsolicited advice indiscriminately, that’s all. I didn’t start off with an aim of pissing the blog owner off unlike most IM spammers like HLC. I’m a fair person, I’ll praise people if they are good and scold them if they are bad. If they fall between the grey area, I’ll shut up and hold my peace (or piss).

So back to the topic of spamming, what is spamming? Spamming is now universally accepted as the abuse of electronic messaging systems to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately. “Traditionally” speaking, spam used to refer to unsolicited adverts that unknown idiots shove into your letter boxes. With the progress of technology, spam now refers to unknown idiots flooding your emails, IM, mobile phones and fax transmissions with more adverts that you do not need.

Spam is harmless by nature, but they are certainly a hassle. For one, I have to clear my emails more often before they jam up the entire system. Furthermore, many spam emails and IM messages contain viruses in attached folders/links that actually compromise your account security and send out more spam emails to annoy those on your contact lists. For those of you who use msn, I’m sure you’ve received random links from friends who appear to be offline with messages ranging from “I can’t believe you were so cheap! (link)” to “Is that you in this picture? (link)" to “I lost over 20 pounds in three weeks! You should try out this acacia berry pills! (link)". Clicking on the link provided would only result in a viral invasion of your beloved computer.

So how to deal with spam? I say, ignore them and don’t respond. When spammers realize that there is no benefit in sending out such messages, the whole system will be redundant. As for annoying buggers you will meet online, just delete their post, ignore them and live goes on, WITHOUT them. They’ll get tired and stop after some time. In summary, don’t take things personally, they are people too, they’re just attention seeking and immature. Sex maniacs will die of STDs and the verbally abusive will get beaten up one day. Unsolicited hecklers like me will give up once we realize that your skull is thicker than a coconut.

P.S. whatever I said about ignoring spammers doesn’t work on me, I have this obsessive-compulsion to insult them back.

What would you do if you witness a case of abuse?

2009-09-13T15:06:00.000+08:00

Oh my, oh my, I was at a complete loss for words when I saw this video. My first thought was “OMG, than man is such a CMI (cannot make it).” Second thought was “OMG, what a bitch”. I have a question for my readers out there, I hope you guys will respond through the comments because I won’t be around at the Chatroll much…

“What will you do if you saw this happening in your neighbourhood?”

a.Ignore them on walk on?
b.Intervene and stop that woman from abusing the guy?
c.Others. (Please elaborate)

Personally, I do not condone physical violence unless the person REALLY deserves it. But I draw a line at humiliation. No matter what that guy did, this woman really crossed the lines of decency when she kept grabbing his balls repeatedly in PUBLIC, no less. Never mind the pain, it’s just downright humiliating. I hope she meets a domineering man who will whack her boobs whenever they quarrel in the middle of a crowded shopping mall.

So what would I do when I see this short of nasty behavior along the streets of Singapore? This is what I would do:
1.Walk up to the couple and tell that woman to stop that disgraceful behavior.
2.Take of my right shoe.
3.Slap that woman for mistreating that guy.
4.Slap that guy for letting that woman treat him like this.
5.Walk away feeling satisfied

Oops, I sounded violent didn’t I? But violence would wake the both of them up than by all mean. Actions do speak louder than words. Sometimes a tight slap works better than starting a verbal fight with people who think with their fists more than their mouths.

Singapore-the Club of Inspiring Elitists who should learn the value of shutting up if they can't do better

2009-09-13T10:40:00.000+08:00

Recently, Ris Low came into the spotlight when everyone started critizing her English- "How on EARTH could someone of her calibre represent Singapore?? So MALU!!" Initially, I was nodding my head in full hearted agreement because she wasn't exactly what I would call "beautiful" or "hot" and her English was a monumental tragedy! She was obviously inarticulate and has trouble trying to organize and express her thoughts and feelings. The words that came out of her mouth were jumbled messes that were in a hurry to run out and trip over each other. The words she employed were really simple and weird...

Furthermore, I felt that she just revealed her ignorance with regards to South Africa when answering question about African-inspired fashion. It’s not just about leopard prints and zebras… In fact, most of the African inspired fashion is largely based on traditional tribal designs based on geometric patterns! The emphasis is on clothes that are outdoor look, color and comfort. Leopard prints and feathers are largely a by-product of the imposition of western ideals on a backward nation. The people there rarely wear fur and feathers except for tribal festivities, simply because it’s too damn hot.

This is an example of Safari-inspired Fashion:

I disagree with her idea of how to carry off animal prints without looking trashy, but I won’t go into it beyond the point “less is more” and no “mix and match”. I would also like to add that fashion is NOT about yourself… The opinion of others DO matter, they decide if you look like an ass or elegant. Your personal opinions do not matter in this case. So back to the old girl, is it that embarrassing to have her as a representative of Singapore? I thought of this question overnight and watched this video again. Surprisingly, I found myself reaching some new conclusions.

1.Nervousness
It is possible to attribute her extreme self-centered speech and bad choice of words to her nervousness. It was quite clear from her body language that she was very nervous. But if that’s the case, would she make a suitable representative for Singapore? She might be required to do speeches and rub shoulders with the political/industrial elites, would her nervousness make her look like a terrible village idiot?

2. Long tongue
I would attribute the countless mispronunciations to her long tongue, or at least I think she has a long tongue. She always sounds like she’s slurping her words. So can’t really blame her for that.

3. Ignorance
Singapore is a country with literate people who are both knowledgeable and yet ignorant in their own way. Thanks to our education system, our knowledge of the world is limited to what we can learn from the success of EMDCs and the reasons why ELDCs still cannot make it. Little effort is done to highlight the failures of EMDCs and how ELDCs do achieve successes slowly but ultimately. I’m hardly surprised when most of the Singaporeans I’ve spoke to:

- think that South Africa refers to the entire African continent
- have no idea that Egypt is part of the African continents
- have no idea what Biltong is
- are blissfully unaware that South Africa isn't just full of Savannas, there are deserts and jungles too! (I dunno how Singaporeans pass their geography exams)
- think the all of Africa still practices animalist worship. WRONG, some African cultures/tribes have been practicing Islam and Christianity as well for hundreds of years.
- are completely ignorant the South Africa is one of the MOST dangerous countries in the world (SA makes the US look safe).

Judging from such communal ignorance, who are we blame her for being ignorant when her strongest critics often need to look at themselves in the mirror first? I refuse to believe it when people insist they are NOT ignorant- rubbish, you can never know enough.

4. Age
She's only nineteen, some might say she should be mature enough, but I beg to differ. Unless she has a voracious appetite for books, nineteen is still the age of innocence and ignorance. She has yet to achieve the financial and emotional independence to see the world as it truly is. Nineteen is still the age where people think that the world is their piece of cake and opportunites for success are open and equal for everyone. They stil need to learn that whilst everyone is equal in society, there are some who are more equal than others. It is at the age where they still think about themselves first over others, the day they start putting others before themselves is the day where they full achieve maturity.

So is it a tragedy for her to represent Singapore? Are her critics any better than her? I always believed that criticism should be constructive and one should not criticize others unless one can prove to be better. I would openly criticize Ris Low because I believe that I’m way better than her in terms of worldly knowledge, fashion sense and linguistic expression. However, I will admit that I’m chronically shy when it comes to talking in front of a group of people. So fair is fair, I’ll shut up because I lost to her in one field.

Now let me move on to bitch about the other Singaporean critics! The main criticism is leveled at her language. I used to think Singapore was a place where good English was heavily prized. That ideal was smashed when I entered the working world. Based on emails and phone calls with “graduates”, “lowly clerks” and “warehouse guys”, I can safely say “Good English does NOT exist anywhere”. The good English that I see are usually from graduates, who consciously remember to follow grammatical rules and punctuations, and from Caucasians. However, it must be noted that not all Caucasians use good English, I’ve met some with worse English than an average kid from primary 6. So does good English have to be a must have for a representative in Singapore?

If you’ve noticed, Singapore has a culture of over-prizing graduate beauty queens. Our beauty queens- Rachel Kum, Joanne Peh and Felicia Chin are highly popular because of their status as graduates! They are seen as the “smarter breed”. However, is that true? They are as human as anyone of us, are we creating an artificial benchmark for them as well as ourselves to reach? What’s wrong with diploma or NT students representing Singapore? They are not part of the elitist culture, but they ARE part of our Singapore culture aren’t they?

For too long we have been obsessed with the idea that only the best of Singapore would be shown to the world, with the other “undesirable” aspects conveniently being swept under the carpet, away from the curious eyes of “foreign investors and dignitaries”. Should we give them a chance to appear in the limelight for once and accept them as they are? They are integral aspects of the culture after all, and the elitist club members are by no means perfect themselves…

As my friend SH said, such competitions are useless beyond their entertainment value. So what's the point of having such competitions anyway? It is all pointless competition engaging pointless people inviting pointless critics. Shouldn't such resources be channeled to more constructive activities such as saving Taiwanese flood victims? After all, the title of beauty queen is just a temporary crown, temporary fame and unnecessary pressure to create a farcical "virtuous image". I could only shake my head sadly when the public insisted that Rachel Kum be stripped of her status as beauty queen just because of some suggestive pictures of her being posted online. Must the public always pretend to have this moral high ground? I’m sure everyone had their heydays that they would rather not mention to their kids today. It’s just a meaningless competition for an empty crown, there’s no need to hold up their personal flaws against them- nobody is perfect.

Guest Post: SMRT

2009-09-08T14:44:00.000+08:00

Response to WK's No Eating or Drinking: Fine $500 post
WRITTEN BY: MING FENG
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2009: SMRT introduces the complete ban on consuming all form of food, including plain water, on all trains.

2011: SMRT bans sleeping on trains, the rationale being "dunno, just for the heck of it." Offenders are fined $500.

2012: The notorious East-West line claims the first victim, who died of dehydration after attempting to ride from Pasir Ris to Joo Koon.

2013: Fine raised from $500 to $5,000.

2013: Fine raised from $5,000 to $50,000.

2013: Fine raised from $50,000 to $500,000.

2014: SMRT bans singing, loud handphones, talking louder than 45 decibels, not keeping to the left on escalators and not giving way to alighting passengers, as part of their motto of "Moving People, Enhancing Lives".

2015: SMRT renamed to SMaRT despite their rules being quite on the contrary. SMaRT changes motto to "Moving People, OUR Way".

2016: SMaRT bans inhaling of plain water, after one commuter attempted to justify the ingestion of plain water through the nose as "inhaling, and not drinking, and therefore you can't fine the shit out of me". The man was detained for being a public nuisance.

2018: 172 people died from dehydration while attempting the "Coast to Coast" feat, riding from Pasir Ris to Joo Koon without alighting to drink water. Local adventurer Mr S.C Khoo becomes the first man in the world to succeed in this feat, becoming a national hero once again.

2019: SMaRT caught 783,402 people attempting to drink or inhale plain water on the train, and decided to make smuggling more than 18 grams of plain water into trains a capital offence. In the same year, SMaRT declares a profit of $402 billion, a world record for a public transport company, while denying that fines make up the bulk of their profits.

2019: First person executed for attempting to smuggle a bottle of NeWater into trains.

2021: A commuter with 18kg of plain water strapped to his body, managed run through the water detector gates, evade pursuing station officers, and charged through the ticket gantry without paying. He later disappeared into the peak hour crowd and was last seen distributing water on the platform. The Water Bearer, as he was later affectionately known among commuters, was branded a hero by the people but was never seen attempting the feat again. SMaRT arms their station officers with police-issued MP5 submachine guns after the infamous incident. The SMaRT management deals with the humiliation by likening the Water Bearer's actions to that of "a terrorist, a suicide bomber", and threatens to shoot any commuter attempting to emulate the Water Bearer.

2027: To solve the problem of commuters not giving up seats to the elderly, the pregnant and the handicapped, SMaRT bans the elderly, the pregnant and the handicapped from taking trains. SMaRT buys over SBS Transit.

2030: After a nine-year hunt, the Water Bearer was finally caught and was due to be sentenced to death. However, he escaped through the window inside one of the toilets in a detention facility. The notorious Window was last reinforced in 2008 when a wanted terrorist escaped through it. The Water Bearer was never seen again, despite eye-witnesses reported seeing him swimming in the Straits of Malacca with a flotation device fashioned out of 180 NeWater bottles hours after he was reported missing.

2034: The number of deaths related to the plain water drinking ban exceeds that of the Death Railway, earning SMaRT the nickname of "The Death Transit".

2035: SMaRT successfully monopolises public transport after completing the buyover of ComfortDelgro. The people likened the move to an experience similar to the Japanese Occupation. SMaRT shot down the claim, saying nobody in this generation has ever been through the Japanese Occupation, and therefore there is no basis of comparison. SMaRT ridership at an all-time low.

2036: In a brilliant collaboration with the government, private transport, including bicycles and tricycles, are completely banned from the roads. SMaRT encourages the people to take their world class public transport service. SMaRT ridership at an all-time high. SMaRT embarks on the Great Leap Forward programme, massively and rapidly expanding their transport services.

2038: Taxi flag down rates raised to $24.40. Bus fares increased by 600%.

2048: Taxi flag down rates raised to $96.70. Bus fares increased by 600%.

2086: Great Leap Forward ends. There are now 666 kilometres of train tracks serving every corner of Singapore, including previously inaccessible places like the Live Firing Area, Pulau Brani, Pulau Sudong, Jurong Island, Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong. Batam extension opens. There is one taxi for every four people, and one bus for every 12. SMaRT employees make up more than half of the 15 million people in Singapore.

2987: SMaRT celebrates 1000 years of public transport service.

Animal Cruely vs Consumerism

2009-09-06T21:38:00.000+08:00

Warning: Disturbing video for animal lovers.

P3ST showed me this video clip about how animal cruelty occurs due to consumer demands.

Thrown, dropped, mutilated, and ground-up alive. This is the disturbing reality faced by hundreds of thousands of chicks each day at the world's largest egg-laying breed hatchery Hy-Line International in Spencer, Iowa.

New hidden camera footage obtained at this facility during a http://www.MercyForAnimals.org undercover investigation gives a disturbing glimpse into the cruel and industrialized reality of modern hatcheries.

The warm, comforting, and protective wings of these newly hatched chicks' mothers have been replaced with massive machines, quickly moving conveyor belts, harsh handling, and distressing noise. These young animals are sorted, discarded, and handled like mere cogs in a machine.

For the nearly 150,000 male chicks who hatch every 24 hours at this Hy-Line facility, their lives begin and end the same day. Grabbed by their fragile wings by workers known as "sexers," who separate males from females, these young animals are callously thrown into chutes and hauled away to their deaths. They are destined to die on day one because they cannot produce eggs and do not grow large or fast enough to be raised profitably for meat. Their lives are cut short when they are dropped into a grinding machine tossed around by a spinning auger before being torn to pieces by a high-pressure macerator.

Over 21 million male chicks meet their fate this way each year at this facility.

For the surviving females, this is the beginning of a life of cruelty and confinement at the hands of the egg industry. Before even leaving the hatchery they will be snapped by their heads into a spinning debeaker a portion of their sensitive beaks removed by a laser. Workers toss and rummage through them before they are placed 100 per crowded box and shipped across the country.

The callous disregard for animal welfare at this facility is not isolated. In fact, the conditions documented during this investigation are completely standard and acceptable within the commercial egg industry. Referred to by Hy-Line corporate leaders as mere "genetic products," these chicks are treated just as they are viewed as inanimate objects, rather than the sentient creatures they are.

Driven by consumer demand, the egg industry will continue to exploit, abuse, and kill day-old animals as long as doing so remains profitable. Empowered consumers can put their ethics on the table by choosing kindness over cruelty at each meal by adopting an animal-friendly vegan diet.

Would you call this evil? To me, I still think chickens are prey animals, so they are meant to be eaten. WK was horrified at the sight of the make chicks being ground up ALIVE. But to me, I found myself suprisingly at ease with this because they die almost instantaneously. Their entire nervous system has been ground up, the true death would have been instant. In contrast, breaking the male chick's neck may not always result in death! Beheading takes about 30 seconds for true death to occur.

Actually, I was more disturbed at the sight of the chicks' beaks being lasered off. If you're wondering why, I would liken that action to removing a teenager's teeth off and leaving him/her toothless for the rest of their miserable existence.

I think this video is also too biased against meat eaters. Chicken meat is a primary source of protein for most people. And given the monumental increase in human population the past 200 years, farming practices have to move on with time in order to meet the demands of the meat consumers. Ask any meat farmer, they don't have any affection for their lifestock! To love your animal would mean not being able to kill it. So should mega-farmers like Hy-Line be presecuted for mass-producing meat in the most efficient manner they could come up with?

As for rough handling of chicks, one must bear in mind that these are our food, not pets. Tender loving care requires time and effort, and it usually breed emotional attachment. This is something that all lifestock farmers avoid. These animals are a means of income, they are FOOD. Plain and simple, its just a matter of when and how they die. So to me, I think lasering off their beaks would be a greater cause of agitation, simply because it is making them suffer throughout the durations of their pathetic little lives. At least the males died quickly.

Another point to note is that asking everyone to turn vegetarian would be impractical either, this is due to a shortage of landspace for farming. Another cute thing is, this is the first time I've heard of males being killed off in the favor of females. ^^ So much so for zhong4 nan2 qing1 nu3. =P

The Political Opposition

2009-09-04T20:05:00.000+08:00

From The Blue Sweater, posted 4 September 2009

Ok, before I begin, the disclaimer:

First, this essay is about politics, but aims only to reflect on the realities of political opposition in Singapore.

Second, this is NOT a Political Science essay. So for any of my PS friends reading this, please don’t take it so seriously...

Alright, now I can start... though I seriously wonder whether those disclaimers are necessary in the first place.

There has been much news about opposition parties in general recently. Japan had a historic change in its politics, when the opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) ended the 55-year rule of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).

In Singapore, the opposition party PKMS hit the headlines (and made a fool of themselves) after fights broke out due to power struggles within the party. All these events made the discussion with a friend of mine today all the more meaningful.

A friend of mine took a module on politics in Singapore, and I was approached for ideas, as I took the same module during Special Semester.

I was given this question, which is not strictly a political science question, but nevertheless is related somewhat to the topic of Singapore politics: “I know some people who vote opposition, but when asked why, they didn’t have a real reason, other than ‘I just don’t like the PAP.’ How does it make sense?”

Well, my initial thought was that it simply doesn’t make sense. I was initially inclined to say that these voters are simply irrational, but then again, I personally felt that wasn’t really answering the question.

So I adopted a different approach to the question, that is, I wanted to address the question “Why do people vote opposition in the first place”.

I thought of three possible reasons.

First, there are people who simply do not support the PAP as it is. People might be dissatisfied with its elitism, the conservatism, or the political ideology of the party.

Second, there are people who sincerely believe that there should be more space and opportunities for the opposition. This is because of the belief that a true democracy is one in which ruling and opposition parties can compete on an equal basis, which is a situation that does not happen in Singapore. In addition, there is the desire for the greater presence of opposition in parliament, so that there is more debate and alternative voices in parliament.

Of course, one might rebut by arguing the role of the Nominated MPs in parliament, but the problem is, though NMPs are non-partisan by nature, they are screened by a PAP-dominated panel, which affects the neutrality of the NMPs.

Third, and more importantly, there are people who do not benefit, or are even marginalised by PAP policy. PAP policies and schemes might not have benefited them, and there are important structural contradictions in some of the government’s policy, such as the contradiction between cosmopolitanism and building national identity, between embracing globalisation and coping with the problems and challenges associated with it, such as the “digital divide”, which marginalises the older generation who lack the IT skills necessary in the digitised job market.

Though there are issues, it is ultimately important to note that these factors are ultimately inconsequential. Political opposition in Singapore is ultimately too weak, for a variety of reasons, to effectively challenge the PAP government (I won’t get to the reasons, one can write an entire essay out of these reasons, which I decline, having already done so just last semester). We are very unlikely, in the foreseeable future, to see the situation in Japan, when a long-ruling party is simply brought to its knees.

Nevertheless, I feel there is an important lesson for the PAP. The ineffective handling of national problems and issues can lead to public disillusionment. The PAP will not see the situation as that in Japan, but public dissatisfaction is easily manifested in the electoral swings, as evident in the PAP’s troubled years of 1980 and 1984.

The Sciences or the Humanities?

2009-09-02T07:50:00.000+08:00

From The Blue Sweater, posted 31 August 2009

This is one of the great debates in academia. For a very long time intellectuals and thinkers have been thinking of the differences between the natural sciences, the humanities, and the social sciences, and the debate is still ongoing.

I’m no academic authority, but I do have some thoughts of my own based on my (albeit limited) experience and knowledge of the differences between the sciences and the humanities.

It was a pretty ordinary after-lesson chat (and lunch), and a friend and I discussed the issues between the humanities and the sciences (among other somewhat unrelated topics), and how these differences relate to us.

Actually, there are similarities. Both make use of systematic methods in the process of generating knowledge and understanding.
But then, what are the differences?

I think the most important difference is that the sciences seek knowledge that is absolute, that is universal in nature, while the humanities look for the general in the particular, since the nature of the subject matter – humans – are difficult to predict and are changeable over time.

This brings me to my thought for today: are the differences between the sciences and the humanities critical? Are there costs if one made the switch from one to the other?

In the chat with my friend today, the answer seemed to be: “Maybe”.

I was a science student in secondary school. I took double pure science (physics and chemistry), along with double math (Additional and Elementary). It’s a combination that prepared me for a track in science education at the post secondary level.

But when my O level results came, I decided to make the switch. Instead of opting for the Science stream in JC, I’ve decided to go to Arts instead. The reason? Sheer realism (well, my math was horrible though I did fine for my sciences, but it was my Combined Humanities score that made the crucial difference). I remembered my teachers were quite flabbergasted at my decision, but looking at my humanities grade, they (kind of) let me be.

What my friend felt about the switch was that it would be difficult if one did not have the foundations in language. The humanities require a certain command of language since it’s reading and writing intensive. Being well-read and having a strong ability to express oneself is essential for a good performance in the Arts stream.

I thought: “You have a point”. After all, I do realize that I still have some weaknesses in this respect (since my friend told me I was the first ex-debater she’s out-debated, but, well, that’s beside the point. Anyway, debaters debate and get out-debated all the time).

What I do agree with, is that it does take a bit to adapt to the “switch”, if I can call it this way. It did take me a while to master the reading and writing skills necessary.

Since I was from a science background in secondary school, taking on Arts meant taking on a different set of reading material, adopting a different mode of thinking, and to be able to express my case. To be honest, it was difficult at times.

What happened next? I joined the debate society in JC. Debate taught me how to read, how to write, and most important, how to think in the Arts and Social Sciences way.

So to be out-debated was, well, quite expected really, since I knew I was the “late-bloomer” in debate, plus the fact that my JC didn’t have a strong debating culture in the first place.

But then again, since I did survive (or I wouldn’t have made it to NUS), that means there is no real cost in making the switch. It’s “maybe” for this reason. It’s good to start early, but there seems to be no real difference between early and late.

What could it be then? Maybe it’s the attitude, the willingness to put in more. Maybe it’s the training I had in debate, which taught me the skills and stimulated my mind.

So, the sciences or the humanities? I say: “Follow your heart (or your grades).” I know my heart’s with the humanities.

On Freedom of Speech

2009-09-02T07:48:00.000+08:00

From the The Blue Sweater, posted 30 August, 2009

“To speak or not to speak?”

That is the question, and the answer to which has persistently eluded me from time to time. Here I share my thoughts on what the freedom of speech is, and what it means for me.

I mentioned in ContemplAsian I had this horrible experience where I invoked the anger of someone while, exercising the freedom of speech, if you will, with a friend. The full story is in ContemplAsian, but long story short, I was chatting with a friend on a bus about school, and as we chatted we got someone we didn’t know angry, and it was a somewhat disturbing experience.

I had several thoughts after the incident, but it’s mainly about the other person, so here I’ll talk more about my own self-reflection.

Well, the problem might not have been as complicated as my friend and I thought. Maybe I was just too loud (after all, I’m aware of this bad habit of mine, where I lose myself during a conversation).

But then again, was it simply a matter of volume, or was there something more fundamental?

This brings me to my topic for today. What is the “freedom of speech”?

I feel that the freedom of speech simply means the ability to say what one thinks without the fear of suppression. Of course, there are important things to recognise, such as issues that are clearly “out-of-bounds”, like comments that threaten racial and religious harmony, and slanderous remarks. But putting those aside, there is freedom of speech in Singapore, at the very least, in principle.

But based on my experience that day, I think there are other issues to consider that are just as important.

First, if what is being said has the potential to cause public anger (like the things my friend and I discussed that day, which, to be quite honest, are quite cynical in nature), would that right still apply? It is certainly true that the freedom of expression should never compromise peace and harmony among people.

But then it begs the question: how would we know whether what we say could offend a person? My friend and I didn’t know we angered that particular person, and then again, the rest of the bus didn’t react in any way that meant displeasure (of course, there is a possibility they feel we were right, or they just can’t be bothered), and if we didn’t mention any names, or any specific institution, where was the need for the person to respond in the way he did? This was the question my friend and I never quite came to terms with.

Or just to quote my friend: “I think that’s his own problem.”

In other words, should we keep quiet simply because of the potential fear of someone getting angry, or should we keep quiet despite being as politically correct as we could? Either way it looks like we are better off quiet, but then, where is the freedom of expression then?

So maybe I was too loud. Maybe if I whispered to my friend this incident would have a different outcome, or would never have taken place.
This brings me to my second point. Is the freedom of speech conditioned not by what we say, but how we say it? This is a very plausible case. Since the point is to minimise disturbance or distress amongst others, it would help if the contents of the conversation is limited to just, say, my friend and I.

But then again, putting it into perspective, does it mean we can whisper to each other about how a certain race or religion is (whatever)? Certainly not.

Besides, if that person still managed to hear us, and still got angry, it’s still our responsibility, since the conversation has already spread beyond the two of us.

The bus, as an example of public space, shows indeed how the issue of free speech can be so complex.

To be honest, as I’ve said in ContemplAsian, I would apologise for making that person so angry, but I would not apologise for what I said, because I feel I have the right to talk about the issues regardless of my standing.

It was regrettable that what we said has caused the breach of peace, if I could put it that way, but ultimately, the balance between peace and free speech was never an easy one to strike in the first place.

Why De Maitre stopped supporting AAL team

2009-08-28T18:33:00.000+08:00

Did you know there is a new Anti-AAL blog up? =) No, I don't hate the blog. Love it so far because it is actually in good English!! Today, I want to talk about why I withdrew my support for AAL team even though I hate ALs. Unfortunately, the comment I left on WHAAL was a tragic parody of my usual standard of English. Learn from me guys, sleep deprivations turns you into a blubbering mass with badly expressed opinions. Ivans' parents are right, you need sleep to function well. Heh, unfortunately, I'm still going to be sleep deprived, so bear with me.

So there, with the help of my friend (who wants to remain anonymous for now) correcting my English, I'm going to repost up my comment.

The reason why I withdrew my support for AAL team even though I dislike ALs was because I think they have crossed the line of decency. Insulting a collective group of people who share common deviant behavioral traits is fine to me. BUT I certainly don't approve of the way the AAL team expresses their dislike for ALs.

For one I do not condone personal attacks. That means, I dislike the posting of personal friendster/facebook links, blog links, personal pictures, etc. Revealing a person's name is fine to me, but not the whole name. People deserve a little privacy and I think that should be respected. I have written posts about ALs before, and I only mentioned a few names as examples, and never in forms that can allow for their being identified, shamed, or cyber-bullied. I deem it more meaningful and constructive to focus on the general idiosyncrasies of their behaviours in a bid to bring them back onto the right paths faster than most of them normally would return to the straight path (i.e. before the age of 20).

I did air my displeasure with their penchant for pasting up pictures of ALs ripped out of the ALs' private blogs/friendster pages. Attempts to censor the pictures by strategically blocking parts of the face fell tragically flat when they pasted up the victim's friendster url. That's bullying as far as I'm concerned.

Abrupt as my switching of support from AAL to AALT2 might seem, I think it should be understood that I did so only out of my growing inability to stomach the fact that the AALs themselves were becoming the very things they sought to censure.

The conflict between AAL team and the ALs-at-large, has degenerated into an ugly brawl between "high-class and educated" ALs against the "low-class and not-so-educated" ALs. To me, plastering vulgarities all over your blog just cheapens your image and credibility. SO you might want to rethink about using vulgarities as well... =) After all, the moment you use the vulgarities Ah Lians use and stoop to their level, you become them and worse, seeing as to how they curse out of ignorance and yourselves, cockiness.

What makes an AL a AL goes beyond stupidity, rebonded hair and cheap clothes. It's the attitude as well. So if AAL is content going about bitching ALs on a personal level, they are just cyber ALs, period. As for the phrase-not afraid of "tsunamis" and "fire", well, it sounds like an average defensive, insecure and overly-defensive AL going "come larh, you think I scared ah". =P

By the way, AAL did use the word "Pandemic" correctly because they are using the rabid consumption of "DSLR related cam-whoring" as the context of an "infection disease" that is spreading across the AL population.

I agree that there is either good English or bad English. Unfortunately, there are many versions of English, so it's hard to say what is good English beyond good spelling, grammar and tenses.

I would assume that AAL team employs "standard" English to ensure that most ALs would understand them after all, your intent is to reform them, not mock at them senselessly with a holier-than-thou attitude, or is it? Based on my research, I can roughly conclude that ALs below 15 years of age still tend to use twit.

I prefer AALT2 because they are a lot more interactive and the focus is more on the stupidity and lack of maturity of ALs as a whole. I managed to talk and learn more about the reasons for why ALs chose to be deviant kids. Furthermore, they are willing to reverse their policies to respect the rights of the ALs on the individual level. They are a lot more respectable than AAL team in that sense.

What Would You Do?

2009-08-28T18:01:00.000+08:00

In this post WK is going to adopt a slightly different style. Usually I write about serious things pretty seriously, but today, I’m going to talk about something serious based on a bad experience I personally had one particular morning.

I was on my way to school with a friend, and we chatted while we were on the bus. Our conversation eventually moved in the direction of my pet topic, the education system (specifically the JC system), and we got critical of the system, commenting how it does a pretty inadequate job of preparing students for university.

But just as we were discussing the issue, the person who sat in front of us (another student at my school, whom neither my friend nor I knew) got very angry. And we could feel it. (I was dumber, I only realized it when he started getting vocal about it). So we kept quiet, right till we alighted from the bus, and went our own ways to our classes.

It was a very bad experience, and I, wouldn’t say was disturbed, but I was quite uncomfortable with his response.

Personally, and honestly, I would apologise for making him so angry, but I wouldn’t apologise for what I said, because first, we did not mention any names, and second, what we said was ultimately, true.

Even though I’m quite likely to be criticized for intellectual snobbery…
So, what did I say? This brings me to the issues I want to discuss today in this post.

As I have discussed in my previous posts, there are problems in our JC system. My friend argued that a problem was that JC was supposed to prepare us for university, but this intent was distorted by the A level system, which compelled teachers to prepare students for the exam rather than for university culture, which are two very different things.

I argued that another problem was that some teachers only teach the bare minimum. They teach precisely enough for the A levels. What I used to do (when I encounter such a situation, which I did) was to ask the teacher questions, and give ideas that were outside the textbooks, or from readings outside the required list, and possibly, out of anyone’s imagination (sounds like a crazy troublemaker, aren’t I?).

My friend added that it had a good effect of pushing the boundaries of the lesson, though not everyone will be happy with this, because some people really, just want the bare minimum, and to be spoon-fed. They either don’t have the energy, or the time, or the capacity, or all of the above, to deal with such things.

My friend then added that such students ultimately suffer in university, because in uni, lecturers never feed, and you shouldn’t expect to be fed anyway.

The second issue is that of learning. We discussed this particular point about the differences between the sciences and the humanities, and my friend commented that in the sciences, one problem was that students learn formulae, are told to remember them, but they may not understand how these formulae actually come about, or the underlying concepts behind them. In other words, they know, but they don’t understand. (I think that comment was the boiling point of that guy I was talking about earlier).

So, what got that person so angry? The real reason I will never know, but a fair guess would be, I hit a soft spot, or stepped on his tail. Something, somewhere in the conversation related to him somewhat, and he felt angry about it.

But then it begs the question, if what we said was unfair or untrue, why respond like that? A mature university student surely would be able to take up a debate?

Besides, by responding angrily, aren’t you already implying we were right, and you do have a problem? A wise person would have simply laughed it off, or kept quiet (but then, we could have been wiser to have kept quiet too). But well, all these are beside the point.

I think another reason for that anger is that we threw out of the bus window many ideas and assumptions about school, which some (like probably that guy) would rather hang on to.

For example, it is safe to say that all who go to NUS (or any of the other of the Big Three) are smart people. After all, we survived the JC system, many probably very well.

But, the good performance experienced in JC may not be continued in university. A former triple or quadruple ‘A’ student may find him/herself in trouble because of schoolwork.

And the issues we discussed during that conversation in the bus were PRECISELY the reasons for this contradiction.

But there are people who refuse to accept it. When they don’t perform and they don’t understand why, they blame everyone except themselves, or they hang on to the reasons we’ve thrown out of that bus window. They refuse to understand that there are fundamental problems.

I am not a smart person. I wasn’t the “straight A student” in JC, I am not some student in law or medicine, but I can say my grades in university are, so far, good.

I know it doesn’t give me the authority to say what I said, but I feel that we have the right to talk about these things, regardless of our standing.

If you meet the same situation as I did, what would you do?

Religious Rights or Secular Space?

2009-08-24T17:50:00.000+08:00

It’s a pretty incendiary title, alright, but the issue is one that has to be engaged one way or another, and not just swept under the carpet, hoping it’ll never happen to us: taking our religious lives into public space.

De Maitre showed me this article a few days ago, about two separate, but related issues. The first was on this French Muslim lady who was refused entry into a public swimming pool wearing a “burkini” (which is like a swimsuit covering one from face to ankle). The second issue was that some of the UK’s public swimming pools are starting to impose Muslim dress codes and “Muslim-only” swimming sessions.

Well, I’m not going to talk about the swimming here. What I am going to talk about is the related issue that spring out of these cases:

Individual rights or not?

Personally, it’s everyone’s, and anyone’s right to lead a religious life, if one so wishes to do so. But the issue is, there are bound to be situations where secular systems prevail, especially in a secular, multi-racial and multi-religious society.

Take for example the (in)famous tudung (headscarf) incidents a few years back. A few Malay parents insisted on letting their children wear the headscarf to government schools, despite such action being against the schools’ dress codes.

When I first heard of the incident, the first thing that came to my mind was “what’s the problem? Why so persistent?” It’s understandable to want to follow a religious life, but I thought the parents were missing two important points.

First, they wanted their children to have a good education. But to do so, they have to respect the institution of the school. The school has rules that are to be respected, and these rules are meant to provide the conditions for constructive education under a multi-racial and religious setting.

Second, a religious life isn’t simply one’s form of dress, it’s about internalising the values that underpin the religion.

It’s the right of the parents to want a religious life, but what about the right of the children to a good education? If the two come into conflict, which is more important? The wiser parent would know. Ultimately, it begs the question, if they so desire a good religious upbringing for their children, why reject the madrasas (religious schools)? If they want a mainstream school, why reject its rules?

It’s ultimately the children who pay the price for the religiosity of the parents.
To return to the question, is it an individual right? Well, arguably yes. The person does have a right to lead a religious life. But it must not be at the detriment of others in the community, who may not share the same ideas. And as I have mentioned, one may lose some of his/her own rights in the process.

What is the Purpose of Exams?

2009-08-19T12:17:00.000+08:00

I was inspired to do this post after reading an article about how the A levels in Britain were becoming so easy, one official actually said, “A monkey could sit for the exam”. Of course, Singapore’s standards are slightly different, but there are still some important issues that are worth discussing, first, are our exams easy or difficult? Second, what is the purpose of exams? Third, which is better, easy-to-pass exams, or high-standard but difficult exams?

First, Singapore’s exams are well, doable. It is difficult to set a fixed conclusion on the level of difficulty of our papers, since there are different standards and levels of difficulty across subjects. The nature of subjects also creates challenges in determining the difficulty of the exam.

For instance, Chinese is fun, but dead. It’s not very difficult per se, but the way it’s taught makes it difficult.

Doing well for exams ultimately depends on a combination of personal effort, attitude, a passion for the subject, and a degree of personal aptitude.

As for whether or not exams in other countries are too easy, the problem is related to the issue of grade inflation (what Singapore students are familiar to as “moderation”). But there is a critical difference. Moderation refers to adjusting the results to reflect estimated performance during the actual exam, because for some schools (like my secondary school) in-house exams are ridiculously tough. Grade inflation is really inflating the grades so that more students appear to do well.

But it begs the question, are students really worthy of their grades?

Second, on the purpose of exams.

What is the purpose of exams? A measure of intelligence? A process to enable promotion within the educational system? A system of competition to reward the industrious and penalize the idle? All these reasons are possible, but they neither serve, nor support the true purpose of education, to impart knowledge and skills.

Some might argue that they test students whether they remember their stuff. But education isn’t simply remembering stuff. Given the ever increasing quantity of knowledge and information in the world today, it is practically impossible.

So what should exams be? Rather than test content, they could test skills. Skills need not be remembered, they should be internalized. To the point it really becomes “in the blood”.

Lastly, on the preferable exam system.

Perhaps exams really are a “necessary evil”, because we ultimately need some system of competition to enforce standards, to reward the industrious and penalize the idle. This is what makes our education system so tough, and yet so successful.

Therefore, rather than say “we don’t want exams” we should explore this question instead: “what kind of exam system do we want?”

In this post I brought up two possibilities, in response to the article I’ve read.

One, an easy exam, or a tough but high-standard exam.

Of course, there are problems with my definitions. “easy” and “tough” are fundamentally ambiguous and relative concepts. These two terms differ between two individuals within the same educational system, between different educational systems, and between students from different streams or faculties. A Singapore student might find a math problem a piece of cake, while an American student of the same level might struggle.

But nonetheless, there is still value in the notion of “easy” and “tough”. This has to do with the purpose of exams. If exams are meant to be competitive in nature, that they should be “tough”, the “tougher” the better. There is no point in passing students for the sake of passing them. This will have a detrimental impact on educational standards.

Of course, making exams tough doesn’t mean leaving students out to die. Teachers must have the means to teach as well, especially in teaching the necessary thinking skills which are of utmost importance. Besides, since exams shouldn’t be intellectual bulimia, wouldn’t a “tough” exam system where students simply have to remember and regurgitate yet more stuff defeat the whole purpose of education?

As I come to the end of my post, I’ve realized that I’ve gone quite far from the article. it’s exaggerating perhaps to say that a monkey can sit for a human exam and pass, but the idea is quite clear: that exams for humans probably no longer serve a human purpose.

Strange Creatures Series- Do Dragons exist?

2009-08-18T08:11:00.000+08:00

Dragons are legendary creatures with reptilian/serpentine traits that appear in myths in cultures all over the world.Everyone assumes that Dragons are mythical creatures that no longer exist today. But did you know there have been reports of dragon sightings? That sound's looney right? Where on earth can such a huge creature be hiding in? As you see, I assume that all dragons are huge creatures and not their sorry excuse of a cousin- Mushu.

So, let me show you Dragons from around the world:
China: This is a country that is permanently obsessed with Dragons as symbols of power and prosperity. The Dragons in Chinese mythology are considered benevolent and they are very anatomically concise- there 117 scales, out of which 81 are of the yang essence (positive) and 36 are of the yin essence (negative). A Dragon with 5 claws was the representative of the Emperors whilst a dragon with 3 or 4 claws was associated with commoners. Chinese dragons are serpentine creatures with long bodies and four legs. They look elegant yet powerful. Due to its benevolent nature, it doesn't breath fire unless it wants to show divine displeasure.

Europe: European dragons are malevolent creatures who are just out to eat virgins and going for communal BBQs at the nearby villages. In comparison to Eastern Dragons, they are more stout, they have wings and they traded the hair/fur for more horns/spikes. They look much more muscular and aggressive. Unlike the Chinese dragon, which remained as an impressive creature over centuries, the European Dragon shrank in size and stature over the years. The Dragon was a symbol of the Pagan era and with the spread of Christianity, Dragons were reduced to the role of an evil creature being subdued by the victorious arm of Christ (like St George). Looking at the two pictures above, you might notice how the first pagan picture shows a brave hero tackling a bigger dragon, whereas the stylized St-George-killing-the-dragon had a tiny dragon that looked more like a lizard submitting to the might of St George. There are many more stories regarding European Dragons that date back in time, such as the story of Siegfried the Dragon Slayer in the German Nibelungenlied, but I won't go into them because it can go on for over 5 pages.

Ancient Middle-East: I will lump 3 ancient Dragons here from Babylon, Ancient Egypt and Sumeria together here because these three cultures engaged in a lot of cultural exchange with each other.
There are two types of Babylonian Dragons that I know off. One is Marduk (picutre above) that guards the walls of the city and the other is Tiamat, the symbol of chaos. They have many other Dragon stories, but the exact role of Dragons in the life of the common folk remains unknown.
Ancient Egypt's "Dragon" is actually a snake with wings who is always trying to take away the sun. As a result, the ancient Egyptians hated Apep/Apophis.In the case of Sumer, we can only tell that the dragon and dragon slayer(s) relationship primarily involves the dragon, Kur, committing some great wrong against the gods and either a god or goddess appearing to vanquish it. Many portions of the story are still missing as many parts of the tablet were still in fragments. You can read more at the richeast.org link below.

Hisotrial Dragons aside, let's take a look at the list of Dragon sightings that occured recently:

The most scientifically reliable description is that of Peter Karl van Esling, the director of The Hague Zoo, who gives an account of a water dragon sighted during a voyage to collect marine species in the Atlantic in 1860:

We saw a gigantic reptile, bright blue and silver in colour. He swam gracefully
around the ship before the sailors' eyes, and submerged himself without a
splash. His eyes were enormous, with vertical pupils and an intelligent expression. They seemed luminous, but this effect could be due to the reflection from the setting sun.

His head was adorned with bright blue and green crests. Even though he disappeared under water and did not reappear, he appeared to measure some seven meters in length, and on his back they could make out something resembling a crest or fins. It was serpent-like, but the sailor thought they saw legs and claw.

They baptized him Megophias.

French-American scientist Rafinesque-Schmaltz wrote of a two hundred foot long sea-serpent seen by Mrs. W. Lee, in 1805, near Cape Breton and Newfoundland. She stated: "Its back was dark green and it stood in the water in flexuous hillocks and went through it with impetuous noise."
On May 15th, 1833, in Mahone Bay, forty miles west of Halifax, three officers and two enlisted men of Her Majesty's Navy were relaxing on the deck of a fishing boat when they sighted at a distance of one hundred and fifty to two hundred yards:
". . . the head and the neck of some denizen of the deep, precisely like those
of a common snake, in the act of swimming, the head so far elevated and thrown
forward by the curve of the neck as to enable us to see the water under and
beyond it. The creature rapidly passed, leaving a regular wake, from the
commencement of which, to the forepart, which was out of water, we judged its
length to be about 80 feet; and this within rather than beyond the mark . . ."
The first recorded sighting in Canadian water was on July 15th, 1825, in Halifax Harbour. It was seen by several people from entirely separate positions. They described it as having "a body as big as a tree trunk... The animal had about eight coils or humps to its body and was about sixty feet long."

Watch this video and decide for yourself- is it real? Was it merely coincidental? Or was it a product of modern technology?

Our ancestors told us stories of many types of dragons- mainly water dragons and flying dragons. This seems to be a constant factor in folklores throughout the world. What made them come up with the concept of dragons if dragons never really existed to begin with? Some have speculated that the myth of dragons was born out of the discovery of dinosaur bones- probably the ones like the Brachiosaurus or Apatosaurus (in layman terms- the long necked dinosaur). Typical of the brainy morons that we are, it is assumed that our ancestors lacked the expertise to piece the (probably incomplete) set of bones together to form a proper dinosaur and created a creatures which they deemed to be a dragon. Heh, we call ourselves clever and we can't even reverse engineer accupuncture, treppaning, the Pyramids of Egypt, etc. So I think humans need to shut up and be less arrogant about their beliefs in their alleged superiority. We have traded our brains for technology- now isn't that a sad thing??

Information Taken from:
http://www.thecryptmag.com/Online/23/Dragonsightings.html
http://www.richeast.org/htwm/dragons/dragons.html

Strange Creatures Series- Do Mermaids exist?

2009-08-17T08:49:00.000+08:00

This will be the first of my series of posts on strange creatures. As my regular readers should know by now, I love the unknown. I find it extremely interesting and thought provoking as it challenges our assumptions on what the world is. Today, many people like to think they are rationale and logical, leaving no space for the supernatural in their daily lives. Well, humans have existed for thousands of years and our history is steeped with superstition, stories of weird creatures, spirits and demons around us. I would also like to point out that superstition seems to be pretty uniform across cultures. Isolated cultures such as the Aztecs, Vikings, Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Chinese and Polynesian all have tale of dragons, mermaids, etc. Is it because we have the same ancestral origin? Or is it because our ancestors have encountered such creatures before? So are these creatures myths or legends (albeit rare or extinct today)?

So today, I shall focus on mermaids. Mermaids are aquatic creatures with a human head and torso but a tail of an aquatic animal, normally a fish. Some cultures portray mermaids as saviors of drowning sailors, other say that mermaids cause nothing but trouble by distracting sailors and thereby wrecking their ships. Given that most sailors are horny wrecks after being out at sea for months, it is hardly surprising that anything resembling a woman is enough to catapult them into state of ecstasy, making them oblivious to any form of danger. Please note that when there are mermaids, there are mermen. =) Nature is about balance.

The earliest known mermaid story appeared in Assyria about the Goddess Atargatis who killed the mortal shepherd that she loved. Ashamed, she threw herself into a lake to take n the form of her fish. Unfortunately, her divine beauty would not be concealed so she took the form of a mermaid. The earliest representation showed her as a fish with the head and legs of a human. Later it evolved into the “traditional” form of a humanoid head and torso with a fish tail (it’s all about symmetry I guess). The story about Atargatis also went on to inspire the story of Derketo the Nereid of Greece, tales of the Sea people in Arabian Nights, malevolent and benevolent mermaid-human interactions throughout other cultures globally.

Now, let me examine the evidence of the existence of mermaids in the modern context. There have been claimed sightings of living and dead mermaids throughout history. Let me list a few:

5th century CE- Physiologus described a “real” mermaid in his book, Bestiary.
1493 CE- Christopher Columbus reported seeing three mermaids playing and jumping out of the water. He did lament that they weren’t as beautiful as he expected, but human enough in the face.
1560 CE- Autopsy performed on 7 mermaids caught by fishermen in Ceylon (Sri Lanka).
1608 CE- Henry Hudson and his crew saw a mermaid near Russia. Unlike the typical fish tail, he said that she had a “tail of a porpoise and speckled like a mackerel”.
1718 CE, a "sea wife" is caught off the island of Borneo and put in a large vat, where it died after a few days. It was heard to utter cries like a mouse.
1739 CE, sailors of the ship, Halifax, caught and ate several mermaids in the East Indies. Apparently they tasted like veal.
1830 CE, a farm woman in the Outer Hebrides spotted a mermaid frolicking in the water. They were unable to capture her alive but did manage to kill her with a rock. The corpse was seen and described in detail by Alexander Carmichael, a well-known scholar.

In addition the claimed sightings, we have preserved bodies of "mermaids" to show! They are namely the ningyo mummies stored in Japanese temples. Eating their flesh is said to give one longevity. Please note that these mummies are not real, they were "proven" to be made of animal parts that were stitched together. But it could be the influence of science on superstition too! So you decide for yourself whether you want to believe in these photos. Either way, I'll never ever going to look at kiam-he (salted fish) the same way again.

This mummified 6-feet mermaid carcass was from Shikoku, Japan.

What I find most creepy about this mummy is the eyes... Staring right back at you. Hehehe, just joking, I don't get creeped out by mummies because I love to study them! This one is cute because of the eyes. It is normally one of the fastest organs to rot due the high levels of liquids. This is one of the few mermaid mummies with fully scaled bodies.

This is a foot long Ningo that was actually created in Japan in the 19th century. A mummified monkey and a dried fish were sewn together to produce this creature.

Look carefully at this mummy, I would agree that this is a fake because of the sudden break between humanoid and aquatic components of the body. If you look at preserved bodies, there should be a form of harmonious "shrinking" during the drying out process.

This mermaid mummy at Zuiryuji Temple in Osaka, which was bestowed to the temple as an offering from a Sakai-area trader in 1682.

Again, this mummy has a remarkably preserved set of eyes. You might note that the break between the scales and skin seems pretty harmonious and the corpse/carcass looks "intact" after the process of drying out.

Another mummified mermaid is preserved at Myouchi Temple in the city of Kashiwazaki in Niigata prefecture. This mermaid is about 30 cm long and is posing with its hands up near its cheeks.

This Mummy is very unique because of its head. It has 2 holes for the eyes and 2 holes for the nostrils and sharp teeth. It looks like there is a layer of clay on it due to the visible cracks on in. In a sense, it looks like a chinchirro mummy, which has a layer of clay painted onto it.

This mermaid mummy is preserved at Karukayado Temple outside the city of Hashimoto in Wakayama prefecture. The 50-cm long mummy has fang-like teeth that protrude from its wide open mouth and both of its hands are raised to its cheeks, like the previous mermaid. Its lower body is covered in scales, and there appear to be the vestiges of fins on its chest, as well as a pair of nipple-like protuberances.

This mermaid is amazing to me because of the amount of care devoted into the details.

This mummy is in the possession of a Shinto sect headquartered in the city of Fujinomiya near the base of Mt. Fuji. At 170 cm tall and 1,400 years old, it is the largest and oldest known mermaid mummy in Japan. The mermaid has an unusually large head that is bald, except for some hair growth that extends from its forehead to its nose. Its eyes and mouth are open. It has webbed hands with sharp claws, and a 20-cm long tail. The lower body has a bone structure similar to that of a fish, but it is unclear whether or not the upper body has a bone structure. The entire body shows signs of having been ravaged by moths.

Legend has it that this mermaid appeared to Prince Shotoku (Shotoku Taishi) as he was passing along the shores of Lake Biwa (about 1,400 years ago). The hideous beast told the prince about how it had been transformed into a mermaid as punishment for making a living as a fishermen within the boundaries of an animal sanctuary. The mermaid claimed that over many years it had come to a clear understanding of the horrors of destroying life, and that it was prepared to move on to the next world. As a final wish before dying, though, it asked the prince to establish a temple using the mermaid’s body as a centerpiece, where it could be used to educate people about the sanctity of life. The mermaid then died. The prince took the mermaid’s body and set up a temple as requested. But after a number of strange occurrences, the mummy was passed on to another temple. The mummy changed hands several times before ending up at its current location at the base of Mt. Fuji.

Isn't it interesting how physical evidence does not match the sightings reported by people? Or how physical evidence cannot express a mermaid's ability to communicate with people as the stories tell? Every mermaid mummy that has been examined by scientists have been declared fake. And yet, hundreds of people every year claim to see mermaids frolicking in the waters. So are mermaids real or merely figments of our imagination that have been constructed by cultural beliefs?

There seems to be a fixed set of poses and features that these mummies share, such as the curved tail, stiff arms held up to their faces, scales, etc. On the personal level, I'm inclined to say that these mummies are fakes due to their dramatic posing. If they are truly natural mummies, they would have been a little more "relaxed" in their poses. If you have seen a kiam-he, you should realize that their bodies and limp, with the tail lying straight, not the curved tail that you see on these mummies. The only way to create such poses is to bind the body in a fixed position during the mummification process. I did another post on preserved bodies before, you can read it here.

Personally, I've never examined the Ningyo mummies, nor have I seen any documentries performing CT scans on them. So I can't concretely declare if they are fakes or not. To me, to fully qualify them as fakes, I would like to see CT scans establishing that the mummie's innards and bone structures do not match in anyway. However, given their status as sacred objects, I think that is highly unlikely.

So do you believe that mermaids exists for real? Do we need concrete evidence to prove that something exists?

Research taken from:
http://www.beautiful-mermaid-art.com/real-mermaid.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mermaid
Pictures of mermaids and desciptions are taken from:
http://www.pinktentacle.com/2006/08/mermaid-mummies/

The criminal mind

2009-08-16T10:17:00.000+08:00

Well, we all know that some criminals are extremely smart, they get away with millions of dollars in embezzlement, loot, etc. These are normally white collared criminals who are educated and charismatic. What about the common people? The less educated and financially destitute who are just desperate to make some money through crime? Let me list 15 of the dumbest crime stories I've ever heard/read about.

1. Two men tried to pull the front off a cash machine by running a chain from the machine to the bumper of their pickup truck. Instead of pulling the front panel off the machine, though, they pulled the bumper off their truck. Scared, they left the scene and drove home. With the chain still attached to the machine. With their bumper still attached to the chain. With their vehicle's license plate still attached to the bumper.
DM's comment: This is called bad planning. Really bad planning.

2. In December 1994, Winston Treadway took two live lobsters from a tank in a Boston, Massachusetts supermarket and stuffed them down his trousers. The lobsters fastened onto his manhood and refused to let go. Doctors reportedly said the result was "a do-it-yourself vasectomy" and told him he might never be a father.
DM's comment: Serves him right. To fellow Singaporeans, please do not try to stuff crabs from Seng Siong down your pants or bras. It's not healthy nor safe.

3. Klaus Schmidt, 41, burst into a Berlin bank in August 1995, waved a pistol, and screamed "Hand over the money!" When staff asked if he wanted a bag, he replied "Damn right it's a real gun!" Guessing Schmidt was deaf, the manager set off the alarm, saying later, "It was ridiculously loud, but he didn't seem to notice."

After five minutes punctuated by Schmidt occasionally shouting "I am a trained killer!" police arrived and arrested him. Schmidt then sued the bank, accusing them of exploiting his disability.
DM's comment: This is so cute, a deaf robber who can't even hear the alarm nor guess that people are no longer afraid of his "gun".

4. Joyce Lebrom fainted at a supermarket checkout counter in Berne, Switzerland, in September 1991. Staff thought she'd had a heart attack, but when paramedics arrived they found a stolen chicken stuffed down her bra. The cold from the chicken had caused her to pass out. After recovering in the hospital she was charged with theft.
DM's comment: Is the chicken a spring chicken or a kampung chicken? If its the former, she would need one heck of a huge bra to stuff that fella into. Besides, wouldn't one of her "tits" look morbidly bigger than the other???

5. Purse snatcher Daniel Pouchin ended up in the hospital when he tried to rob two women in a street in Nice, France, in August 1993. The victims were "burly" transvestites who beat him up and left him with broken ribs.
DM's comment: I have a soft spot for trannies, they are so useful at crime prevention. After this, I would say, never judge a "woman" from the back view. I still can't stop laughing when I think of Abigail Chay turning around to stare at the wolf whistling men around her and saying "mei you kan guo mei nu ah??"

6.A man successfully broke into a bank's basement through a street-level window, cutting himself up pretty badly in the process. He then realized that (1) he could not get to the money from where he was,(2) he could not climb back out the window through which he had entered, and (3) he was bleeding pretty badly. So he located a phone and dialed "911" for help . . .
DM's comment: People do a lot of stupid things and have to bury their embarrasssment when they are reduced to calling the authorities for help. Reminds me of how a few guys around this world who had to call an ambulance when their "little brothers" got stuck in bottles during masturbation.

7. Travion Davis, 19, suspected that Los Angeles police would recognize his distinctive clothing if he robbed a bank. So he stripped naked before his July 1993 raid, and made off with $15,000 in two shopping bags. Not surprisingly, the sight of a naked man running down back alleys with bags stuffed full of cash was distinctive enough to attract the attention of sheriff's deputies, who pursued him over several fences before grabbing him (by what we're not told) and taking him into custody.
DM's comment: Wouldn't it occur to most people that you might be attracting more attention naked than dressed?

8. Mugging people in one of the UK's most popular jogging locations is asking for trouble. Experienced marathon runner Glyn Roberts came to the aid of a victim on Hampstead Heath in north London and gave chase - for two miles. The bewildered mugger eventually fell to his knees and begged for mercy. He didn't get it.
DM's comment: This is called "lack of foresight".

9. Two men in a pickup truck went to a new-home site to steal a refrigerator. Banging up walls, floors, etc., they snatched a refrigerator from one of the houses, and loaded it onto the pickup. The truck promptly got stuck in the mud, so these brain surgeons decided that the refrigerator was too heavy. Banging up *more* walls, floors, etc., they put the refrigerator BACK into the house, and returned to the pickup truck, only to realize that they locked the keys in the truck -- so they abandoned it.
DM's comment: I have no idea why they had to put the fridge back into the house... Very considerate but not very efficient of them.

10. In Modesto, CA, Steven Richard King was arrested for trying to hold up a Bank of America branch without a weapon. King used a thumb and a finger to simulate a gun. Unfortunately, he failed to keep his hand in his pocket.
DM's comment: I guess he got a little too excited and forgot himself.

11. Police in Los Angeles had good luck with a robbery suspect who just couldn't control himself during a lineup. When detectives asked each man in the lineup to repeat the words: "Give me all your money or I'll shoot", the man shouted, "that's not what I said!".
DM's comment: This is what I call a "Freudian Slip".

12. A man walked into a Topeka, Kansas Kwik Stop and asked for all the money in the cash drawer. Apparently, the take was too small, so he tied up the store clerk and worked the counter himself for three hours until police showed up and grabbed him.
DM's comment: If he was going to man the counter for 3 hours for a little more money, he should have gotten a proper job right?

13. A man walked into a Circle-K (a convenience store similar to a 7-11), put a $20 bill on the counter and asked for change. When the clerk opened the cash drawer, the man pulled a gun and asked for all the cash in the register, which the clerk promptly provided. The man took the cash from the clerk and fled-- leaving the $20 bill on the counter. The total amount of cash he got from the drawer? Fifteen dollars.
DM's comment: This guy's CBA (cost benefit analysis) sucks, he will never make it as a financial investor.

14. Not long ago a man from Grand Forks North Dakota traveled to Fargo North Dakota to rob Community First Bank. He scribbled his ransom note and gave it to the teller. The quickly gave him the money and watched him run out the door. Attempts to search the surrounding area were unsuccessful. Upon review of the ransom note it was revealed that the man wrote the ransom note on his personal bank deposit note. Police traveled to the man’s home to arrest him.
DM's comment: Next time, please note which "scrap" of paper did you grab.

15. Sacramento, California, December 1995: Burglar Brett Woolley, 25, had a stereo and other items from the home he'd broken into, lined up by the front door and all ready to go. He was then struck with the desire to take a bubble bath. He fell asleep in the tub, the owner returned, and the police were called to wake Woolley.
DM's comment: If you have issues controlling your impulses, never be a burglar, you might end up cooking a full meal and cleaning up your victim's house as well.

Taken from:
http://www.caderbooks.com/exstupid.html
http://funnystufflol.tripod.com/id41.htm
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/news/stupid-criminals.html
http://www.freemaninstitute.com/hall_of_shame.htm

The War against Obesity – The Response

2009-08-15T16:56:00.000+08:00

De Maitre has mentioned the various reasons behind obesity amongst people, and postulated that obesity may or may not be the fault of the obese person in question. There are genetic, biological and psychological reasons behind obesity as well.

But given those reasons, we still need to consider the other perspectives of the problem of obesity.

First, the nature of food culture in the world today,
Second, the pervasiveness of slimming centres,
And third, the socio-economic reasons behind personal lifestyles.

As I have mentioned in my post, It’s What You Eat, and How You Eat, food culture plays a role in influencing dietary habits. De Maitre is right in saying that fast food by itself is harmless, as long as consumption is controlled. But the problem is not just the lack of control among some people; it is the sheer ubiquity of fast food that is the real problem.
The issue is not very pertinent to Singapore, but in other countries like the US, the relatively higher price of “conventional” food influences the dietary habits of people toward fast food. The problem is further compounded by the fact that working people tend not to engage in cooking, due to it being time-consuming.

So what can we do? Mac’s et al understands the nature of the problem, so they are starting to introduce healthier food in their menus, and to stop the sale of “supersize” meals. But more can be done. In addition to the control on quantity, there has also to be control on quality, to focus on nutritional value.

But even then, there are still other issues. Food that cause obesity is one front in the war against obesity, processed foods (specifically, the pre-cooked, pre-packed meals that you just chuck into the microwave) is the other front. These foods have no nutrition to speak of, and are saturated with sugar and salt. These are the foods that also contribute to obesity.

Therefore, in order to truly deal with the problem of obesity where food is concerned, I propose three “offensives”

First, to control servings in fast food restaurants, and to introduce healthier food,
Second, to “boycott” processed foods for their lack of nutritional value and poor taste,
Third, to introduce and promote natural ingredients and healthy cooking methods.

The idea of these changes is to fundamentally change food culture to one that is healthier.

Second, on the pervasiveness of slimming centres.

Unlike De Maitre, I personally don’t have an issue with slimming centres. In the exhaustion of all options for slimming, the slimming centre can provide some solution to one’s weight and figure woes. But of course, the concern of over-reliance on slimming centres for weight management rather than to adopt a more balanced lifestyle is still valid. But for me, the problem can be interpreted in another perspective. Given the social pressure to look good, there is immense demand for slimming programmes and weight management programmes, along with skincare and cosmetic surgery. So the problem isn’t just over-reliance, it’s when people forget that it’s only a “short-cut”.

Third, on socio-economic reasons.

The socio-economic reasons that contribute to obesity are as follows: a “couch potato” society, and the demands of work.

The “couch potato” society is one that is fundamentally unbalanced. There is little exercise, either because of the lack of personal will, or the lack of time, or both. The prevalence of television and the internet means people spend a disproportionate amount of time in front of some form of screen. Given this unbalanced lifestyle, poor dietary habits is certain to compound the problem of weight gain and obesity.

The demands of work means that people do not have time to exercise. Of course, it’s quite often an excuse. But the point is, the amount of time spent at work creates pressures against the conduct of regular exercise. The stresses of work also mean some people binge to de-stress.

To conclude, the consequence of such a lifestyle only means that people are doomed to a fate of obesity. The problems of obesity isn’t just personal, it’s structural in nature. It’s a war of many fronts, against many enemies, all of them much more powerful than the individual, who is armed only with the weak desire to control his/her weight.

The war against Obesity

2009-08-15T11:27:00.000+08:00

WK did a post on food called "It's What You Eat, And How You Eat" before. Today, I will explore the reasons why people are obese.

Most Singaporeans are so caught up in the pursuit of the slim image of perfection that fat people are looked down upon without being understood. I would admit that I used to look down on fat people as slobs who sweat a lot and smell funny (I have a sensitive nose). But I've changed my perceptions of them a little as I grew older and researched a little more into obesity.

Not all fat people are slobs
I've met fat people who exercise more than me, eat less than me and work more than me. I feel so ashamed. For the record, not all fat people are obese because they eat unhealthily and do not exercise. Genes do play an important role, namely the FTO gene.

People carrying one copy of the "fat" FTO variant had a 30% increased risk of being obese compared to a person with no copies of that version.

Those carrying two copies of the variant had a 70% increased risk of being obese, and were on average 3kg (6.6lb) heavier than a similar person with no copies.

Now ladies, do you always wonder why you have so much trouble going on/keeping to a diet? [Evil Laughter] Just kidding, I don't believe in dieting because you only live once and you live in Singapore (food paradise). If you don't enjoy all the sinful kopitiam food now, you won't get to try it when you're dead.

The sinful nature of carbohydrates (Sugar)
A lot of people love candy, but that's not it! People love cheesecakes, cookies, crackers with sugar on them, roti prata sprinkled in sugar, pineapple tarts, etc. Many people are addicted to sugar without knowing it. The classic example would be drinking lots of coke and sprite when you could have drunk a glass of water instead. You can read up a little more about sugar addiction at this website.

The main role of carbohydrates is to supply us with energy for our daily needs. Unfortunately, evolution has made as crazy for carbohydrates because our ancestors were once hunter-gatherers who may have to go without food once in a while. That eat and starve cycle imprinted a need for high-carbo food into our psyche, so that we can store the extra carbo as fats, from which we can draw extra energy from when we are unable to obtain food.

Comfort Food
"Food is the most primitive form of comfort" - Shelia Graham
I'm sure you guys have watched Shrek 2, I liked the conversation between the King and the Fairy Godmother, especially this part:

"Harold, you force me to do something I REALLY don't want to do! My diet is RUINED, I hope you're HAPPY."

When people get upset, food is a great source of comfort. Especially food high in carbohydrates/sugar, like ice-cream!! Comfort food can also be food that are emotionally significant to us. So for an average Singaporean, it might mean feeling a need to eat good kway chap, a dish that your grandmother used to cook for you when you feel stressed out.

Dysfunctional Brain
Anything good or bad can be blamed on your brain. Be it bad temper, aggression, optimism or greed, it all comes from your brain. As no one is perfect, we all have a little dysfunction that makes us "unique"/"wierd" (depending on your perception). In the case of the 5 year old girl in India who is eating herself to death, literally, it is suspected that she has a dysfunctional pituitary gland. The pituitary gland releases hormones to restore homeostasis- i.e. physical and emotional needs. So in this case, her pituitary gland is not releasing the hormones that control eating. There are "hunger hormones" like ghrelin, orexin and PYY 3-36 and "satiety hormones" like leptin, obestatin, nesfatin-1. They control when and how much you eat and when to stop eating. The way this 5 year old girl eats is horrifying-

In just one week, she devours over 10 kilograms of rice, 24 eggs, six litres of milk and five kilos of potatoes.

Her hunger even leads her to sneak out and pester her neighbours for food in the village of Metiala in the Indian state of West Bengal.

"We give her four square meals a day and two small lunches, but this is never enough."

"She is our daughter and we have no choice but to feed her."

Aiyee... She's only 5 and she eats more food than an average family of 4 in a week!

While many people are fat because of factors beyond their control such as genes or hormones, there are even more people are fat because they are truly slobs. They love buffets, they binge, they don't exercise.

I don't have an issue with fast food because its just another meal to me as long as it not upsized. I think buffets are bad because of the consumer mentality "I must maximize my dollar"- so people eat more than they actually need. Many of the fat slobs that I know are binge eaters, when they want to eat something, they must eat it, even if they aren't hungry. Eating more than you need to is fine if you balance off the energy storage by expanding more energy through exercise. But many Singaporeans always give the excuse that they don't have time to exercise. I think it's a bad excuse because I know of people who drive to the shopping center nearby even though they could walk or take a bus (2-3stops away). I'll understand if they drive down because they are doing grocery shopping or furniture buying, but not if they are just going there to buy clothes or shoes.

Personally, I disapprove of slimming centers because it is the lazy method of losing weight fast. I prefer having a healthy diet, not eating beyond my daily needs and exercising. It gives people healthier body, mind and soul.

Does technology help or hinder social interaction?

2009-08-14T21:18:00.000+08:00

WRITTEN WITH THE HELP OF PHONG

Man is a social animal, evolution has made us so. Why? In the past, the world was a dangerous place where every man needed and extra eye or hand to aid survival. In a social unit, they can share their resources and help each other survive the harsh environment that they live in. As time passed, writing progressed from pictures to symbols and characters. Communication was primarily through verbal and written means. As time progressed, we opened up a whole new world of mobile communication through SMS, emails, MMS, cyber platforms like MMORPGs, Friendster or Facebook! People from all across the world can communicate with each other without meeting up personally and yet know how each other looks like, what are their preferences, age, birthday, etc.

But are these communication methods helping or destroying peoples’ social skills? There are 2 prevailing view regarding technology (the internet) and social relationships. The first theory is old and conservative (mostly created in the 1990s), it proposes that no form of stable or genuine relationship can be formed online and the Internet only served to atomize society, isolating the individuals. In contrast, the modern view was predominantly advanced by Walther, with this theory of the hyper-peronal effects claiming that the Internet and its communication tools actually help to create a lot of affordances to facilitate communication and socialization. More recently, Dmitri Williams also suggests that online games like MMORPGs actually have characteristics of a "third place", which is a sociological concept advanced by Ray Oldenburg to refer to sites of socialization, with the first place being home and second place, school or work.

So this bring out another question, where is the border between virtual versus reality? Yes, MMORPGs, Facebook and Friendster are just social platforms online that are virtual, regardless of how they look. But then, the relationships there are real because real friendships are made, often offline and many become couples. But this line is blurred when people have virtual marriages with ceremonies and attendees (other gamers who are their friends). Facebook and Friendster are based on cyberspace, so their communities are cyber-based, yet their relationships are real in the sense that today A insults B on Facebook, tomorrow, B can kill A for it. That is the real thing. Also, the cyber world has become a platform for people to share their “fantasies” that they are unable to enact in the real world due to social norms and rules- virtual rape, virtual bullying, etc...

Thanks to the technology, disagreements can be displayed using cowardly methods such as cc-ing every “important” person in the company in a bid to “cover ka-cheng”. Either that or cowardly attacks on people’s personal blogs such as leaving hostile messages on tag boards, or making their enemies’ blog links public on community blogs. I’m sure you have heard of stories about husbands or wives telling each other “I want a divorce, I’m leaving you” through emails or sms because they lack the courage to do it face to face.

I’ve also noted that many teenagers today are slaves to technology. It has gotten so bad that many of them are incapable of interpersonal interaction face to face. When I mean incapable, I don’t mean that they are unable to make friends, I mean they are unable to speak their minds, nor are they capable of conveying their opinions through verbal (choice of words) or non-verbal (i.e. body language) means.

Despite this, the internet has been a good place for people to socialize and interact with others from other parts of the world, socioeconomic groups, languages, race and religion. On my end, I’ve gotten to know new people- some good some bad, but every one of them left me a precious lesson on differences in people and their beliefs. I just find that with the ready availability of emails, I hate to call people up or meet them face to face. I prefer long emails that leave me a record of what transpired. =)

Why Are Singaporeans So Hard to Please?

2009-08-13T19:02:00.000+08:00

I had some thoughts after reading an article in the Channel NewsAsia webpage on the installation of half-height barriers in the above-ground MRT stations, which will be completed across the nation by 2012.

There are a few issues that revolved around this policy, firstly, why these barriers are built, and second, how people reacted to this change, which is the focus of my post here.

The barriers were built as a response to cases of suicide in MRT stations, where people simply jumped off the platform onto the track at the oncoming train. So the barriers were erected in order to prevent the chances of people falling onto the tracks, by intention or by accident. It also prevents personal objects from falling onto the tracks.

The benefits? First accidents and deaths are avoided. Second, time is saved and convenience ensured, as train services are always disrupted after each accident, which causes a certain amount of distress and frustration (just imagine stuck in the station, or the train, for more than an hour because the trains couldn’t move).

BUT, some Singaporeans are just so hard to please.

“It’s unsightly.” Said one. “There is no ventilation.” Said another.

I was thinking, given Singapore’s insane weather, there’s no difference whether there’s a barrier or not in the first place. Besides, the existence of barriers is not the real cause of temperature conditions in MRT stations anyway.

And unsightly? Well, the Metro in Taipei had the same barriers too, they didn’t complain.

Besides (and to be really cynical), given the already unsightly appearance of above-ground MRT stations in Singapore, it really doesn’t make a difference.
What is more important, to think of the larger picture, is to consider what these barriers are for. They are, to use the RSAF’s advertisement motto, “for a higher purpose”. They are there to prevent accidents and disruptions to train services.

So, why are Singaporeans so hard to please?

It’s because, to me, we are just such a demanding lot of people. We want the best of everything, even if they might contradict one another. We want safer stations and less disruption, and yet want “visual pleasure” and ventilation, we want good salaries and career prospects, yet are cynical of our education system, which is responsible for the creation of career opportunities for individuals.

It’s really like the people in the US, who want to slim down by eating.

Of course, not everyone in Singapore is like that. The difference in opinion to the erection of barriers is also not necessarily the self-contradicting statements of specific individuals. But it does show one thing about human society in general: that conflicting interests create the difficulty of policy implementation and social improvement.

I was also reading about Mr Obama’s recent healthcare reforms, which led to intense debate in the US. It’s a pretty complex issue, so just for a quick background, here’s some of the issues.

First, Mr Obama wants to extend insurance coverage to more Americans. A large number of Americans are still uninsured, so you can imagine what will happen to them if they incur medical costs, which are ridiculous in the US.

Second, Mr Obama wants to reform the insurance system. Currently, insurance companies (in the US, of course, you can’t imagine insurance companies in Singapore doing that) can reject claims based on “pre-existing conditions”, meaning you’ve had some previous health condition you may or may not know about. So, if you are hospitalised, for say, heart disease, and you have high blood pressure, the insurance company can reject your insurance claim because of the pre-existing condition of high blood pressure (ridiculous, isn’t it).

For a cynical take on the shambles of the US healthcare system, you can watch Michael Moore’s Sicko. Of course, I’ll have to warn you, it’s very cynical, and biased in some ways, so take note.

In the US, the debate is really intense. Obama’s supporters feel he’s not doing enough, and his opponents and critics are saying he’s bringing more problems and creating “socialised medicine”, exemplified by the communist states and the British National Health Service (NHS), which are portrayed as inefficient and expensive (well, not quite. The NHS is expensive, for the state, but it’s quite efficient, thanks to Mrs Thatcher’s reforms).

What am I trying to put forth here? First, in Singapore, there’s this really famous saying, “In Singapore, one can die, but can never fall ill”, reflecting the high costs of healthcare in Singapore.

But if you know just a little more about the other healthcare systems of other countries, you’ll realise we’re not all that bad. At least we have some form of funding for healthcare (not that the US doesn’t have things like medisave, medishield and medifund, they do. But they are much less substantial in funds), and at least insurance companies don’t cheat us like they do in the US.

What bridges both the US and Singapore is the contradicting interests that are involved. To put it bluntly, both want a healthcare system that is good, but both also don’t want to pay for it.

In the presence of conflicting interests, we need to think critically, rather than naively and childishly say, “I want it my way.”

Should the parents of Ah Lians/ Ah Bengs be blamed for their deviant behavior?

2009-08-12T23:56:00.000+08:00

Ah Lians (ALs) and Ah Bengs (ABs) are such fascinating creatures. I really enjoy disturbing them by being the biggest kaypoh (busy body) to swing by their terrible blogs. I don’t kaypoh because I care for them, but because I’m gathering info! I usually target ALs because they are more emotionally unstable. Based on 6 months’ worth of data collection, when I talk about ALs, I’m talking about teenagers from 13-18 years old who share the following characteristics in varied combinations:

Self Inflated Ego- They like to think they are pretty, but most of them are plain Janes. They normally share the same re-bonded China-doll hair cut, thick make up and an awful taste in cheap clothing. I don’t have issues with rebonded hair and cheap clothes, but ALs have a remarkable talent in making nice hair and clothes look bad. As for thick make up, I think it should be reserved for Wayangs, note for the streets. They like to say stuff like “DM, you jealous of me right? Cos I’m so pretty…” Urgh, I rather die a virgin. What’s more, if you don’t think they are pretty or smart, they mutate into banshees that scream an endless barrage of vulgarities.

Sensitive- they can criticize you, you can't criticize them. They take it VERY personally. They'll threaten to burn down your house, whack you up and start challenge you for your real name, your home address, handphone number and your gender. And I suspect most ALs are homophobic, I guess they just want to get laid by every male that walks across their path in order to feel like they are "wanted" and "desirable". They take rejection personally too, they do threaten suicide (to me, its good riddance to bad rubbish).

Diarrhea of the Mouth, Constipation of the Brains (intellectual poverty)- I realize all ALs can’t debate. All they can do is swear and accuse people of being kaypoh. I find it incredibly amusing that when I leave comments, I get accusation of “stepping English” (since when was speaking standard English a sin?) or for being a kaypoh (I love being a kaypoh, anyone who has curiosity in them will be a kaypoh!). So far, a few ALs have “cursed” me to be childless in future, even AFTER I told them I refuse to have kids due to the 50% chance of them turning bad. The other word they like to use is slut/bastard. Well, pot calling the kettle black in most cases. Heh.

The word “dog”- I don’t know why they have to use the word “dog” on everyone, be it friend or foe. They don’t call people baboons, morons, jackasses, etc. From the Freudian perspective of symbolism, I would hypothesize that it’s a reflection of their behavior:

They mate like dogs (multiple partners)
Run in packs (their endless lines of gans and jies)
Bark a lot (the endless barrage of vulgarities and empty threats)
Howl to the moon (emotional outbursts at night about being lonely and unwanted by their family)
Bitch bitch bitch (they are experts at that)
Run off with their tails between their legs once they meet their betters

The inability to swear properly- They are masters of quantity, not quality. They feel very empowered using “f” words and other hokkien words. Unfortunately, their hokkien stinks to high heaven, the sentences often don’t make sense. For example- knn limbei you! (translated as: screw your mother, your father you). That doesn’t make sense doesn’t it? And the part that really made me flinch was the use of CCB by ALs, may their vaginas rot off from overuse.

Self destructive behavior- I find it very cute that they always glorify these three things: smoking, drinking and sex. I think these are activities that no under-aged kid in their right mind would do. What’s more, I’ve been trying to go to a few AL’s blogs to offer them “good advice”. Typical of their rebellious nature, most of the replies I’ve gotten are “who are you to tell me what to do? Stupid Kaypoh”, the nicer ones were “I don’t know who you are, thanks for the advice, but I’ll live my own life”. I have a question “Why is a stranger offering you good advice inferior to that of the gans and jies that teach you how to die of cancer or STD faster?”

If you aren't with me, you are against me- As long as you don't agree with "the" AL way, you are a nerd, even if you can't study. Either that or you're a retard, idiot, bodoh, huan loh, hongster, or whatever, even though you know you are smarter than them and a lot less flirtatious.

Mysterious creatures- no one understand them. Really, you see them declare this all over their blogs. Their teachers, parents, boyfriends and siblings don’t understand their insurmountable pain and anguish over lord know what. Nobody can understand why they do stupid stuff like getting knocked up and going for rounds of abortion. No one understand why they have to waste all their money on cigarettes and alcohol when they highest pay they can get is approximately $6/hr. No one understands why they take so many MCs and leave even though they are earning so little. No one knows why they prefer bad friends over good ones. No one knows why they want to go to NT or NA when they can perfectly well get into express. No one knows why some of them give up poly to join their bfs in ITE. No one knows why they still stay with a boyfriend who rather sleep than go out with them. Are they that stupid? Maybe.

After many scuffles with them, I realize they switch to the “sob” story after some time. They start to cite stories about having a single parent, stepparent from hell, lousy parents, etc. as a reason for their deviant behavior. I think that is a terrible excuse. I’ve met people who come from single parent families with that single parent being a shitty example of parenthood (gambling, loansharks, alcoholism, etc) but they still turned out find. Why? It’s because they have the ambition and determination to pull themselves out of the vicious cycle. So my point is ALs are weak in mind, body and soul. Some ALs reform and improve over time. But hey, a leopard never changes its spots- once an AL, forever an AL. I’ve known a few successful ALs, sadly, financial success couldn’t scrub off their liannie “aura”. Staff and associates would always whisper behind them what an AL she is. So what is a liannie “aura”? This is what I’ve gathered:

Loud voice- they treat everyone like slaves that require regular rounds of verbal abuse.
Overly suggestive dressing- most of these ladies are in their late 30s or 40s, most have sam-cham-bak (3 rolls of fat at the stomach region). They like to wear TIGHT clothes that make them look like this:
Tries too hard to look modern- I’m sorry, re-bonded hair, spaghetti straps, mini-skirts and boots should never be a uniform of lady in her 40s. The effect is revolting.
Tries too hard to show off her wealth- they like everything that screams money, such as diamonds and branded clothes. I know a liannie in her 40s. She loves Esprit and Ralph Lauren, but somehow, she couldn’t carry off those clothes. Everyone thought they were fakes. They like to decorate their homes with expensive but tasteless furniture. Pink and purple walls do not go well with rosewood furniture nor Da Vinci Sofas.
The wrong clothes for the wrong occasion- I know a liannie who has to paint her nails beautifully before she goes out, even if it’s to the wet market. And she must wear her LV heels instead of slippers to the wet market. I don’t know what she’s trying to prove.

Such deviant behaviors has to start from somewhere. I believe that their parents should be blamed. Granted that most ALs are the worst examples of daughters any parent would want, but I still think parents need to play a more active role in nipping the flower in the bud. Children start to distance themselves from their family once they hit adolescence because it is a stage where, a developmental psychologist, Eric Erikson proposed as a period of “Identity Formation or Identity Confusion. They start to venture out into social groups to form a self identity outside their family.

At this stage, they are the most vulnerable to bad influences because their frontal cortexes are still under developed. Meaning, they are unable to think long term- they rather smoke because it’s cool rather than think of its long term impact on their health and looks. People’s frontal cortex is normally fully matured and stabilized when they hit 21 years old. Until then, I would say that it is the parents who should play a more active role in guiding their children until they are mature enough.

When I mean guiding a child, I don’t mean coddling the child and forcing him/her to do things the parents’ way because they said so. A compromise has to be reached through reasoning- children are not right all the time and neither are their parents. Teenagers need their independence, so parents shouldn’t deprive them of it. Instead, they should teach their teenagers how to obtain independence through responsibility. It can be as simple as making sure curfew times are not breached and how asking for extra allowances might be met if there is a valid reason so that they will learn how to spend within their means.

In the case of ALs, many are from broken families and by the time their parent(s) realize that their kid has mutated in a bitch from hell, it’s normally too late. The years of neglect have finally reflected on their parental incompetence. Their children hate them and hate everything that is associated with the words “good” and “decent”. Their children rather take advice from other hooligans than listen to their parent(s) pleas to be good, study hard and get a good job. When that happens, I always favor chopping those kids off and letting them learn how difficult life is if mum/dad isn’t paying for your living expenses. Let them learn how painful it is to earn a pathetic sum of money only to spend it on food and rent.

So are parents to blame when their kids go wild? Yes. There is always a possibility that a kid’s deviant behavior is learnt or inherited from his/her parent. I know of families with 3 generations of jail birds and school drop outs. So is it the genes, or maybe they learnt how to be bad from dad/mom? Who knows?

Although parents have a big part to play, I won’t deny that some teenagers are really hellish, particularly at the ages of 14-15. They are almost impossible to handle. But parents who are firm and strict enough on their children whilst they were growing up would have laid a firm foundation of discipline and respect. Their children may be deviant, but not to the extent of getting knocked up or hooked onto smoking. Negligent parents wouldn’t stand a chance unless their children are mature for their age. So we’re back to square one- parents should be blamed if their children disintegrate into a swarm of angry bees that sting anything that they perceive to be hostile.

I’m aware that some kids turn deviant because of parental abuse, or should I say “parental abuse”. Some call strict parenting abuse. If you think your parents caning you for swearing, coming back home late, smoking, failing your exams or getting into a fight is wrong, that sod you. You are a bloody self centered ingrate who just can’t recognize that your parents whack you because they want you to improve, not because they hate you. In this case, it’s clearly the kid’s fault and partially their parents’ fault for not realizing that caning is no longer a solution to the problem.

I don’t think there such a thing as “I give up hope, I tried everything and I still can’t correct him/her”. It’s a matter of catching them when they are young and instilling values into them. When they are young, they are like a “tabula rasa” (blank sheet of paper). They are still pure and clean, so as a parent, you write down the values you want them to uphold before that piece of paper becomes yellowed, brittle and crowded with negative values accumulated with age, bitterness and misunderstanding.

It’s What You Eat, and How You Eat

2009-08-11T12:32:00.000+08:00

Here are some of my thoughts after reading the posts on obesity and anorexia.

If you ask me, the problem with obesity in the West has to do with two main reasons, first, the ubiquity of fast food, second, the problems with western food culture and dietary methods.

First, the ubiquity of fast food. Several reasons allow for the proliferation of fast food in the west. The first is the lack of cheap, healthy alternatives; the second is the various marketing schemes they have used to make their meals more appealing.

The consequence of these is to create the situation where fast food becomes a staple for people in the west, and we all know the effects of the prolonged consumption of fast food.

Second, the problems with western food culture. The trouble is, it’s arguably true that unhealthy foods tend to be the tastier ones. Who doesn’t like fried chicken and fries? But to consider the problem on the other hand, why are the so-called “healthier” foods relatively bad?

The first possible reason is the youth of western culinary culture. Western cuisine (if I can call it that) didn’t really begin until the 15th and 16th century, when Europeans got their hands on spices from Asia. Spices allowed them to favour their food, making them more palatable.

Before that, they cooked like this: everything was boiled in a big pot for several hours, until they were a soggy mush. Not very appetizing isn’t it?

Of course, one might argue, didn’t they have baking and roasting? True, but how many could afford meat back then? Besides, to some extent, this was precisely the problem in their cuisine, because they didn’t have the variety of cooking methods that turns out to be much healthier.

I recently read a book, Why the Chinese Don’t Count Calories. It’s a book about Chinese food culture. The author highlights the point why westerners have having, first, the problem of obesity, and second, so much trouble trying to slim down, and found the answer in Chinese cuisine.

First, there is balance in the Chinese diet. Plenty of vegetables, and other nutritious ingredients, like tofu, as compared to the meats of a western meal.

Second, there is variety in cooking methods. In addition to frying, there are many more cooking methods, like steaming, etc. Point is, more than just baking and roasting.

Third, it’s not about calories. It’s about nutrients. The reason why dieting for many westerners are so difficult and prone to failure is because they get so caught up with calorie intakes they end up measuring the amount of spread for a measured amount of bread, when every meal has to be carefully calculated, and worse, having to abandon essential nutrients, such as carbohydrates for high-protein diets (the Atkins’ Diet is this type of diet)

The author’s point was, if there is balance in the meal, plus the use of other methods, and to focus on nutritional value rather than just calorie intake, the dieting would be easier, along with the other benefits of a simple diet.

But for me, there’s one more thing I’ll add: exercise.

A balanced diet is good, but so is a balanced lifestyle. Just eating and not exercising will not be good, even if one is eating food as simple (or austere for some) as Japanese food.

I enjoy my food. But I also take care not to be enslaved by them.

De Maitre’s list of 10 important inventions across time Part 2

2009-08-10T20:39:00.000+08:00

This is a continuation of another 10 important inventions to me. You can read part 1 here: http://contemplasian.blogspot.com/2009/06/de-maitres-list-of-10-important.html

1. Toilet Paper
As a clean freak, I get very upset when there’s no toilet paper around after I’ve conducted my business. Our toilet paper today are nicely soft and smooth, they won’t cause any abrasions. In the 15th centuries, sailors out at sea had no toilet papers to use. So they had a rope hanging down from the ceiling of their “toilet” (it’s just a huge gap at the side of the sea. By the end of the voyage (normally about 3-6motnhs), you can image how the rope looked and smelt like. Most of our landlubber ancestors used leaves- it’s a trial and error thing that certainly taught them some leaves are poisonous and cause severe inflammation/itching. So be thankful for your toilet papers today.
Read more here for other methods of cleaning asses in history: http://regretfulmorning.com/2009/02/9-bizarre-methods-once-used-to-wipe-ass/

2. The Sewing Needle

This is what an ancient needle looks like. It’s pretty big compared to our modern needles, so it always brings this question to my mind- are they sewing up the hole or making even more holes?

3. The Wheel and axle

Without them, there would have been no carts, therefore no chariots, therefore no bicycles and therefore no cars today. They were the first in our step towards automated transportation and contributed greatly to the great human migration. It is also the basis of modern machinery (i.e. cogs) due to its nature as the foundation of all moving parts.

4. Trepanation

Most of you never heard of this, it is the drilling or scraping of a hole in a human skull. It is done for a few reason- releasing “bad vapors” in the head (i.e. migraines and headaches), to release the soul (through a hole in the head) so the person can commune with the Gods better, or surgery to reduce remove excess bone/bleeding from a head injury. Most people do survive this surgery. In the cave man era, they normal use obsidian chips to scrap out a hole in the skull. It was a pretty messy and painful business.

5. The Oven

I love food- baked chicken, bread, cookies, pizza, etc. The oven was an improvement over the common cooking methods of roasting. It was typically a small little clay/brick dome where a fire was lit inside (around the edges) and the bread was placed in the center. I think food tastes better when cooked over wood or charcoal because they are a lot more aromatic.

6. Ink (Pigment)

Nothing much remains of our caveman ancestors’ way of life except the paintings left on the walls. They depict stories of the hunt, village life and their reverence for Nature. From them, we know that our ancestors hunted in groups and they liked to engage in body painting. These cave paintings were the stepping stones for the transition from oral to written history. Do note that these two forms of history are by no means exclusive as they go hand in hand together.

7. Aqueduct
If you thought the Romans were the first people to construct aqueducts, you were wrong. Our ancestors have been doing there for a looooooooooooooooong time. The Romans only deserve the credit for building Mega-Aqueducts that stretch over huge distances. Even “backward” civilizations like the Aztecs had a sophisticated system of aqueducts bringing in water from the mountains down to their valleys.

8. Ships/ Log Boats

Our ancestors spread out from Africa thousands of years ago by foot and water. Did you know that the indigenous population in South America had aboriginal ancestry? Unfortunately, this has been bred out over the generations. That would mean the Aztecs, Incas, Moche, etc were survivors of people who crossed the entire Pacific Ocean from the Pacific Islands on primitive ships!

9. Basket Weaving

Now that we have plastic bags and plastic containers, the modern world has relegated baskets to trivial use such as floral arrangement and presentation at bread shops. In the past, they were the shopping and storage bins for people. They were used to hold fruits, grain, eggs, bread, etc.

10. Pottery

Pottery was important to our ancestors because they allowed us to store liquids for prolonged periods without having to worry about them going bad. Animal skins could only hold so much, and water or wine turned stale in them. Furthermore, pottery allowed our ancestors to eat and drink in a “civilized” manner through the use of bowls, cups, etc. It also allowed our ancestors to cook stews, lentils, soups, etc over the fire, providing them a change in diet.

44 Facts about Singapore!

2009-08-09T20:01:00.001+08:00

Well well, NDP is here! Happy 44th birthday to Singapore. Ironically, I only realized Singapore was 44 earlier on thanks to Evone. So much so for being a history monster...

1. Mosquitoes
We are never short of these infernal beasts. But it’s ok, treat each feeding session as a karma reaping session.

2. NeWater
It’s always nice to know the water you drink might contain a little of your piss as well as everyone else’s.

3. Raffles is our founder
That’s wrong, it’s Sang Nila Utama. I guess it’s because we can’t find a nice picture of Utama (a myth) to carve a likeness of him and place in front of our Victoria Theatre.

4. Our national anthem is in Malay
Well, not many people know what the lyrics mean, but heck, we all know how to sing it.

5. We have the highest execution rate per capita in the world! It’s ok when it is traded for the lowest crime rate in the world!

6. Our universities do not have an on-campus bar and they do not have enough hostel rooms for everyone. It’s ok, the cleaners are happy less people to scrap off the campus floor when they get drunk and barf everywhere.

7. Singaporeans cannot aim- the rubbish bins have rubbish everywhere but in them and the toilet bowl is cleanest inside the basin. No worries, we have an army of cleaners to maintain our “clean and green image”.

8. We train our smokers to be nice and considerate! We just ostracize them to the corner table at the koptidiam to be exposed to the sun and rain.

9. Alcohol and cigarettes are ridiculously expensive! No matter, under aged kids still smoke and drink anyway. They are affluent and devious enough. Isn’t that a sign of our thriving economy and first class education system?

10. We pay a lot of GST, service charge, road tax, parking fine, library fine, littering fine, spitting fine, etc. to the government so that they can pay the thousands of useless employees who mess up the bureaucracy more everyday and our extremely expensive ministers. Ah well, at least we can confidently say have one of the lowest income taxes in the world, so can’t complain.

11. Durians- some people love them, some people hate them. For the consideration for all, they are banned from entering all public transports. No worries, you can still eat them at the stalls! We have high-class sounding Durian sellers who call their shop "Durian Cafe".

12. Middle Age Crisis is very common among Singaporeans. They are typically serial nose pickers, quarrelsome, aggressive, naggy and extremely Kiasu. They spend half of their time being inconsiderate and the other half nagging at inconsiderate people around them. Aren't they such precious treasures?

13. Our ministers are among most highly paid politicians in the world! PM Lee Hsien Long makes 6x more than Obama (USD 400,000). It's nice to know that we are one of the least corrupted countries in the world too. We have a Corruption Perception Index of 9.2 and we rank 4th in the world, only because the top 3 countries- Demark, New Zealand and Sweden share the same 9.3 index! Taken from:http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/04/pm-lee-tops-list-of-10-best-paid-world-politicians/ & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

14. We still practice Judicial Caning! We are one of the few secular states that administer caning to social deviants. The cane is about 1.2m long and about half an inch thick. Many countries criticize us for violating the UN Convention Against Torture. Guess what? We didn't sign it and we have the lowest crime rates in the world!
15. Sarong party girls- many Singaporeans hate them because these girls only have eyes for caucasians. Don't worry though, our local men also know how to import "foreign talents", mainly from China and Vietnam to restore homeostasis.

16. We have a different meaning of racial harmony through tolerance. Tolerance stems from "don't talk about it at all and don't even be a kaypoh about other cultures and religions". Fair price to pay for the peace we get eh?

17. We are suspicious people. Why shouldn't we? Even charities are conspiring against us. First it was NKF, now it is Ren Ci. Good for Reverend Ming Yi who has 9 credit cards, bought and sold 6 private properties at a profit, bought and sold 3 BMWs, a pet horse and an expensive pet called Yeung who has a penchant for branded stuff and 3 supplementry cards from boss. I guess monks have to violate the "abstain from material wealth" code in order to be generously contribute to the economy. =) His self sacrifice will be appreciated by all the needy poor and doners who surely must realize he was doing it for the benefit of all in the long term.

18. We are a paternalistic society where dad/governement will make sure you behave very well. Even to the point of nailing a notice on your bedpost "NO ORAL OR ANAL SEX FOR HOMOSEXUAL PARTNERS". It is an attempt to maintain our image as a conservative society. There is always a lovely cane hanging within sight and the threat of being grounded or having your pocket money revoked hanging above you. So we should all BEHAVE; no wonder that we have the lowest crime rate in the world eh?

19. We are the only country in the world (to my knowledge) that actually banned the import and sale of chewing gum. Unfortunately, they relaxed that rule a little and allow pharmacists to sell certain gums that have health benefits. If they relax it a little more, we'll have a multitude of idiots stuffing gum into mailbox keyholes, lift buttons and pasting them under tables and chairs. Disgusting inbreeds.

20. We are a "fine" country. People like to criticize us for being a nanny state where spitting, toilet flushing and jaywalking are considered punishable offenses. All I can say is shut up. =D We are a lot more cleaner and safer than our critics.

21. Singapore don't give a hoot about international pressure- the LAW prevails. That's one thing I like about Singapore, we don't bow down to international pressure to remove our capital punishments like hanging and caning and fairly punish foreigners who violate our laws! E.g. the idiot Michael Fay who was so cocky of his immunity as a citizen of mighty America- he got caned anyway when found guilty of theft and vandalism. When he got burnt while abusing butane later in life, he had the cheek to blame the Singapore judicial system for emotional trauma. He was a kid with serious issues, we should have given him the full 12 strokes instead of 4, maybe he would have crawled out of prison a better person.

22. Based on estimates in the 2008 World Drug Report, published by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Singapore has one of the lowest prevalence of drug abuse. So we should execute all the drug traffickers regardless of nationality once they are caught in order to keep this up. In the sensationalized trial of Van Tuong Nguyen, Australia tried to pressurize Singapore into blocking the death penalty. We executed that criminal anyway. It's good that we treat criminals and criminals regardless of their background, reasons or nationality. They were apprehended in their attempts to cause harm and they will be punished for it.

23. We are a nation of common sense and reason. Unlike USA or Australia, we certainly didn't hold virgils or organize protests to burn the opposing countries' flags nor did we boycott their products in order to show our disfavor whenever our citizens are punished overseas for their wrong doing. When you're wrong, you are wrong, you should be punished.
24. Singaporeans make the worst hostages because the government won't contribute a single cent of ransom to save their citizens. I honestly like this because you won't encourage the terrorists or kidnappers. The means justify the end. That's why terrorists networks worldwide hate us and love American hostages.
25. We are a certificate country, no certs means no future. We can't have that now can we? So our students are the most obscenely hardworking bunch of monsters, bar the social deviants who drop out and make parasites out of themselves. Your future boss looks at your certificates before he looks at you.

26. We are one of the most realistic group of people in this world. We openly admit that being a construction worker is a terrible job, unlike our American counterparts who zealously call it a professional occupation. To us, it is a low skill labor that pays poorly, they just don't see that don't they? Every job is professional, it is how professional it is that matters.

27. We are very ambitious people, we want the 6Cs- cash, credit cards, condominiums, cars and certificates. That's gooooood, it motivates us to work hard for what we want. It deters people from sitting at home and waiting for their monthly social security handouts.
28. We have the best propaganda machine in Asia- because almost everyone doesn't realize it exists! Ok, we know it exists, but most can't pinpoint where or what it is. A good example would be Social Studies! It has almost nothing to do with sociology but it has everything good about Singapore.

29. The Singapore government even regulates how you rear your pets. For those staying in HDBs, only toy dogs are allowed and apparently no private fish bonds outside your apartment either (apparently, you upset the weight per sq inch ratio). You are not allow to breed dogs for sale at home either! You need a license and a farm to do that.

30. We don't have strikes and protests every alternate day unlike Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, France, etc. This is because you need a PERMIT. Since no one can be bothered to think of a justifiable reason of holding a protest in order to apply for a permit, nor wait for the permit to be approved, no one has organized a successful protest so far. Thank goodness for that! We have a very stable economy because man hours are not wasted on pointless marchess requesting for more pay and holidays. In Singapore, you'll just get sacked. There are other people out there waiting for an opening...

31. We are a city of misers and workaholics. We hate to pay fines and neither do we relish holidays behind bars. So no one breaks the law just to attend a strike or protest because everything they hold dear is in jeopardy.

32. Our politicians have cat fights now and then. Classic example: MM Lee & SM Goh vs Mr Chee. MM Lee and SM Goh won not because the law was on their side, but because they makes more sense than Chee.

33. We are the only country with the post minister mentor. People insist that MM Lee refused to relinquish his political power. I think they are wrong- we can't drop him after all he has done! He has a lot of experience and he was the hand that shaped Singapore. His guidance has been proven to be the most sound leadership in SEA.

34. I fully agree with Kumar when he said this "(Every NDP)everytime the fireworks go, I cry. That's not because I'm patriotic, that's my income tax".

35. The Merlion will most likely sink head first if it tries to swim. If you look closely, it only has a claudal fin, it doesn't have a anal fin, dorsal fin, pectoral fin nor a pelvic fin. So it shouldn't be able to balance nor steer.

36. Singapore is an ungracious country. Smile at a stranger and they'll start to think there's something wrong with your head. No one bothers to ask you polite stuff like "how are you" or "how was your day". We don't have that culture.

37. Singaporeans have a penchant for queueing up! As long as there is a looooong queue, they'll queue up even if they don't know what its for. They are even to queue up overnight and over the weekend for free stuff or special discounts.
38. Singaporeans are unfriendly. They bitch a lot and they don't smile a greeting when they walk by you and the men don't open the door for the ladies at all.
39. Singaporeans always complain that the influx of foreign talent has been depriving them of jobs. Well, serve the Singaporeans right, they didn't want those jobs when times were good. Now that times are bad, they whine about it louder.
40. We're probably the only country that drills its people for all kinds of emergencies- war, fire, air raid, etc. Students and workers alike are timed and evaluated for their response level and efficiency.
41. Singaporeans are so crazy about food that they are willing to travel from one end of the island to the other just to eat their favorite dish. Some even go out for suppers way after midnight to satisfy their insatiable cravings.
42. Singaporeans depend on the government for everything. When they can't handle their children, they throw the problem to the government. When they can't get along with their neighbours, they scream for the government. When they have a major disagreement in an association like AWARE, they scream for the government.
43. We have a wierd way of drawing up our "maps". You might be staying in Paya Lebar, but you're under the Marine Parade Constituancy. Wierd...
44. Singapore has one of the worst script writers to me when it comes to serial dramas and "comedies". They are so embroiled with moralistic overtones that you can pretty much guess what will happen next.

Should a Child be Punished for the Sins of His/Her Parents?

2009-08-09T11:38:00.000+08:00

Have you ever met people who are so entrenched in their beliefs that they often make stupid and hurtful remarks at the expense of people around them without using any cow sense? This is my story:

Once I tried to talk my friend out of the religious fanatism that she has gotten herself into. I suspected she has histronic personality disorder and she did mention more than once that she was more upset about being at being unnoticed and unpopular rather than being unable to commune with God or for having a weak faith. So after another emo session with her deploring her "ugliness" being the cause of her unpopularity, I sat her down for a good talk. I started off by trying to explain to her that there are people even uglier than her in this world, and how she should not use this as an excuse to diet and exercise like a fanatical moron. This is a rough transcript of our conversation:

ME: "Why do you think some children in this world are born deforned or defective in some way in mind or body?"

HER: "Erm, because of incest lor, It's their parents' fault"

ME: "What??? Who told you THAT?"

HER: "My Pastor lor"

Her answer shocked the hell out of me, I ditched her because I could tell what a lousy conversationalist she would be and I hated Mega Churches with a vengence ever since. I'm fully aware that it might be possible that she misconstrued the pastor because the other Christians that I know have never heard of such a thing. But give me a reason to hate mega-churches a littel more, will you? Anyway, this conversation raised many questions in my mind.

-Is this what religion teaches a person? Christianity's main tenant is to love and forgive everyone!

-Deformed people are a source of reflection that we should be happy with who and what we are. NOT as a source of criticism that they are like "this" because of some action in their past life or their parents' sin.

-What's the point of educating a person all the way to University level if they can't use their goddamn brains?

-What happened to all the science, biology and research topics that we've been given throughout our academic life? Shouldn't they help us to be more open to alternative and more realistic reasons as to how and why things happen?

When I ask this question to anyone else with a brain, that they know how to use, the answer is always linked back to genetics. When children are born like this, it's not because God is punishing their parents for commiting incest! It's just a matter of probability! Almost everyone has a defective gene somewhere in their DNA (we aren't perfect creatures) it can affect your offspring both positively or negatively. Unique traits such as eye color, jaw shape, hair color are all products of "defective" genes that branched off from the original DNA many centuries ago.

Children with deformities are unfortunate because the "wrong" gene was activated due to a freak of nature or because their parents didn't know they had recessive "problematic" genes. So you shouldn't blame the parents nor the children, they are equally innocent becaue it is something beyond their control. Besides, I always maintained the view that God frowns upon such stuff but he must be one heck of a bitchy bastard if he makes an innocent kid suffer for his parents' sin (if any).

Incest is a common sin worldwide, but normally they take pains to ensure that they conduct it discreetly and don't have children. I think every country in this world has laws against incest because it is established that it would result in long term inbreeding problems such as a concentration of genetic coding errors. From what I gather in my research, incest is fine for a few generations, but anything beyond 5 generations is problematic. How do I know this? From studying History!

The best example is the Habsburg Dynasty. Over the course of 500 years, they have intermarried a lot just to maintain power within the family. They are all Christians, so they don't practice incest in the sense of marrying within the immediate family (i.e. parents, siblings or first cousins). By the end of 500 years of marrying cousins, nieces, uncles, etc all the genetic errors accumulated into creating the disgusting Charles II of Spain.

Charles II not only suffered an extreme version of the Hapsburg lip, his tongue was said to be so big for his mouth that he had difficulty speaking and drooled. He also suffered from an oversized head, intestinal upsets, convulsions and, according to his first wife, premature ejaculation.

"He was unable to speak until the age of four, and could not walk until the age of eight. He was short, weak and quite lean and thin. He was described as a person showing very little interest in his surroundings," Professor Alvarez said. "He looked like an old person when he was 30 years old, suffering edemas [swellings] on his feet, legs, abdomen and face. During the last years of his life he could barely stand up and suffered from hallucinations and convulsive episodes," he said.

Taken from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/revealed-the-inbreeding-that-ruined-the-hapsburgs-1668857.html

Let us take a look at this German couple- they are siblings who grew up apart and fell in love with each other after the death of their biological mother. Regardless of Germany's incest laws, they had 4 children together. The first 3 children were forcefully taken away from them and place in foster care. It raises the question of ethics- did the government have the right to take away a mother's child from her just because they feel her choice in their paternity was faulty? Their children are all fine and healthy individuals, is the fear of parental influence so great that it necessitates the heartbreak of a mother for the good of her children?
Taken from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6424937.stm

My post is going to be a lot more graphic from now on. I want to use pictures to prove my point "If deformity is due to incestuous parents, that's a very harsh price for their children to pay". In reality, these children are all by products of faulty genes.

Down Syndrome (Trisomy 21)

This is a picture with a kid with Down Syndrome. It is NOT because his parents are incestuous. It is because he has an extra Choromosome 21. Individuals with Down syndrome tend to have a lower than average cognitive abilities, often ranging from mild to moderate developmental disabilities. A small number have severe to profound mental disability. It occurs in approximately 800 to 1,000 births. It must be noted that these statistics are heavily influenced by older mothers.

Harlequin type ichthyosis

Call this baby a demon spawn or whatever and I swear I'll slap you. Children with this defect normally die very young due to infection or dehydration. I can only imagine the pain they are experiencing. The oldest survivor is only 24 years old.

The features of sufferers are deformed facially and cranially. The ears may be very poorly developed or absent entirely, as may the nose. The eyelids are severely everted (ectropion), which leaves the eyes and the area around them very susceptible to trauma. They often bleed upon birth. The lips, pulled by the dry skin, are fixed into a wide grimace (eclabium). Arms, feet, and fingers are almost always deformed in such a way that they cannot bend properly, and may be below the normal size.

Taken from: Wikipedia

It is a hereditary disorder caused by recessive genes. So means if the child's father and mother both have this gene stuck somewhere in their DNA, it might become a dominant gene in the child.

Siamese Twins

Conjoined/Siamese twins are identical twins or non identical whose bodies are joined in utero. A rare phenomenon, the occurrence is estimated to range from 1 in 50,000 births to 1 in 200,000 births, with a somewhat higher incidence in Southwest Asia and Africa. Approximately half are stillborn, and a smaller fraction of pairs born alive have abnormalities incompatible with life. The overall survival rate for conjoined twins is approximately 25%. The condition is more frequently found among females, with a ratio of 3:1.

Two contradicting theories exist to explain the origins of conjoined twins. The older and most generally accepted theory is fission, in which the fertilized egg splits partially. The second theory is fusion, in which a fertilized egg completely separates, but stem cells (which search for similar cells) find like-stem cells on the other twin and fuse the twins together.

Taken from: Wikipedia

Again, they are borned like this due to freak of nature, not because their mother commited incest.

Neurofibromatosis

Neurofibromatosis (commonly abbreviated NF) is a genetically-inherited disease in which nerve tissue grows tumors (e.g. neurofibromas) that may be harmless or may cause serious damage by compressing nerves and other tissues. The disorder affects all neural crest cells (Schwann cells, melanocytes, endoneurial fibroblasts). Cellular elements from these cell types proliferate excessively throughout the body forming tumors and the melanocytes function abnormally resulting in disordered skin pigmentation.The tumors may cause bumps under the skin, colored spots, skeletal problems, pressure on spinal nerve roots, and other neurological problems.

Taken from Wikipedia

If either one of your parents has this gene, you have a 50% chance of getting it. So it depends on your luck. This is what the elephant man suffers from.

Ok, enough of graphic examples. Other genetic problems include: Adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD), Sickle Cell Disease, etc... Go read up more on your own.

Back to the topic, so is it fair for children to suffer from such deformities just because their parents' so called "sin"? Rubbish. Don't look down on these kids, EVER. Admire them and their family for having the courage to grow together and learning how to accept each other for who they are. These children have to grow up with the constant scorn and humiliation heaped at them by the so called "perfect" people who deem them to be misfits in society.

Think again, some of these people who are of "sound mind and body" end up being society's greatest parasites. They don't get proper jobs because they think the job and pay is beneath them, they ruin their health by taking drugs and alcohol, they refuse to study and spend their time loafing at the nearest shopping arcade leering at people, etc. And some of these people end up anorexic or bulimic because they think they are fat. By the time they are done damaging their bodies, even the starving kids in Africa look better than them. So who is worse off?

Ironically, the loudest voice decrying such children belong to religiously devout people. To them, it is easy to point a finger and screech "That child is a spawn of the devil, he is evil!" or "That child's parents must have commited a grave sin like incest for God to punish them with such an abomination" or even "That child's mother must have mated with an animal or the devil himself for such a child to be even born". That's just horrible, why has no one spared a thought for the pain that the child and his/her parents are undergoing?

On Patriotism

2009-08-08T21:07:00.000+08:00

Since we’ll be celebrating the 44th year of Singapore’s independence in a day’s time, I thought it’ll be nice to talk about something uplifting.

People might wonder, is there patriotism in Singaporeans?

It’s arguable, but there are reasons for Singaporeans to be patriotic, however small these reasons might be.

De Maitre in the recent post, NDP 09, brought up interesting facts about Singapore.

These are the small things which bring about both bewilderment and criticism from the rest of the world, but they are also the facts that made us who we are today.

For me, I’ll like to talk about the “higher” things.

To quote from that old song: “There was a time when people said that Singapore wouldn’t make it, but we did”.

There was indeed such a time. It was a time only our parents and grandparents would remember.

It was through hard work, and good governance, that brought us to where we are today. We were lucky, because while many other post-colonial countries are still struggling in the modern world, Singapore went in a different direction, the effects of which were unexpected even to the leaders themselves.

But so much for an introduction, what is patriotism?

The definition is different for different countries. For the US, it’s the fact that they are a superpower. (Though if you ask me, that title is increasingly becoming hollow), for the Chinese and Indians, it’s the thousands of years of history and culture. For the Europeans, it’s the intellectual, artistic and cultural values that are important to them, plus the quality of their own products.

Singapore has, arguably, little of these. We’re far from a superpower, even though we have one of the most prosperous economies and the most advanced military in the region, we are, well, only 44 years old, 50 if you add in the years of self-government, and we haven’t given birth to any intellectual or artistic “greats” (at least not yet).

But people still love Singapore, at least, again, arguably.
This is because we have the many things other countries want, but just can’t seem to have.

Good governance, from which springs forth many more things, like low corruption, foresight, etc

Economic growth

Rule of law.

What’s holding the other countries back? For many, it’s bad governance. For others, it’s the sacrifice of economic prosperity and social order for such things as “people power”.

Ultimately, there are costs to be incurred for any choices a country may make in the charting of its political direction.

For that, we should also remember, we are so lucky to have had travelled in that right direction, despite the costs that we may have had to pay for that.

Good Old Movies- Boring to most, but rewarding if you watch

2009-08-08T13:47:00.000+08:00

I'm a great fan of old movies before of their more in-depth dialogue and better acting skills. There's very little CGI to cover up bad acting or distract me from the skills of the main actors. =)

I'll share a few good classic shows with you guys here:

Magic Voyages of Sinbad (1953)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAmev0oYg1c&feature=channel
This show is very cute. If you notice, the costumes don't look as middle eastern as what Sinbad would typically wear. Instead, the costumes have a very distinctive Viking/Russian in design. This show was released in 1953, it was filmed in Russia and the original story was about a Norse legend- Sadko. Unfortunately, the US released it as "Magic Voyages of Sinbad" after dubbing it in English and editing the original video. If you guys recall, the Cold War was in play at that point in time, so the US would do anything to degrade a Russian film.

The Hunchback Of Notre Dame (1923)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7boNOrs-v4g&feature=related This is a silent film. I know many people at this age have never experienced the joy of silent movies. It's called silent because there's no dialogue, not because there is no sound... It is a good experience because the actors have to rely a lot more on body language to express their feelings. Just to let you know, I hated the disney cartoon about this story. I think it didn't cover Quasimodo's feelings enough.

The 300 Spartans (1963)
Part 1: http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/rrzmOVdNO6c
Part 2:http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/Ek0VQqtVYnM
This is my favorite quote from the show "The Gods have a sense of humor, they make pretty girls and turn them into wives". Hehehehe, the death of the honeymoon period. Unlike the new version "300", it is a lot less graphic as it deals more with the political aspects of prior to the battle. How the Spartans would reject one of their own just because that man's father was assumed to have less than honorable dealings with the Persians, and his journey to prove himself as a capable Spartan regardless of his father's deeds.

Hercules (1958)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSSVvEz-hAI
This movie features Steve Reeves, Mr. Universe (1950). He was one of the body building icons made of 100% natural muscles without the help of drugs. This is a rather interesting movie that focuses on Hercules' sturggle between the choice to be human or immortal, and how he learns that being a mortal only meant pain and suffering but he chose to be human rather than a cold blooded immortal, immune to time and feelings. I particularly like this movie because it dwells on concepts such as how difficult it is to be "special", how positive encouragement can motivate a person to belief himself more than any criticism, etc.

Jason and the Argonauts (1963)
http://www.supernovatube.com/play.php?viewkey=c694cd0fd49e71249d61
I'm not sure if this show is a public domain film, but it is a definite must see due to its then "state of the art" stop motion feature than generated the fight scene between Jason and the Skeletons. =)

Cleopatra (1963)
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzruB19CFgI
I'm not sure if this show is a public domain film (so please search for Part 2-25 on youtube by yourself). I can never get enough of Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Not because they're sex icons, but because of the way they delivered their lines! Taylor is always brimming with sensuality and suppressed emotions, whereas Burton delivers his lines with confidence and authority. The effort channeled into creating the costumes and sets were simple breath taking! Remember, they didn't have CGI to create the fake landscapes at the background.

The Ten Commandments (1956)
http://static.youku.com/v1.0.0052/v/swf/qplayer.swf?VideoIDS=cc00XMTUyNzM0MzI&embedid=-&showAd=0
This is another breathtaking costume drama movie that stars Yul Bryner (I can never get enough of his intense gaze), Charlton Heston and Anne Baxter. I really enjoyed this show because it examines the Journey of Moses as he progresses from being a prince to a commoner, how he struggles to adapt to his new role as a spiritual leader and his secret doubts and fears.

Ben Hur (1959)
http://static.youku.com/v1.0.0052/v/swf/qplayer.swf?VideoIDS=XNDYzNzY3NTY&embedid=-&showAd=0
This is another breathtaking costume drama movie that stars Charlton Heston and examines the whole notion of faith, integrity and revenge. Will revenge help to quench the fire of vengence? The setting is in classical Rome under the reign of Emperor Tiberius.

The King and I (1956)
- no links -
I find this movie really unique because it reflected the white man's superiority mentality at that point in time. Yul Bryner adopted one of the most disgusting oriental accents I have every heard for this movie. Beyond that, it was a good show that shows the learning journy of Anna, her son, the King and his children/wives.

The Sound of Music (1965)
http://static.youku.com/v1.0.0052/v/swf/qplayer.swf?VideoIDS=cc00XMzAwOTIzODg&embedid=-&showAd=0
I adore Julie Andrews, period. =D Boy can she sing... This is one of my all time favorites because of it's light hearted tone. How a scruffy girl learns her place in her world by filling everyone around her with joy and laughter, how a stiff Captain von Trapp learnt how to bend a little and love his children with a lot more flexibility, communication, hugs and laughter.

Ulysses (1955)
http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/entertainment/watch/v14079501ksfsyets
I can only find this on veoh, so just sign up for a free account or something. It's pretty good film based on Homer's Odyssey. The story of a man who pit himself against the Gods and lost, how his love for his wife guided him back home after being seperated for 1o years. It's a good movie, but I prefer the 1997 version with Armand Assante though.

Why can't people just be themselves?? ( Anorexia Nervosa)

2009-08-07T15:43:00.000+08:00

In my previous post "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder- or isn't it?" I did talk about annorexic women. Annorexia is becoming a really problematic issue in today's society where looks are highly prized over brains. I was surfing youtube and I stumbled across this documentry. Please take time off to watch it. It covers the dangers of online anorexia communities.

I'm sure you guys all know what is anorexia nervosa by now. Personally, I think anorexia is terrible. It makes people look as appealing as a set of chopsticks you can dig out of the nearest bin. It robs them of their mental faculties and common sense. They look half dead and terrible. I don't know how they can find such joy in being such bony wrecks. Even the Jewish P.O.W.s found in concentration camps after WW2 look better than them.

As a food lover, I hate skinny people. They put me off my food because they don't eat together with me. It's so damn unfriendly and plain rude. And I noticed that constant dieting makes them so insecure that they drive their friends away. Because they ask everyone if they look skinny and sexy, and everyone has to lie through their teeth. As anorexia affects women more than men, all I can say is the ideal woman has curves. CURVES you know, like Monica Belluci?

Compared to this:

In Singapore, Anorexia is a growing problem, thanks to this stupid fashion trend that only makes your feet look big- the SKINNY jeans. And thanks to idiots like Fuazi Rassull who denies inspiring his readers to be anorexic. [READ HERE] That's bullshit, people cross the line from being skinny to anorexic when they cannot control the urge to be thinner and they set more and more unrealistic goals when it comes to weight loss. Besides, his moto is "Get Thin or Die Trying" that's a typical anorexic's goal.

But Fauzi, who is also the creator of "The Thinspo Club" on Facebook's rival social networking site Friendster, said all he was trying to do was gather like-minded individuals to share slimming tips.

"I just want Singaporeans to lead a healthy lifestyle as well," he said.

By the way, I hardly call the diet of bread and instant noodles healthy... Anyway,it might be a good thing if he starves himself to death. Singapore is a country that learns best by example. If he dies horribly, his followers will stop following him and society as a whole will learn how anorexics can be so caught up in their own "fantasy" that they die uglier than the day they were born.

To me, the ideal figure should be fit. A little fat here and there is fine. The last thing we need in this world are a bunch of wimps who can only smile and taking pretty pcitures but unable to do any physical labor. In the case of Rassull, I wonder if he's even capable of completing a road march with a full pack or practice 2hours of rifle drill. In fact, I predict that his life might be worse than hell if he enters the army because they will force him to eat and make an example out of him due to his penchant for being flashy.

There are more medical and psychological reasons as to why people become anorexic. One of which is control- eating is something that you are fully in control of. But I won't go into details. I want to focus more on the devastating effects of anorexia on the patient and his/her family and friends. Many people have starved themselves to death due to anorexia. Why can't people just be happy with themselves?

Most anorexics are lonely and they spend a lot of time on self pity and criticism. As a general rule, they are never happy and content. I think it's fine to be a chubby as long as you have a lovely personality. Skinny but sensitive and emotional people are definitely not my cup of tea. =D

In this documentry, the presenter actually experiments with a diet plan provided by one of the "pro-ana" websites. She has to survive on a total meal of 100 calories a day. That means half an apple for breakfast, half an apple for dinner and one cucumber. She broke the diet by the end of the day and was suprised by the sense of guilt that swamped her. When she tried to diet again, it was clear that she was starting to be incoherent and distacted.

In the documentry, it was revealed that many of the anorexis are very young. Approximately 10 years old. They gain inspiration from famous celebrities such as Victoria Beckham, Kate Moss, Kiera Knightley, etc.

This documentry brings out this million dollar question: Should we shut down such websites?

I would also like to highlight that if you're single and you can't find a partner. It might not be because of your looks, but your character. As demonstrated in my previous post "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder- or isn't it?" there's always someone out there who will love you for what you are. =D Character improvement beats plastic surgery, liposunction or crash dieting because you will always have the knowledge that people hang out with who you really are than what they think you are.

Boys, give me your opinion on what do you look for in a future partner? Please think hard about it and give me your honest opinion.

Girls, give me your opinion on what do you look for in a future partner? Please think hard about it and give me your honest opinion.

Singapore: The nation of closet slobs

2009-08-07T14:25:00.000+08:00

Singapore is an economically developed country with one of the most modern infrastructure in Southeast Asia. We have a reputation for being a clean and green country with a very polite and industrious working force. We have a strong economy, sound political structure and social harmony. Our students are intelligent and capable potentials being groomed to lead Singapore into greater heights.

Well, that’s what they all tell you. In truth, we are a nation of slobs- the main philosophy in life here is “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Nothing resembling progress occurs until someone submits a serious complaint that sends everyone scrambling to fix it before they lose their jobs… We hire others to do the dirty work whilst we maintain the illusion of soaring success and acute intelligence.

Look at the young adults today, for all their academic and corporate achievements, how many are actually capable of cooking a full meal? I.e. rice, fish, meat, veg and soup? Most of the people I’ve spoken to are woefully unable to progress beyond frying an egg and cooking instant noodles. When I spoke to my old art teacher who went for a year long course in Australia, she told me the horrors she noticed in the hostel there. Singaporean students were making a lot of calls back home to mummy to ask stuff like:

“How long does it take to boil an egg?”
“How to use the laundry machine?”
“How to get rid of the stain on my white shirt?”
“What type of soap powder to buy?”
“How to cook rice?”

The first and last ones were a real joke. To me, they are really basic. Ok, maybe rice cooking needs some skill and practice. As a general rule, the water level should reach your mid knuckle when you press down the rice. It varies with different brand and type of rice. As for egg boiling, it’s about 10 minutes for hard boil and about 5 minutes for soft boiled eggs. This is a website for all those who can’t even manage an egg- http://www.mrbreakfast.com/ask.asp

Singaporeans are too dependent on their mothers and maids. I’ve witness many a scenario where children are brought up in a completely safe environment till the point that they are nothing but spineless upstarts with a brain that they don’t know how to use properly. Scoring well academically does not equate to intelligence in my opinion. Having a PHD means you are clever but not necessarily wise nor insightful.

For example, when children fall down and scrap their knee, the maid gets blamed and scolded. As a result, the kid is always kept closeted to ensure his safety. To me, there’s nothing wrong with children getting a little bumped and scrapped now and then as it teaches them the following principles:

Pull yourself up when you fall; mummy isn’t going to be there forever (she has a shelf life and expiry date, you know)
Pain reminds you that you are alive and it will be a constant factor in your life. Learn how to cope with it and use it as a motivating factor to push you into achieving greater feats in life. Mummy isn’t going to coddle you and give you a big kiss each time you undergo emotional turmoil or an injury later on in life.
There is danger everywhere, you (and only you) can protect yourself by learning how negotiate your way around them with care. Mummy can’t be telling you to mind the wet floor everyday of your life.

These are precious lessons in life that we need to learn through experience. If parents deprive their children of experience, all the children have are certificates proving their academic capabilities and nothing more.

Singaporean children are so spoilt that they have almost everything they want and need. Primary school kids have a handphone, mp3, computer, good clothes, a lot of assessment books, tuition, etc. Is it the fault of the parents? Yes. It is possible that they work hard to give their kids the luxury they never had in their youth. It is possible that there is a competition among them to see who can provide the best for their children. What they do not know is that they are spoiling their children beyond belief. I’ve seen children screaming at their maid to get them a glass of water and it’s suddenly the maid’s job to ask hospitable questions to guests such as “Would you like a drink?” Tsk, that’s what the host should be asking the guest and instructing the maid to serve up.

Children today do not know the meaning of having to go hungry because their parents go hungry for them. They don’t know how to make their own beds because the maid or their mother does it for them. They can’t cook because parents are afraid that they will burn themselves as well as the entire house. Children are taught to packet food or eat cup noodles rather than cook a proper healthy meal for themselves. Children contribute to household cleaning with a broom/mop or “Magic Clean” dusters. That’s easy. But many of them do not know how to sweep or mop the floor properly! By my standards, they are merely rearranging the dust. When I mean clean, the floor is the “safe to eat your food off the floor” clean. =) I’m a Detol monster who insists on moping the floor by hand.

Look at home economics taught in schools today. In my mother’s generation, they were taught which parts of the cow/pig/goat were to be used for what type of cooking. They were taught how to do mending in addition to doing pretty stitches. They were taught how to use the sewing machine. Mum said she was thought how to cut and make her own dress. They were taught how to bake muffins and cookies! And the used the proper fire stoves and ovens.

By my generation, home economics was a joke. It was more like a financial management class with cooking demonstrations thrown in. All I learnt was:

How to differentiate between a want and a need when it comes to spending
Kitchen and household safety
How to have a healthy balanced diet (not that I follow it)
What I would call a sewing demonstration rather than a actual sewing class. We made a hand puppet and a letter holder. The stitches I learnt were oversewing stitch, running stitch and cross stitch (for sewing the button eyes onto my puppet. And I also learnt how to use fabric glue. That’s it. The pieces were all precut for me and I didn’t go anywhere near a sewing machine. I guess they didn’t want students to cut or prick their lovely little PERFECT fingers.
I learnt how to cook macaroni chicken soup, shepherd’s pie and spaghetti. The stoves were all induction cookers to ensure that we won’t burn down the entire building or ourselves. The macaroni was the most tasteless and healthy soup I ever had in my life. The chicken meat was so fat free that I could kill you if I threw it at your head after boiling it. It was dry and HARD. Never mind that, there’s no salt at all. The shepherd’s pie was a greater joke. There was a pre-boiled potato waiting for me. All I had to do was to take a fork and mesh it. The teacher fried the meat for all of us. Than she filled up the aluminum foil cups for us with the meat, told us to spread the potatoes on top of it and baked it for us. The Spaghetti was also an interesting experience- boil the spaghetti and open a bottle of tomato paste (not the Preggo Spaghetti sauce type, it’s really tomato paste). Again, it was a tasteless disaster.
I also learnt the cooking appliances were unpredictable monsters since only half of the stoves/ovens in the HE room can be used at one time. Out of which, you have to chose to use either the stove or the oven. Otherwise, the whole building will black out.

All in all, I call the revised HE curriculum a joke. It overdid the tradeoff between safety, taste and health. Ask any mother or grandmother, who can cook well, how many times have they been burnt by spraying oil or being too careless near a hot wok/stove? I have quite about twenty burns accumulated from the past 10 years. My interest in sewing died as I grew older, but I still do it for fun when I feel like it. =)

Another point that I’ll bring up is- how many Singaporeans can actually survive on their own in a jungle, without modern technology? I’m going to throw out the NS guys and OBS monsters for the sake of this argument. If a war comes to Singapore, how many Singaporeans know how to identify edible plants and animals from our forests? How many Singaporeans can start a fire without the following tools- matches, lighter, solid fuel and a fire starter?

Here we are, all proud of our meager accomplishments in life when most Singaporeans don’t even know how to unclog their own sink or toilet bowl… Did you know that one part of baking soda and 4 parts of vinegar can unclog a choked sink? How many of you know how to change your own lock? Given our ever increasing levels of affluence, we rather call the handyman to do this short of menial labor and call them stupid and unaccomplished behind their backs. Well, don’t call people idiots-with-no-future unless there’s nothing they can do that you can’t do.

Most of the Singaporeans that I know are lacking general knowledge. They read the newspaper religiously for exams and to ensure that they won’t look like a complete idiot when questioned about the latest global scandal. They reject the notion of reading beyond the school curriculum because they have this mentality that the important stuff will be covered in school, anything beyond that it useless. Well, they’re wrong. There’s never such thing as useless knowledge. Almost every Singaporean, who doesn’t specialize in history, is blissfully unaware that Singapore was MORE than a little fishing village when Raffles swung by. We have archaeological evidence that we were once a thriving trading center during the Srivijaya Empire. Secondly, I would like to highlight that Sir Stamford Raffles isn’t our founder. The name “Singapore” was given to us by Sang Nila Utama, so he is our founder, not the angmoh that waltzed by looking for a nice place to set up a new trading post. See how terribly history can be misconstrued? And how stupid students gobble it up wholesale for the sake of exams? We can’t even be bothered to question what we have been taught, because it is unacceptable and it’ll most likely lead to an F grade.

Schools today are so anal about MCs, which is something I frown upon greatly. I understand that this system was set up to prevent students from forging letters on their parents’ behalf to excuse them from school, so they can do more meaningful stuff like playing. But if I’m having a fever due to a cold, why do I have to see a Doctor so that I can get an MC when I can just bloody well spend a day or two at home gulping down lots of water, Panadol Cold and sleeping the illness off? I have better things to throw my money on. I think more discretion should be practiced such as calling up the kid’s parents to verify the authenticity of the letter. See, even teachers are lazy!

Look at parents today! As long as they can afford to hire the maid, the maid has to settle the household chores, taking care of the employers’ mad temper, their rabid children, etc. In Singapore, maids are the surrogate mothers to their employer’s children. It’s their “duty” to make sure the child eats well, sleeps well, shower well, study well and play well. It makes you wonder- what the hell are our Singapore mothers doing? I think the excuse that she has to work for her children’s comfort is crap. All children need are clean comfortable clothes, a full stomach, comfortable bed and a mother’s love/companionship. The last factor is the most important; they don’t need the branded clothes, expensive fish/meat, King-Koil mattress, etc. They can live without it. I strongly suspect that such expensive treatment is due a mother’s guilt that she isn’t spending enough time with her children. That’s why when children turn deviant; I blame their parents first more than anyone else, for not nipping the problem in the bud.

The Melodramatic Imagination

2009-08-07T11:41:00.000+08:00

I read an article in the Chinese paper, Lian He Zaobao a couple of days back, which inspired me to do this post.

What was the article about? It was from someone who was involved in a recent Chinese essay writing competition for primary school students.

The person was lamenting the essays that were written for the competition.

Badly written? No.

It was an issue of the plots.

For example, one of the topics was “The day our teacher didn’t come to school”. Most students wrote, well, you could have guessed it, that their teacher was diagnosed with cancer, or had an accident, and from there they wrote about how much they took their teacher for granted…

Another topic was “Now I understand” (note: the topics were in Chinese. The translations are my own.) The students always understood something after some death or accident.

Of course, there were other topics, like describing your weekend with your mother, which didn’t go beyond shopping…

So what’s the issue? As the title suggests, the writer in the article was lamenting the melodramatic imagination of primary school students, and fearing for their psychological development.

In my opinion, the problem of all this melodrama is understandable, but psychological impact? This is harder to tell.

And I have the following reasons.

It’s not that students are fundamentally pessimistic. It’s pretty much to do with the way they are taught to write essays. Students are often told to write something with greater emotional impact, with more room to explore emotions, and can express more values. Like not taking your teacher for granted, for example. Writing something that has greater emotional impact, they’re told, looks better than a “boring”, essay that has got a “happily ever after” ending.

Besides, even famous authors do that, except with much more stylistic flair, of course.

The next reason is that of socialization. Students are socialized to accept certain values, and these values are expressed in their writing. For example, they could write about how the class cheered wildly the day their teacher didn’t come to school, because the teacher was one from hell, for example, but first, that wouldn’t be “addressing the topic” in the eyes of the judges, and second, it doesn’t reflect well on the values of the student.

But of course, all these melodrama is not without its concerns. For a start, it doesn’t reflect well on creativity. Think about it, even Mediacorp is into this melodrama, with all the rape and kidnap scenes in their drama serials. Society seems to be overwhelmed by this fetish for tragedy, while forgetting the value of the comedic and the light-hearted.

Just think about it, what’s wrong with writing about a shopping trip with mum?

Misplaced Pity and Misunderstanding

2009-08-06T17:15:00.000+08:00

When I travel overseas, I always get plagued by beggars. It brings up the question: to give or not to give? On the practical note, it is not advisable to give them any money because you will be merely feeding the begging industry, which is already overstaffed with all the lazy never do wells. Not to mention, once you patronize one beggar, you might see a long queue forming up behind him. On the ehical level, it is hard not to feel pity for the poor people trying to get some money to feed their families.

In the past, I donated money only to beggars who lost either both arms or all limb because I figured those with hands and legs can jolly well make themselves more useful than that. This continued until the day that I found out that some of them had their limbs forcefully amputated by gangs in order to use them as icons to milk sympathetic money out of soft hearted people. So I'm a hard hearted person now. I gave up the moralistic battle because I'm not sure if I'm helping to feed the beggar or the godforsaken gangster.

Take a look at the following video about the street kids and the dead poor people in Manila. Do you feel pity for them? People stuck in the vicious cycle of poverty, unable to afford school or even a proper meal, etc?

Well, I don't pity them because of a few reasons. In Jarkata, I learnt that women walking around with a troop of children to beg for money along the streets are not necessarily poor and neither are the kids their beget. They have an industry of borrowed children. These women "rent" their neighbours kids in order to create an image of a poor woman bogged down with the task of feeding her children.

The business of begging has reached the point where pretty much everything is staged. Walk along the streets of Jarkata or Manila and you'll see children lying down by the roadside as if they are halfdead from the lack of food. It would be natural to assume that they would be living somewhere nearby as they won't have the energy to walk off right? When nightfalls, the street is mysteriously empty, and there are no little kiddies lying postrate on the road pavements. And I've once seen the kids get up and run at the sight of an aggressive policeman too! So I have my doubts.

In ELDCs [i], the poor aren't as poor as they look due to the low standards of living. When I drove into the rural parts of Indonesia and the Philippines, I learnt that you can survive on very little money there. For example, a trishaw rider in the kampung probably earns less than 10 SGD a month. He peddles probably an average of one or two kampung women and her shopping from the market to her home each day. Each trip costs only a few cents. And yet, he can bring up a huge family of probably 4-8 children. You must be thinking, how is that possible? Unlike the gluttons that we Singaporeans are, they are normally content with rice and some chili paste for their daily meals. Meat and fish are only served on special occasions or to a sick family member only. Even the extremely poor loafers in the kampungs get by on coconuts they pluck from the multitude of coconut trees growing around. Very few people have died of starvation in Kampungs unless there is a famine.

Some foreigners insist that Singaporeans violate human rights by paying our maids a criminally low wage. All I can say is HA HA in the most sarcastic tone I can summon. A maid earns approximately SGD50 working in Jarkata. She earns approximately $350 here. That's seven times more! And some caucasians have even said we treat them worse than humans because we don't give them a room on their own nor do we give them a bed. Why must we give our maid a room on her own??? Unlike most Americans who can easily afford to give their in-laws and children a room on their own due to cheap landed property, most Singaporeans are barely able to buy landed property. Given a kid his own room is tough, much less a maid. And what's wrong with sleeping on the mattress?? Back in the Kampungs, they use mats in most households! In fact, they are so poor that its quite a feat to have a sofa in the house.

As I get older, I think it is good to be generous to some people rather than everyone because they have the will to improve. For example, I wouldn't mind "adopting" a few street kids in Jarkata and Manila by paying for their education and some decent food. However, I would only do that IF the kid is willing to possess a little more ambition in life than being the next king of the beggars.

To me, the poor people always remain poor for a reason- they don't know how to keep their money. I was a little taken aback when I was in Jarkata. Almost everyone had a handphone (even the beggars dammit). In the kampung, I see women yaking away on their handphones whilst their children are dressed in rags/hand-me-downs, with no other toy beyond a cardbox (because they can't afford anything more). Calls might be cheap there, but it's still money. The men in Indonesia can easily be mistaken for chimney pipes- they are serial chain smokers! Even 14 year old boys are smoking. Sheesh. Ciggies are cheap there, but once again, it's still money. Money that could be channeled to better uses such as education or patching up that hole in the roof which could pass off as an airwell or sun roof.

This is a photo I took myself of a little boy playing with a cardbox. That's his only toy and his father can't even afford to buy him shoes. The clothes you see on him is a gift from his neighbours. His father has a really severe case of pile due to heavy labor (his pants are always bloody at the back). His mum is working in Taiwan, but she just went there, so she has no money to send back yet.

So, should we pity them? It is hard to say isn't it? But that's life to them. If we give money to them, are we helping them or harming them? After my long exposure to these poor people, I realized, it is better to leave them on their own because you can never help them all. If you truly want to help them, the old saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a life time" could not be more true. You will have to teach them to value of working hard for what they want instead of giving them money in hope that their lives will improve in time.

[i] Economically Less Developed Countries- please note that this is the politically correct term to use when describing countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, Cambodia, etc. The terms first world and third world have be phased out after the Cold War and Vietnam War. F.Y.I.: First World refers to US and its allies (i.e. democractic countries), Third World refers to Communist Countries and Second World refers to all the other countries that don't fit into either categories.

禽兽不如 Humans can be worse than beasts Part 2

2009-08-06T11:00:00.000+08:00

After reading more about animal rape, I learnt that the terminology was called bestiality. Last night, I came upon a website that hosts submissions of bestiality stories, boy was I disturbed. No, it’s not because it got me aroused in anyway (Tsk, you horny people!); it’s because of the sheer lack of guilt! In psychology, these people suffer from zoophilia (preference for sex with animals over a human). But a medical term isn’t enough to help me understand what made this people prefer animals over humans. So my best friend, Google Search Engine, came to my rescue.

Please note that I’m writing this post to explore the issue of fetishes, not because I want to inspire people to develop zoophilia or whatever weird, obscene habits. From a personal point of view, I think it’s disgusting, downright degrading and the epitome of the word- desperate. That’s probably because I’ve hypoactive sexual desire. If any of the readers out there engage in this type of behavior, please feel free to email me your thoughts so I can achieve better understanding. I am actually capable of getting bored when reading so called sexually charged articles. I am SO hypoactive that I don’t understand how people can get addicted to sex, porn or dirty talk. It is NOT a disorder because I don’t feel distraught over it. =)

I think I became an asexual person once I started researching on the various “-philias” that people engage in. Given the obscenely long list out there, I’m sure everyone has one fetish or another (so dangerous). Since humans are the root of all problems in life, I’m staying away… For all of you curious nuts out there, people have very weird interests. I’ll just name a few here, with my personal opinions in brackets:

Necrophilia- sexual fetish for corpses (She/he looks a little blue, stiff and smells funny eh?)
Podophilia- sexual fetish for feet (Yikes, it stinks and is that foot rot?)
Odaxelagnia - sexual fetish for biting (Do I look like a juicy chicken drumstick to you?
Retifism- sexual fetish for shoes (Urgh, I hope it’s a nice pair)
Hierophilia- sexual fetish for sacred items (Think the Exorcist)
Electrophilia- sexual fetish for electricity i.e. literally being exposed to electric shocks (shocking isn’t it?)
Gerontophilia- sexual fetish for old and enfeebled people (I bet you’ll like raisins and prunes too)
Eproctophilia - sexual fetish for farting (I can do without the methane overdose)
Parthenophilia- sexual fetish for deflowering virgins (such a Neanderthal thinking)
Urophilia- sexual fetish for urine (I hope it’s sanitary)
Narratophilia- sexual fetish for talking dirty (Where’s the chili Padi/soap??)
Autassassinophilia- sexual fetish for putting yourself in life threatening situations (How about lying on the train tracks?)

Back to the bestiality stories, I learnt that zoophilia was a small issue. When people write stories, be it fictional or otherwise, they reveal a little about themselves and their thoughts. I’m NOT going to post the weblink up here because of the readers are under-aged. I know you guys aren’t that innocent, but let me play my role as a “responsible” adult- please don’t get addicted to pornography after reading this. It’s not because my conscience will be troubled but it’s just bad for your mental and moral development. The last thing we need is a nation of rapists and molesters. By the way, I ascribe to the old punishments of castrating rapists, chopping the hands off molesters and stuffing a hot poker up the buttocks of a sodomist. I don’t have sympathy for those who inflict psychological and physical harm on others.

After spending 3 miserable hours reading through entries (I was seriously dead bored from reading stories that conspicuously lack vocabulary from beyond the realm sexual connotations. Ah well, the price you pay for research.), I gleaned the following information:

Most of the offenders (for the lack of a better word) suffer from Nymphomania/Satyriasis (i.e. VERY high sex drive). Teenage readers need not worry about that because teenage horniness is due to hormonal changes. Most of the offenders are normally in their 30s or 40s who are compulsive masturbators.
Most do not suffer from Zoophilia by default.
Most of the offenders discover the “joys” of bestiality by accident or are heavily influenced by stuff they read over the internet.
Most of them suffer from more than one fetish.
All of them are desperate- gender, age and species don’t matter. I’m so thankful that interspecies breeding doesn’t work out. Can you imagine how hybrid dog/human, pig/human, horse/human, goat/human, chicken/human, etc would look like? The Minotaur, Centaurs and Satyrs are creatures of our imagination.
Most of them are old, fat and therefore ugly women to me. Alternatively, they were adolescent boys who enjoy getting licked by their family dog. Urgh.
I hope the animals involved won’t end up with mutated forms of human STDs.

There was ONE story that particularly disturbed me. It was about a girl who got introduced and hooked onto sex when she was nine. And the biggest kick in the nuts came when it was revealed that it was her mum who introduced her into the world of debauchery. By the time she was 13, she and her mum were sharing partners and she reached the stage where she was woefully unable to look at any guy beyond his nuts. She was literally experimenting with anything and everything that she could wank. That’s tragic and disturbing even for a fictional story. The story went on and on and on and on and on and on about her various exploits. She even called herself a cheap slut. I can’t think of any worse a name to call oneself.

I think an active sex life should only occur when a person is in their early 20s. By that age, they would have known what they want, any younger than that would normally result in psychological trauma. The greatest example that comes into mind is Mary Bell, who murdered of her playmates when she was 10 years old. During her trial, she horrified everyone with her conspicuous lack of guilt. She was sexually abused since the age of 5 by her mother’s customers.
Read more here: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/bell/index_1.html

Ammendment:

I forgot to add another fetish! It's called Objectophilia- sexual fetish for objects. Here is a documentry for you!

In the recent news, Miss Wolfe, 33, announced that she will be marrying the fairground ride that she has been in love with since she was 13 years old. Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5972632/Woman-getting-married-to-fairground-ride.html

So what’s your take on abnormal sexual fetishes? Contribute your ideas at the chatroll!

禽兽不如 Humans can be worse than beasts

2009-08-05T22:08:00.000+08:00

Today, whist browsing the news online, this headline just screamed for my attention "Stable owner catches man having sex with horse". Wow, another desperate guy having the hots for a horse. We have lots of beautiful women and men in this world who are willing to offer any decent looking human sex for free or for a token of appreciation. But some people in this world have other sexual preferences. Let me name a few:

COLUMBIA, S.C. — A South Carolina man was charged with having sex with a horse after the animal's owner caught the act on videotape, then staked out the stable and caught him at shotgun point, authorities said Wednesday.

But this wasn't the first time Rodell Vereen has been charged. He pleaded guilty last year to having sex with the same horse after owner Barbara Kenley found him in the same stable. Then he was sentenced to probation and placed on the state's sex offender list.

Kenley said she noticed several weeks ago that her 21-year-old horse Sugar was acting strange and getting infections. She noticed things in the barn had been moved around — dirt piled up and bales of hay stacked near the horse's stall at her Lazy B Stables in Longs, about 20 miles northeast of Myrtle Beach.

Taken from: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/bizarre/6553012.html#none

The poor horse got an infection!! Poor thing, I hope she didn't get any STDs from that wierdo. I suspect he has a really strong infatuation for the horse, since he can't stop seeing her. Being caught in the embarassing situation once obviously wasn't a deterrent in this case.

The rapist groaned and held on tightly to his victim’s small body as he forcibly penetrated her small opening. High on drugs, the beast apparently thought he was having sex with a human. In a corner, a horrified witness watched the suspect force himself into the chicken’s cloaca -- a channel for waste, and passage of the egg.

A bounty has been offered by the chicken’s owner, Ely Antonino Flores, for the arrest of the drug-crazed man who allegedly raped to death his prized hen at a local fighting cock farm in Bgy. Agnaya, Plaridel town.
The ravaged hen died moments later.

Flores said a texas breeder egg costs P5,000 each (around $100 each). He added that his prized hen usually delivered at least five eggs at a time.

Taken from: http://salaswildthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/07/why-would-someone-rape-chicken.html

Twisted Patricia Newman, 40, had even trained her pet Alsation to have sex with her, a court heard.

She was arrested after police found a video of the vile act.

Taken from: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2242022.ece

SARASOTA COUNTY, FL -- Sarasota County Deputies have arrested a woman who videotaped herself having sex with two dogs.

Deputies say Caroline Willette videotaped herself having sex with two dogs and watching child pornography with a friend.

Taken from: http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/local/story/Sarasota-woman-arrested-child-porn-having-sex-dog/FGrD5wAmzUSsJEWHMnuXhA.cspx

Ok, thats all I'm going to look for. I'm VERY disturbed as to the never ending perverse stories that people create. I still prefer animals over humans...

孔乙己

2009-08-05T12:59:00.000+08:00

Before anyone asks “What on earth does the title mean?” I’ll do a quick explanation.

The title (pronounced Kong Yi Ji) is a character from a novel written by the great Chinese novelist Lu Xun (鲁迅).

And before I move on to talk about the topic related to this character, here’s the story in gist:

Kong was a scholar who repeatedly failed the Imperial Exams in China. In addition to his failed academic career, he’s also poor, for he’s never held a job for long.

But despite his failure and poverty, he still feels self-important as a scholar. He continues to wear his chang shan (长衫), the standard dress for the literati at that time, even though it’s torn and dirty.

And because of his poverty, he has resorted to stealing books from others to get money for wine.

He buys his wine from a tavern that he frequents, but every time he’s there, the people in the tavern, from the boss to the customers, even the young assistant, who’s the narrator in the novel, makes fun of him.

They say things like: “You’ve gone stealing again!” “How come you can’t even get a Xiu Cai! (秀才, the lowest level in the Imperial Exams)”

Kong will then get moralistic, quoting all the Confucian classics, much to the laughter of the people in the tavern.

He could have settled for a job writing and reading letters for the illiterate folk in the town, but again, owing to his self-importance as a “scholar”, he didn’t.

Eventually, he didn’t come to the tavern for days. Everyone was initially curious, but soon after, life simply went on without him.

The last time he came to the tavern, he was crawling. Turns out, he was caught stealing from Ding juren (举人, the second level in the Imperial Exams), who got his henchmen to beat him up, till his legs broke. But despite his sorry state, he received no sympathies, and after drinking his wine, he crawled out of the tavern, never to return.

What are the lessons from the story?

First, whether Kong deserved any sympathies.

He does, if you consider the sorry state he ended up in. stealing is wrong, but being beaten to that state is way too much. It exposes the inequality of society, and the injustice that people in power inflict over the weak in society.

But nevertheless, he has himself to blame for his predicament. His self-importance as a “scholar”, albeit a failed one, his refusal to settle for a decent, respectable job, and his irrelevance, quoting Confucian classics while living in the modern world, creates the situation where he cannot be accepted by society.

In addition, “morals” and so-called “principles” are mere excuses for the failure to improve and reflect on his predicament.

Actually, though the story is set in the 20th century, many things remain relevant to our times. In any society in any time, there’s always a Kong Yi Ji, who’s always bullied and ridiculed, who’s unwilling to face failure, who’s unwilling to change and improve, who’s unwilling to adapt to changing times, and who is so insignificant, life for everyone else goes on, with or without him.

You'll never know when Retribution will COME

2009-08-03T18:09:00.000+08:00

Do you think there's such a thing as retribution? In today's ST, I was quite upset with the report regarding the elderly being preyed on by a plump con-woman in her 40s or 50s. She posed as a welfare worker who knocked on their doors and invited herself to clean their homes. The part that disgusted me the most was that she preyed on those who lived alone and on a shoe string budget. One of the victims survives on the $360 he gets from public assistance every month! That sorry excuse of humanity (aka the con-woman) stole his $100 angpow, which he could have used to buy other daily necessities or treat himself to a better meal.

The elderly are frail and dependent on other people in society to take care of them. The last thing they need is someone to take advantage of their dependence. They have lived for so long and contributed much to society, they have experienced all the joys and crap that life has to offer. So treating them in such a manner, is just plain disgusting and reflects badly on one's morals. I hope that woman gets her just desserts; I trust karma to come around chewing her ass. Speaking of karma/retribution, have you guys watched the movie "Hard Candy"?

Its a pretty disturbing movie about a pedophile, Jeff, getting his just desserts. He meets up with this girl called Hayley that he chatted up with online. They engage in some flirtation and they go to his home to listen to his Goldfrappe concert recordings. Hayley mixes them some screwdrivers and before Jeff knows it, he passes out. When he wakes up, he finds himself bound to a wheeled computer chair, and Hayley reveals that she's not the 14year old girl that she said she was. She begins to interrogate him about his involvement with the murder and rape of Donna Mauer. Jeff denies it all and distract Hayley whilst he tried to get his gun. Unfortunately, Hayley predicted this move and quickly asphyxiate Jeff with plastic wrap into unconsciousness.

When he next gets up, he finds himself on a steel table with an ice pack over his nuts, listening to Hayley calmly informing him that he will be castrated for the good of humanity, so he could never prey on another innocent kid again. She sets up a video tripod aiming at his exposed genetilia and linked it to his kitchen TV, so that he can watch himself being castrated (is this evil of what). This is the castration scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMXed9Nvjfo Unfortunately, I can't embed it. Guys, you might get a litte uncomfortable especially when you hear the sound of Jeff''s testicles going into the garbage disposal (for those of you who don't know what it is, its a grinder that most Americans have in their sinks to chop up their rubbish into small bits) after she's done with the castration.

If you watch the full movie, you'll learn that he wasn't really castrated. She just used a clothes peg to clip his testicles to give him the sensation of pain and played a medical video of a castration op. Lord knows where she got the testicles that she dumped into the garbage disposal unit.

You can read more here

The moral of this movie is- you don't know where or when revenge will come nor what form it will take. Ultimately, restribution came in the form of Hayley who convinced Jeff to commit suicide using a combination of guilt and stress.

This is the trailer:

Holy Crap! I can't believe my eyes

2009-08-02T15:47:00.000+08:00

I always found it wierd how people can find the image of Jesus, Mary and even MJ in the most unlikely places. Is it psychological? Merely us trying to make sense of a pattern? Or is it pareidolia at work? Or is it a true paranormal occurance? Or is just blind faith? Here are a few stories:

Jesus on a frying pan
Juan Patrano, who lives in Prairie Lea, Texas was washing his dishes one night when he suddenly saw the face of Jesus staring up at him. He wrapped the pan in plastic and hung it on the wall, never to be used again. Juan says he's a "religious man" so the likeness has a personal, deep meaning to him. Not that religious, however, that he isn't considering selling the pan on Ebay for the obscene amount of money this stuff has brought in lately. It's more blessed to get a lot of money than it is to be personally hand picked to receive the image of Our Lord on your frying pan.
Taken from: http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Religion/Jesuspan.html

Virgin Mary on Sandwich
A Florida woman put the sandwich up for sale, saying it has brought her great luck since she found it 10 years ago.

She described how she came across the mysterious morsel.

"I made this sandwich 10 years ago. When I took a bite out of it, I saw a face looking up at me - it was Virgin Mary starring (sic) back at me. I was in total shock," she explained.

Mrs Duyser has since kept the toastie surrounded by cotton wool, in a plastic container on a stand.

She says a decade on from its conception, it has not shown any sign of mould or crumbling - which she considers "a miracle".

Taken from: BBC News

Virgin Mary appearing on Tree Stump

The supposed vision surprised locals who have come in their hundreds to pray and light candles in the grounds of Holy Mary Parish church.

While some believe the willow should be preserved and covered in glass, others think the believers are just barking up the wrong tree.

Noel White, Rathkeale Community Council Graveyard Committee chairman, said workmen sprucing up the church land saw the image when they cut the tree.

"One of the lads said look, our Blessed Lady in the tree," Mr White said.

"One of the other lads looked over and actually knelt down and blessed himself, he got such a shock.

"It was the perfect shape of the figure of Our Lady holding the baby."

Candles and rosary beads have been draped over the stump by prayerful locals with up to 700 holding a candlelight vigil last night and into the early hours of the morning.
Taken from: The Telegraph

Jesus appearing on Cider Bottle
Michael Cartwright discovered the face of Jesus on his bottle of cider
"When I saw it I got goose pimples," 35-year-old Mr Cartwright said yesterday. "I have no doubt it is the face of Jesus. You can even see his beard and hair."
Mr Cartwright, a taxi driver from Darlington, noticed the extraordinary image while drinking with a group of friends at his local, the Tanners Hall.
"As the barmaid removed the cap to the cider I suddenly realised what was staring back at me," he added.
One of Mr Cartwright's friends took a photograph. It was only the following morning that he realised how clear the image was. But by then it was too late to retrieve the bottle.
"It ended up getting collected by a barmaid when no one was paying attention and thrown away," said Mr Cartwright.
Taken from: The Daily Mail

Jesus on a Tortilla
Mario Rubio is rolling a burrito when she notices skillet burns on the tortilla resembling the mournful face of Jesus Christ. Shortly thereafter, 8,000 curious pilgrims trek to the Rubios' small stucco house in rural New Mexico to view the sacred icon. Mrs. Rubio leaves her house unlocked so that visitors may freely enter and examine the tortilla.
Taken from: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/electronic-publications/stay-free/5/jesus.htm

Jesus on Chopped Wood
A gasoline log splitter cut through a piece of wood, leaving behind an image of Jesus’ face. Wolfe said the machine was making all kinds of noises as it was working its way through the wood. It got to the point where it was going to get bogged down when it finally split the log.

“You would never dream something like this is going to happen,” he said.

Wolfe was cutting the wood with his friend and his friend’s son. When the image appeared, his friend told him it looked like Jesus.
Taken from: Star Beacon

Michael Jackson on Car Bonnet
It appeared to show that the 'King of Pop' had made a swift ascent to the heavens after his death.

Father of two Gary Sloggett, 43, had taken some photographs of his Rover 200 with the intention of submitting them to a car sales magazine.

But when he uploaded the snaps onto his computer he was shocked to see Michael Jackson who had died just 13 hours earlier - staring back at him.

'It's quite extraordinary,' said Gary, of Stafford. 'The obvious explanation is that it seems to be some sort of cloud formation that just happened at the time.'

'But I've shown the picture to quite a few people and without prompting they all say: 'That's Jacko.'

Taken from: The Telegraph

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

2009-08-02T14:47:00.000+08:00

After the big debate over what is OCD last night, I've decided to do a post on what is OCD.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder: A psychiatric disorder characterized by obsessive thoughts and compulsive actions, such as cleaning, checking, counting, or hoarding. Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), one of the anxiety disorders, is a potentially disabling condition that can persist throughout a person's life. The individual who suffers from OCD becomes trapped in a pattern of repetitive thoughts and behaviors that are senseless and distressing but extremely difficult to overcome. OCD occurs in a spectrum from mild to severe, but if severe and left untreated, can destroy a person's capacity to function at work, at school, or even in the home.

The obsessions are unwanted ideas or impulses that repeatedly well up in the mind of the person with OCD. Persistent fears that harm may come to self or a loved one, an unreasonable concern with becoming contaminated, or an excessive need to do things correctly or perfectly, are common. Again and again, the individual experiences a disturbing thought, such as, "My hands may be contaminated--I must wash them"; "I may have left the gas on"; or "I am going to injure my child." These thoughts are intrusive, unpleasant, and produce a high degree of anxiety. Sometimes the obsessions are of a violent or a sexual nature, or concern illness.

In response to their obsessions, most people with OCD resort to repetitive behaviors called compulsions. The most common of these are washing and checking. Other compulsive behaviors include counting (often while performing another compulsive action such as hand washing), repeating, hoarding, and endlessly rearranging objects in an effort to keep them in precise alignment with each other. Mental problems, such as mentally repeating phrases, listmaking, or checking are also common. These behaviors generally are intended to ward off harm to the person with OCD or others. Some people with OCD have regimented rituals while others have rituals that are complex and changing. Performing rituals may give the person with OCD some relief from anxiety, but it is only temporary.

Taken from: medterms.com

This is an interesting documentry that showcases two cases of OCD. One is a girl who MUST check if her doors are locked, and the other girl who must check if everything is switched off. Unlike what "somebody" said last night, the difference between OCD and careful people lies in the compulsive nature.

It is possible that a flight engineer is obsessed with perfection, but he is not compulsive. As mentioned earlier, compulsive would mean that the person just has to do something over and over again. Having an obsession with a clean and neat table, may not make you an OCD. Most people with OCD have rituals to follow, they get VERY upset and emotionally distraught when the ritual is disrupted. For example, if the only sink in the house breaks down for a hand-washing OCD, she may plunge into panic and depression. In severe cases, suicide is even possible.

This isn't the most accurate OCD video ever, but I would like you to focus on the ritualistic aspects of his OCD. Ignore the neat geek phenomenon. He does everything in sets of three, and when the key broke. He just panicked, he was distraught over the broken key.

OCD is a very common disorder, but most people have it in mild levels. Please do not confuse it with pet peeves. For me, I must have a clean floor and I will obsessively check if the taps are closed before I can go to bed. It normally worsens when I'm stressed. I can get up 4 to 5 times a night to check if the tap is fully closed. I would get up in the middle of the night to clean my room floor if the little voice told me it wasn't clean enough. Thankfully, I got over it. I can control the compulsions now.

Interesting Rules!

2009-08-02T12:45:00.000+08:00

I just came across this news article and shucks, I couldn't stop laughing... It is about all the various laws from countries around the world that tourists should be aware of. So I researched a little more and compiled a list of all the wierd rules from the world that are pretty much not taken seriously today.

1. In Milan it is a legal requirement to smile at all times, except during funerals or hospital visits.
2. In Massachusetts, taxi drivers are prohibited from making love in the front seat of the car during their shifts.
3. In Denmark, people are legally obliged to honk the horn and check for small children underneath the car.
4. In Thailand, it is illegal for anyone to leave a building without wearing their pants.
5. In Michigan, anyone planning on bathing in public must have their swim suit inspected by a police officer.
6. In Florida, any unmarried woman who parachutes on a Sunday could be jailed. Singing while wearing a swimming costume is also prohibited.
7. In Portugal it is unlawful to urinate in the sea.
8. In Hong Kong the wife of a husband who commits adultery is legally entitled to kill the mistress in any manner desired, and the husband with just her bare hands.
9. In Switzerland flushing the lavatory after 10pm is illegal.
10. In Canada if you are arrested and then released from prison, it is a legal requirement that the felon is given a handgun with bullets and a horse, so they can ride safely out of the town.

Taken From: The Telegraph

More wierd rules:

1. Alaska - It is illegal to take a picture of a live bear. Better shoot it before getting that scenic shot!
2. Arizona - If a thirsty vagrant comes knocking on your door asking for a glass of water, denying to serve them is a punishable offense.
3. Arkansas - Beating your wife once a month? Go for it! More than once a month and the cuffs come out.
4. Colorado - Your pet goat is not allowed to graze on grass that is on city property. Aww, come on.
5. Connecticut - In Devon, Connecticut, it is illegal to walk backwards after sunset.
6. Delaware - Whispering within 300 feet of a church is considered a crime.
7. Florida - All pregnant pigs must be allowed to roam free, anywhere in the state.
8. Idaho - Fishing while on the back of an elephant is strictly prohibited.
9. Illinois - In Chicago, it is illegal to eat in any building which is currently on fire. Well, duh!
10. Kentucky - Throwing tomatoes at a public speaker is punishable by up to one year in jail.
11. Louisiana - In Jefferson Parish, all garbage fed to hogs must first be cooked, no matter what the garbage contains.
12. Massachusetts - It is illegal to park your donkey in a bath tub. Umm, excuse me, what?

Taken From: Amusing outdated laws

EVEN MORE OUTDATED LAWS

1. It is illegal for a cab in the City of London to carry rabid dogs or corpses.
2. It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament.
3. It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British monarch upside
down.
4. In France, it is forbidden to call a pig Napoleon
5. Under the UK’s Tax Avoidance Schemes Regulations 2006, it is illegal not to tell the taxman anything you don’t want him to know, though you don’t have to tell him anything you don’t mind him knowing.
6. In Ohio, it is against state law to get a fish drunk.
7. Royal Navy ships that enter the Port of London must provide a barrel of rum to the Constable of the Tower of London.
8. In the UK, a pregnant woman can legally relieve herself anywhere
she wants – even, if she so requests, in a policeman’s helmet.
9. In Indonesia, the penalty for masturbation is decapitation.
10. In England, all men over the age of 14 must carry out two hours of longbow practice a day.
11. In San Salvador, drunk drivers can be punished by death before a firing
squad.
12. In the UK, a man who feels compelled to urinate in public can do so only if he aims for his rear wheel and keeps his right hand on his vehicle.
13. In Kentucky, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon more than six-feet long.
14. In Chester, Welshmen are banned from entering the city before sunrise and from staying after sunset.
15. In the city of York, it is legal to murder a Scotsman within the ancient city walls, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.
16. In Vermont, women must obtain written permission from their husbands to wear false teeth.
17. In London, it is illegal to flag down a taxi if you have the plague.
18. In Bahrain, a male doctor may legally examine a woman’s genitals but is forbidden from looking directly at them during the examination; he may only see their reflection in a mirror.
19. The head of any dead whale found on the British coast is legally the property of the King; the tail, on the other hand, belongs to the Queen - in case she needs the bones for her corset.

Taken from: The world's strangest laws

Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder- or isn't it?

2009-08-01T13:44:00.000+08:00

There is something wrong with me... Maybe its my assexual nature, I never found either gender good enough to hold my attention for more than 2 minutes. TWO minutes, thats all the time I need to dig out a person's flaws and my bone deep cynicism and distrust of people to kick into gear. Either the person is as interesting an average *bleep* (I'm leaving that part out until I can find something I find less interesting than an average human), or there's a something stuff between that person's teeth, or it could be bad breath, or it could be body odour, too much hair, too little hair, terrible literacy skills or just that set of protruding ears/nose. So what is beauty?

I always thought the world of muscular perfection in people. The beautiful definitions, sharp edges and alluring network of veins. It looks like a work of art to me. Until I came upon the picture of Madonna looking like this (left), taken from the Telegraph. From that moment, my fantasies came to a screeching halt. I had this compulsive urge to scream the "White HULK!!" (I'm not being racist here, Madonna isn't green... yet)

She has reached a stage of physical perfection that almost every individual muscle is fully defined. Her personal trainer, Anderson, had the guts to say "Madonna will never look her age," she insists. "She doesn't even look half her age – she looks 19." Well, I say Madonna looks like one of the exhibits by Dr van Hagen's body (minus the testicles and penis plus a slightly bigger but rapidly shrinking set of breasts). Would you call that sexy/hot? Personally, its a loud bluidy NO.

Now, lets compare the following pictures:

Do you find these skinny girls hot? Or would you think annorexic guys look hot?? Some people do, but I don't. To me, dating skinny girls are like dating the lalangs (nothing much to grab onto other than their heads) and dating skinny boys are pointless waste of time because they are wimps.

Now lets take a look at the opposite; do you find them hot? Personally, no. But I like them because they have a guts to show off their bodies with pride.

These are just a few examples- so what affects our perception of beauty? Age? Personality? Gender? Size? Race? Just to highlight how beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, take a look at the following videos from the Maury Show called "Opposites Attract". Enjoy!

Size and Age?

Size?

Hot versus Not?

So, in summary, I would say, beauty has no boundaries in the eye of the beholder. So I can say I'm a dysfunctional idiot. wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

The Dark Tower at Buona Vista, Part 2 (Cont.)

2009-08-01T08:10:00.000+08:00

Note: If you are reading this for the first time, please refer to The Dark Tower of Buona Vista, and The Dark Tower of Buona Vista, Part 2

Having discussed our education system’s obsession with grades, and the policy failures regarding PW and SS, I now continue my discussion, this time into the final subject, History, and the last issue in my post, the over-valuation of certain subjects.

“What’s wrong with History?” One might ask.

“It’s Boring!” would be the most common reply. But why it is boring? Was it supposed to be boring?

The problem is twofold. First, people misunderstand the subject. Second, there is an issue with the way History is being taught in schools.

The common misunderstandings regarding History is that it is all about memorising, about remembering and regurgitating facts, dates, events, names of peoples and places, and whatnot.

Actually, to memorise and rely on intellectual bulimia is the fast track to failure in studying History (I speak from my experience). History is about facts, but facts are far from the only, nor even the most important aspect of the subject. History is about analysis. It’s about getting the big picture, and understanding why things happen the way they did. Like how WW2 started for example. There is a good deal of background knowledge required, but some things are just commonsensical.

So unless you specialise, in say, military history, there’s no real need to memorise the nitty-gritty details. Even university professors don’t do that. They know enough to teach, but getting to detail still requires them to go to the library or the archives to do their research.

This brings me to my second point, that there is a problem with teaching History.

When I was in JC, I was selected to represent the school in a dialogue session with the Prime Minister. I managed to raise a question, and the question was precisely about the History curriculum. For a multitude of reasons, I did not pursue the question, and had to be content by saying that my JC history teachers would make good examples of what History should be in schools.

So, what is the problem?

I would say there are two points. One, there is too little interaction. JC History for me was about debating. About arguing your case and defending it, while recognising the alternative points and the nuances in each issue. Secondary School History was by contrast, much less exciting. I only remember spending time writing essay after essay after essay, and spending umpteen hours on “source based skills” totally irrelevant for my JC History.

Two, teaching methodologies are too dry. The main, if not the only reason I enjoyed History in Secondary School was my teacher, and the fact that international History was simply more fun.

But to be objective, at least for both secondary school and JC I got to go for overseas field trips. That’s why made History REALLY FUN.

Last but not least, the over-valuation of subjects.

I wouldn’t deny the importance of subjects like law, medicine or engineering; they are truly important occupations.

Besides, sociologically speaking, these occupations, especially law and medicine, given their long periods and high costs of training, have to be compensated. This is the so-called Davis-Moore Thesis in sociology.

What I am against are parents who myopically think that only these occupations are considered successful careers. I’m sure many of you would have heard of stories where a student tells their parents, “I want to major in Theatre Studies”, only to get the reply, “Got job for it meh?”

It is the lack of understanding that led so many students to lead miserable lives in university, at the cost of their freedoms, their grades, and consequently, their dreams.

End of Part 2

Is Love really worth all that Effort? -Coral Castle

2009-07-31T20:36:00.000+08:00

Every time I recall Coral Castle and the Taj Mahal, I just wonder if love is worth such a tribute and sacrifice? I will focus more on Coral Castle because it is the work of one man, rather than a ruler capable of mobilize an army of workers.

Edward Leedskalnin built his castle from coral stones that he had hewn from his parcel of land. He carved and put together every single block of stone within his castle single-handedly. The largest of these rocks weighed approximately 30 tons and two of the tallest stones stood over 7.6m high. He carved out an accurate sundial, a water well, 25 rocking chairs, a fountain, a bath tub and even a polaris telescope! [Read More Here]

Amazingly, he didn't do this for love, he did it for his lost love, his "Sweet Sixteen". Is it possible for someone to be so hardbroken that he spent the rest of his life building his dream home for the woman he wanted to be with? Or is it a vain attempt to prove his undying love for her throught a symbolic construction a a monument to her beauty, like the Taj Mahal?

The most amazing part is yet to come, Coral Castle was built by Edward alone, without the help of any machinery. He was very secretive as to how he actually managed to move such huge pieces of masonry without the help of a crane or scaffold. All we know is that he used a simple system of pulleys that we know to be incapable of holding that much weights! The only tool that Edward spoke of using was a "perpetual motion holder."- Lord knows what the heck that is....

I've attached 3 documentry clips to show you all the miracle that this man has single handedly constructed for a woman who never loved him and rejected him because he was too old.

The Dark Tower at Buona Vista, Part 2

2009-07-31T19:31:00.000+08:00

Typical of De Maitre, whose cynical view of the world exposes the dark machinations and miserable failures of our education system.

De Maitre identified three issues in our education system:

One, the obsession with grades,
Two, the failure of policy,
And three, the over-valuation of certain subjects.

But looking at the issue a little deeper, one realises that there is more to it.

First, the obsession with grades.

Who started it? Parents, or the state? Thinking about the dynamics between parents and the state in this respect led me to realise that there is a two-way relationship.

Parents are obsessed with grades, so they force their children to take up certain courses in school, or certain schools, leading the government to react by regulating the terms of entry, making it even more valuable in the eyes of parents.

Alternatively, the state is obsessed with grades, so it creates cut-off points for certain courses or certain schools, creating the impetus for parents to push their children to meet those grades.

And the reasons? One word: Meritocracy.

As I talked about in a previous post, What is Intelligence?, I mentioned the problem of meritocracy: How does one measure ability and effort? Because of this difficulty, the state relies on grades and certification as methods of determining ability and effort. Hence the importance of grades in our society today, because that’s what the state, and consequently society as a whole recognises as “success.”

Second, the failure of policy.

I’ll talk about three subjects that best exemplify the miserable failure of our education system. Actually, De Maitre has talked about them too, but here I have a different way of looking at it.

The subjects are: Project Work (PW), Social Studies (SS), and History.

Starting with PW.

Ask any JC student, and he/she will say “PW sucks”. But why does PW suck?

De Maitre talked about the irrelevance of PW in actual university work. I agree. Group work in university is very different from PW.

I think there are three main reasons why PW has failed to meet its objective.

First, students spend a disproportionate amount of time in learning those so-called “critical thinking skills” in “PW lectures”, rather than to internalise them in the process of doing that project. The critical thinking skills that are so important in a university cannot be simply taught, they have to be experienced. As many others have criticised, it is “the absurdity of teaching us how to think”. In other words, PW is a waste of time.

Second, university work is so different. There is the regular term paper, group presentations, and ultimately, the thesis at Honours year. What is important for PW to do is to internalise students on the processes and skills behind doing these assignments, which unfortunately, the PW system doesn’t.

Let’s look at what’s missing. For any assignment at university level, there has to be research done. Research has to be done for the term paper, for the group presentation, and a hell lot of research for the thesis.

What PW fails to do is to teach students how really to do research. Students waste time sourcing information they don’t need, just piling them in the bibliography for it to look impressive, students cite references, but have no idea the principles behind citation, and worse, students can’t tell the difference between what is and what isn’t plagiarism right until university itself.

So if PW IS SUPPOSED to prepare students for university, what kind of a job is it doing?

Of course, it is important to consider the differences in methodology towards PW between schools, but my point is, the skills that are so important for PW have not been properly inculcated.

The third reason is that PW can take so much less time than it actually does now. The situation now is this: up to five students spend close to one year (the 2nd year of JC) on a project question, requiring them to come up with both an oral presentation and written report. But this begs the question: why are students spending so much time?

This was how long I took in university:
A group presentation: one week.
Term paper: three days.

Of course one might retort, “But you are already a university student! You already know all the skills!”

My answer to that is simple. I never used any so-called “skills” taught by PW in the first place.

Group work is about getting people together, discussing the issue, dividing the work evenly amongst the group members, and putting up a good performance during the actual presentation. How much time should that take? How much time does it take to meet up to talk about the question allocated or chosen? How much time will it take if one divides the work evenly? How much time does it take to prepare the presentation slides?

Ultimately, why are students spending months on something that can be done in weeks or even days?

Moving on to SS.

SS is propaganda. For fairness, I would say, “to a certain extent.” Not to be politically correct or whatever, SS does have some value. At least, the topics are meaningful. Governance, Racial harmony...

What I HATE about SS is that is so one-sided. To truly understand our society, we have to study it objectively, highlighting both the good things and the problems that face our society. There’s no politics or the so-called OB markers involved, just an objective, truthful account of our society.

It is NUS’s way of teaching Singapore that I feel should be the way for SS to be. In NUS, there are Singapore Studies modules, where we well, learn about Singapore. I took a course on Singapore politics (yes, politics) and I had a very good experience. It was far from a process of “government indoctrination”; there is constructive critique as well. If our society is to improve, this is the way to go.

As for De Maitre’s idea of replacing SS with sociology, I am personally supportive of that idea. This is because the sociological perspective allows us to challenge common sense assumptions and see problems in our society to be improved. Either way, it’s more fun.

To be continued...

The Dark Tower at Buona Vista

2009-07-30T17:42:00.000+08:00

That is the most fitting tribute to the MOE HQ that I have ever encountered in my life. We have the world's "best education system". But all I can say is *cough* bullshit. We have all the good grades in the world but the worst ability when it comes to applying what we have learnt. We have all the best plans in mind but the most disastrous outcomes thanks to confound variables such as parents and social attitudes.

We have been taught the value of studying hard, the pursuit of material success, to the point of stupidity. We have created a paper chase society where the more certificates you have, the better. The longer your resume, the more impressive you are. My point is- certificates do not reflect your true capabilities.

Our education system is conspicuously lacks one major element- emotion. Students and teachers are nothing but cogs in our grand education system. Teachers are bogged down by meaningless administrative duties (makes you wonder what the admin staff are for). Students are made to pay for the mistakes they made during a moment of playfulness. Students are not taught the joy of studying, the joy of expressing their thoughts in essays, the humility that comes with knowledge. In Singapore, one can be a millionaire just by starting a tuition agency.

Parents in their kiasu pursuit of guaranteeing their children’s grades and certification, sign their children up for endless sessions of tuition, swimming lessons, piano lessons, violin lessons, golf lessons, etc. All in the name of a well rounded education, without realizing the level of stress and emotional neglect imposed on their children. Some children grow up thinking that parental love is conditional, depending on their grades and achievements in school. That’s plain sad, some children commit suicide or turn deviant and completely reject their parents on the basis “since I can’t study, they won’t bother or love me anymore”.

The blind pursuit of A grades by students and teachers (whose pay and promotional prospects are dependent on their students’ grades) has resulted in a culture of rote learning and the death of creativity. Students are spoon-fed what they need to know in order to score during exams, questions beyond that are rarely entertained. Learning has become a chore, where everyone thinks the same. There is joy in being creative or proposing alternate points of view because it does not guarantee a good grade. Just look at the way people memorize sample essays. As a marker, I would definitely prefer creative answers over structured ones.

Those who have gotten their certification on the other hand, normally end up big headed. They think they own the world and they are guaranteed the best job with the best pay, only to realize that in the working world, seniority and experience matters more. Those working the HR department can tell you that Singapore graduates want obscenely high pays, company cars, business class tickets, and etc. privileges only given to senior managers with at least 10 years of experience. Many graduates enter the working world with a “holier than thou” attitude and they like to think they know better. Knowledge is power, humility is wisdom.

The ruling elite from the “dark tower” seem to be implementing a lot of useless policies recently. I think Social studies, Project work (PW) and Sex Education are the classic examples of waste of time. Social studies should be about basic sociology, not propaganda promoting Singapore’s successful policy implementation in the social, military and economic spheres. Ask any university student and they will tell you what a tragic parody PW is. It doesn’t teach you any precious writing skill that you will need in university because of it crappy outlines. In University, you’ll encounter MANY types of bibliography- MLA, APA, ASA, AMA, etc. And the research done is a lot more concise and presented in a different format. Till today, I have no idea what the hell are they looking out for. Sex education is quite a joke to me because it focuses mainly on physical abstinence and protection, but it doesn’t focus on the emotional protection. The teenage years are fraught with emotional issues, where many teenagers think sex is the universe. Ask many teenage girls, they think sex is a means of obtaining love, a mentality that many will maintain until they mature. I think teaching students how to build healthy relationships is much better than knocking into them the importance of using contraceptives.

Somehow our education system is also a primary reason for the “death of dreams”. I have met many playful people who chose play over work at one point in their academic lives. Because of that, they are consigned to EM3, normal tech, etc and labeled as stupid for the rest of their lives. Although I use the term stupid liberally on everyone (including myself), I don’t really believe in it because people may be deficit in one area but superb in another. For example, I’m a complete idiot when it comes to music and dance. I have probably 50 or 60 left and right feet and malfunctioning brain when it comes to following beats.

These people are condemned to learn boring technical skills without hope of clawing their way back into the express level. Ok, they can climb back, but it’s a slow hard climb back up. Many give up and spend their lives hating studying. What they don’t realize is school isn’t the start and end of studying- there is a world of knowledge outside the textbook. Learning doesn’t end in school; it is truly a life-long experience. MOE needs to change its stance- success if life should not be limited to certification. We also need to look deep into ourselves and change our social perception regarding people and their jobs. I disagree with the social perception that construction workers and street cleaners are lousy jobs. To me, they are hard working enough to find an honest job to earn a living. The people that I look down on are those who cannot hold onto a stable job just because they find the job too tough or the pay too little, and go around borrowing money from their friends and relatives as a result.

All the reason to SWEAR, in moderation of course

2009-07-30T17:14:00.000+08:00

Scientists have discovered that uttering swear words can help to lessen the feeling of physical pain.

Dr Richard Stephens, who conducted the study at the university's school of psychology, believes it may explain why swearing is still common place in languages around the world.

He suggests that swearing could have evolved as a way of raising aggression levels and reducing the feeling of pain to allow our ancestors to flee or fight back when attacked by predators.

He said: "We think it could be part of the flight or fight response. In the volunteers who swore, we also found they had an elevated heart rate, so it could be increasing their aggression levels.

"Increased aggression has been shown to reduce people's sensitivity to pain, so it could be swearing is helping this process."

Taken from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5803300/Swearing-can-reduce-the-feeling-of-pain.html

I always had this stand- "swear when you need to but nothing more". A lot of youngsters think there's nothing wrong with swearing and that swearing is cool. I think it's just plain ugly and crude. I'm willing to forgive rabid swearing in the event that you stub your toe or got run over by an errant cyclist but I'm completely unprepared to forgive people who use "F**k* in every sentence they utter.

The following video is a rough background swearing/cursing, etc.

"What Is" Series- What is Bullying?

2009-07-30T16:04:00.000+08:00

After I came home last night, I checked my blog and AALT2’s chatbox and surprise surprise, I saw Jeannie’s renewed threats and her god sister (Qitong)’s claims that I have bullied Jeannie. I didn’t know calling Jeannie stupid on the basis of spelling my name wrongly 3x was tantamount to bullying. If anything, I was wondering how on earth the pair of them can achieve that many spelling errors- “irratating”, “distuarb” (that appeared 2x, so I can assume that’s how she thinks disturb should be spelt) and “prossitude”. I pointed that out, called her stupid for her spelling errors and bimbotic attitude- so now I’m a bully.

All I can say is HAHAHAHAHAHA. =P I always had a morbid sense of humor that is coated with a thick layer of mockery and cynicism. It is ironic how it can become a crime in the eyes of a bully with a huge ego who thinks everyone is jealous of her beauty. I think there’s nothing to admire about a bimbo who can’t spell and speak coherently. So today, I’ve decided to write a post about bullying.

Basically, it defines bullying as “saying and doing things to hurt a person. It is usually done on purpose and repeatedly.” The video goes on to describe the types of bullying- relational, verbal and physical; the results of continuing to be a bully- friendless and getting scolding; the possible reactions of the victim- freeze in fear, fight back or walk away and complain to the teacher; the types of bystanders behavior- ignore the bullying, encourage the bully, support the victim or avenge the bully.

I think this is a very interesting video, but it is too optimistic and stereotypical for my liking. The bully is type casted as the typical “kiam-pah-bin” Ah Beng with his arrogantly, sour face and standing collar. And the victim is the typical village nerd… The points they highlighted were good, but they didn’t have to explore deeper expects of bullying. I’ll be highlighting some in my post.

Anyone who has an edge over others in terms of money, influence or knowledge can be said to be bullies. I would take it further through the exploration of a bully's desire for control and self gratification, and the malicious consequences.

This wasn’t highlighted much upon- most bullies have insecure personalities; they have to belittle others to feel good. Unfortunately, they belittle others the wrong way- for example, they call other people stupid when they are more stupid than others. And most bullies run in a pack- “birds of a feather flock together”. They need emotional and physical support in their actions, especially when they are at the losing end. They can only summon the courage to bully others with the backing of others. Ironically, when someone stands up to them, they go around crying for help claiming they have been bullied. Well, all I can say is, don’t look for trouble and complain when trouble finds you.

Bullies need to have control to feel good- people must scrape and bow before them. Once you demonstrate that you are not afraid of them, they normally react by ignoring you and saying stuff like you aren’t worthy of their attention. Alternatively, they switch tactics and embark on greater attempts to discredit you (relational bullying). I will be focusing a lot more on relational bullying because it is more common in today’s context than physical bullying and its effects are a lot deeper and long lasting. In the video, the example used was “don’t be friends with him!” In life, it goes way beyond that. As mentioned earlier, another form of relational bullying can come in the form is discrediting you. That means they go about spreading malicious tales about you. I.e. you are gay/lesbian, a gossip, a backstabber, a liar, a promiscuous bitch, etc. In the cyber world, you get criticisms about how fat and ugly you are if you post up your pictures and an “enemy” happens to see it.

In the working world, relational bullying is so prominent that it’s a norm. I’m sure you have heard of many stories of people resigning from their jobs because of bosses or colleagues from hell. These are due to the prevalence of certain factors.
a.EGO - Big ego means greater need to be a bully to feel good and powerful.
b.AMBITION – Big ambition means climbing up the corporate ladder FAST. If you don’t have the means to achieve promotions the “natural” way, backstabbing and sabotage is required.
c.BITCHY COLLEAGUES – “When in Rome, do as Romans do” you need to be a bigger bully than others to survive.
d.AGGRESSION – Some people are just plain aggressive, they are just hostile to everyone so that they feel superior to others.

Bullying has the most severe impact on people’s lives especially during their teenage years. This is the critical point in everyone’s life where there are many self doubts and insecurities regarding their looks. Many have committed suicide due to the unrelenting pressure exerted by bullies and themselves. To me, it takes two hands to clap- bullies get tired once they realize they have no hold over you.

Will I feel guilty if Jeannie jumps of the nearest HDB flat? Nah, I don’t have sympathy for weak people. If fact, I admire courage. Look at Yu-Kym, she got nominated for most insightful blog awards. I like her because she has the courage to stick to her guns. She openly posts pictures of herself on her blog and people just avidly criticize her for being a slut, how old she is, how ugly she is, what a copy cat she is, etc. Instead of being upset and shutting down her blog, she stands firm and continues to post her thoughts. I think she is a fantastic blog that all adolescents should read for the purpose of sex education and BGR experiences. I particularly like this proverb that she pasted on her blog: “Pigs are afraid of becoming fat, people are afraid of becoming popular."- meaning a healthy pig will be killed and eaten; a successful person will be a target. At least she has something to be successful about. She doesn’t brag; she relates that’s the reason why I will support her anytime over other promiscuous girls. It’s the ATTITUDE, something that the Ah Lians and Ah Bengs will never understand.

So back to the question- do I consider myself a bully? Maybe, what's your opinion guys? =) I insult everyone equally and fairly (including myself). I’m way too cynical I guess. No one is ever perfect enough for me to call pretty/beautiful- having a pretty face doesn’t mean that your fart will smell of roses nor does it mean you have the personality or intelligence to match your looks. Criticism should never be classified as bullying, especially when it is based on facts. I find it fitting that the real bullies in life find their own bullies in cyberspace, call it Karma if you will.

[Read more about relational bullying here]

The Crisis of Identity in Singapore

2009-07-29T08:42:00.000+08:00

Ok, this is the last post before my exams, after which I’ll be in hiatus for a couple of days.

Hopefully things will liven up once again when De Maitre is back.

Anyways, this post of mine is relating to an issue that has been talked about for many, many years, in different forms and in different contexts, but today I’ll talk about it from a slightly new perspective.

I am no soccer fan, and till today I still struggle to understand how this sport, which involves 20 (less the goalkeepers)people running around after a ball, can be more influential in certain ways than governments, than nationalities, than even religion.

But reading the newspaper about how our national soccer team was thrashed 5-0 by Liverpool FC last Sunday, to the delight of Singaporean Liverpool fans, led me to once again look at this issue, and from there, I thought some new thoughts of my own.

It is very ironic to learn that the national team, playing on THEIR home ground, was being treated as the away team. When Liverpool scored goals, it was Singaporeans who cheered. When a Lion was given the yellow card, it was Singaporeans who cheered.

It was at that moment I realised, the forty years of Singapore’s national identity quest has been put to nought by this single event.

What on this planet happened?

I think it is the transnational nature of soccer. Soccer is a game that is distinctively international in nature. The teams have a multi-national composition. The supporters come from all over the world. The sport itself appeals to many nationalities. It’s little wonder that the World Cup is the most watched sporting event.

Given this multinational nature, supporters back teams, not nationalities. This is when sport can unite, but also divide people.

But Singapore is hardly the examplar of the divisive qualities of sport. Look at other countries. Riots, fighting amongst fans, are just cases of how extreme things can become, when passion can descend rapidly into violence. When that happens, countrymen are treated as aliens, fellow citizens treated as enemies.

But looking a little further, I think it also has to do with the Singaporean psyche. Singaporeans have this peculiar fault: That foreign is better.

Singaporeans have little idea of local brands beyond SIA, Creative and Tiger. To worsen the problem, Singaporeans have little faith on local brands that are new, always thinking that they are not comparable to foreign brands.

The situation is changing, of course. Many Singaporean designers and artists have made it overseas, and have been relatively successful, and are recognised within their own fields. But the problem is HERE.

If Singaporeans don’t have faith and confidence in our people, who will?

The point is there is no guarantee that every venture will be successful. But if the opportunity and support is not given simply because of that risk, then the chances of success are nil. More importantly, even the successful brands didn’t always start out successful; it was the process of exposure and gaining experience that they could be what they are today.

It’s our culture’s obsession with instant success that has resulted in this predicament, where we don’t support our own brands, where we don’t support our soccer teams, where many of us foolishly think only a course on law or engineering will make a good career.

Nevertheless, I am not encouraging the economic nationalism or economic patriotism that you see in other countries, where people make do with sub-standard stuff. Quality comes with competition. Improvement comes with competition. I only ask for the freedom of opportunity, and for Singaporeans to give their support to our own people.

Ultimately, if people lament foreign talent, the best way to deal with it is to prove that we have something of our own to be proud of.

Liverpool never walks alone. They certainly didn’t on that match last Sunday. But many Singaporeans, those young aspiring individuals who want to carve out a career of their own, found themselves very, very alone.

On Tourism

2009-07-27T20:29:00.000+08:00

While one might take for granted that it’s the people in the tourist industry that are assessed for their service quality, it’s interesting to note that tourists are also being assessed for their friendliness and conduct.

A report in the Channel NewsAsia webpage reports that “Pushy French are world's worst tourists”.

This was the result of a study of the global hotel industry, evaluating tourists from different nationalities based on nine criteria from their politeness to their willingness to tip.

Turns out, Japanese tourists were top for the third year in a row, for their tidiness, politeness and discretion. French tourists, as mentioned in the title, turned out to be the worst, for being the least generous on tipping, as well as being most unwilling to pick up the local language.

So, what does this report tell us about tourists in general?

First, I think the study has its inaccuracies. The evaluation of tourists based on politeness is fair enough, since it gives a good indication of the civility of these tourists, but to judge tourists based on their ability to tip is being somewhat expedient.

Second, it can be somewhat stereotypical to look at tourists by the country they came from.

Nevertheless, this study does break many of the perceptions that people have about tourists. Americans are the most generous in tipping, but also turn out to be the loudest, the rudest, and the most badly dressed, while the British, thought to be “beer-guzzling hordes”, emerged second in the study.

That being ranked low in such a study can show some things about that country, and tourism in general:

First, the French are truly proud of their language. That’s probably why they'll use French even when being pushy: “L’etat c’est moi!” (I am the State!)

Second, the problem of declining service in many countries (including our own) cannot be interpreted one-sidedly as a manner of poor service quality. The poor response and rapport from the tourists also matter. After all, a travel experience can only be fun if the tourist was willing to play his/her part in the experience.

Third, it’s a lesson for us as tourists too. We are watching the service quality of the service providers, but we are also being watched as tourists too.

So when we are treated badly as tourists in other countries, think about whether the service provider was bad, or we have had a very bad reputation as tourists?

A question for the Patriachal Social Model

2009-07-23T21:41:00.000+08:00

I just have this burning question- "Why are family names only passed down through sons?"

This is applicable to almost every society in the world. Well, technically, you can never doubt the mother of a child, but you can certainly doubt who the father is... So if the child's genes are in doubt, why should surnames be passed down from the father's side instead of the mother's side of the family?

Anthropologist would typically say that it has to do with the social organisation-Pastoral and Agrarian societies tend to be paternalistic because males do the hard work but Horticultural societies tend to be maternal.

That bullshit aside, surnames are meant to identify the offspring as members from a certain family. Only the women can assure that their children carry half of the family genes, not the men. ^^ So is it time to revise that antiquated system and redraw the family tree based on maternal links?

When Hardware isn’t Everything

2009-07-23T17:35:00.000+08:00

Today I’ll do a military post. I was inspired by the recent vote cast by the US Senate against the acquisition of an additional seven F-22 raptor fighter jets as part of a defence authorisation bill.

This was in support of President Obama’s desire to reduce wastage in defence spending, and focusing on fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan rather than military hardware.

In his words:

“At a time when we’re fighting two wars and facing a serious deficit, this would have been an inexcusable waste of money”

“I reject the notion that we have to waste billions of taxpayer dollars on outdated and unnecessary defence projects…”

Just for your knowledge, the F-22 raptor looks like this:

And the US Air Force (USAF) already has 187 of these, the most advanced jet fighter in the world.

Personally, I commend President Obama and the US Senate for their decision. But there are three main issues I’ll like to explore as a response to this issue, and from there, talk about the whole notion of defence spending in general.

First, the effectiveness of the F-22.
Second, the military-industrial complex.
Third, the emphasis on hardware.

The F-22 was designed as an air-superiority fighter, meaning it was designed to take out enemy fighters. For that purpose, it was designed to have stealth features, the ability to “supercruise” (travel at supersonic speed without afterburner), and thrust vectoring for extra manoeuvrability.

But the problem is, given the current nature of military operations in the world today, is such a category of military hardware still relevant? In the post-cold war world, terrorism has superseded conventional militaries as the primary threat to national security. Given this context, wouldn’t it be wiser to spend on counter-insurgency?

Besides, the complexities of such military hardware create huge costs for governments, due to maintenance costs, and the need for specialised support equipment and services. The specialist role of the F-22 also implies other planes have to be bought to fulfil other roles, such as the ground attack role.

This is why some people argue that the alternative, the multi-role F-35 Lightning II, better known as the Joint Strike Fighter, is a better choice:

The second issue is that of the military-industrial complex. Supporters of the acquisition argue that F-22 production provides 25,000 jobs, and indirectly support 70,000 jobs. The defence industry forms an integral part of the US economy, in what is called the military-industrial complex, coined by former US President Dwight Eisenhower.

In a nutshell, it defines the politico-economic relationship between the state, the military and the defence industries.

To illustrate how it works:

A militaristic government wants to use military action to fulfill some strategic or political objective, and sends the military for these operations. Since the military needs hardware and support services to carry out these wars, it has to purchase them from the defence industries, which therefore are supported by and profits from the state. In return, the defence industries sponsor the government, bringing its politicians back into power. The government is then free to continue its militaristic policies, continuing the cycle.

So what is the problem here?

First, the government is trapped in the vicious cycle of militarism. Governments become dependent on the support of the defence industries for their legitimacy, and the defence industries push them towards aggressive foreign policies. Therefore, governments can become corrupted by this relationship, since defence industries hold so much leverage.

Second, it affects other sectors of the economy. The primacy of the defence industry means that other industries are not given the same level of attention and development.

The increasing weakness of US manufacturing industry, with the exception of the defence industry is evidence of the advent of the military-industrial complex.

Third, why all that emphasis on hardware?

As I have mentioned above, the current nature of military action has changed since the times of the Cold War. Of course, there are emerging powers such as China, and re-emerging powers such as Russia, that are still aggressively pursuing policies of modernisation within their militaries.

But there are two things to consider. First, the advent of diplomacy within the international community. The international community has been united by the common threats of international terrorism and rogue states. Their relative military strengths have been channelled towards the containment of these two threats.

Second, given the weak global economy, isn’t it wiser to spend money on more constructive purposes, rather than “destructive” ones?

Actually, come to think of it, the same thing is happening to Singapore too. Over recent years, the Singapore Armed Forces have acquired a whole array of military hardware as part of its project of modernisation. F-15 fighters, Formidable - class stealth frigates, Leopard 2 main battle tanks...
But it begs the question: does it fulfil the true needs of our military? It does, if one considers the age of the equipment these new hardware were designated to replace, but on the other hand, how is “improvement” on our defence capability measured?

It’s certainly not a game of numbers, nor is it a matter of “who’s got the latest hardware”.

And what about the average soldier? Has his life as a soldier improved?

To end off this post on a lighter note, I think the F-22 issue could come to a better conclusion if only they got their hands on this particular F-22:

Yeah. Starscream.

The only question left would be: Will we control him, or will we end up controlled by him?

No Eating or Drinking: Fine $500

2009-07-22T17:37:00.000+08:00

If you have ever travelled on an MRT train, you cannot possibly have missed this sign:

As you may already know, or have already paid the price, SMRT has started a “crackdown” on eating and drinking in MRT trains, with SMRT staff patrolling within the carriages and issuing people whom they caught eating or drinking summons.

Offenders may not get the maximum penalty ($500), but a fine would be inevitable.

The trouble is: it seems like the policy is a little taken too far:

According to an article in Straits Times Interactive, Mdm Bibi Zaina Binti Mohamed was fined $30 for eating sweets in the train.
She explained that she had to eat sweets as she felt giddy.
But the enforcement officer was not persuaded.

$30 for sweets, anyone?

So, what are the issues behind this incident?
First, why the sudden enforcement of the no eating / drinking regulation?
Second, what does this incident imply about MRT policy in Singapore?

Why the “crackdown”?

I think there are a few reasons. First, some people have complained about people eating or drinking in trains, and over time, as the complaints accumulated, SMRT felt that the problem had to be arrested. Second, it is the desire to improve our MRT culture, by going back to basics, and making sure that these rules and regulations are obeyed.

The main idea of the “No food and drink” policy was to deter people from dirtying the trains. It is perfectly understandable if SMRT was trying to stop people from eating Mc’s Extra Value Meal or a packet of mixed vegetable rice in the train. But since it is difficult to draw the line between what can and what cannot be eaten, SMRT has little choice but to ban food across the board.

Some might argue, “What’s wrong with eating sweets?” I personally agree. There’s nothing wrong with eating tidbits. But the issue is again where we draw the line. A hard candy or gummy might be alright, but what about biscuits, which leave behind crumbs, or chocolate, which can cause stains and are difficult to clean up.

Besides, what about the wrappers? Considerate people would hold on to them and throw them at a rubbish bin when they alight. Trouble is, not everyone does that, and it's those people who leave their sweet wrappers and whatnot behind that caused this problem.

It may be ridiculous to ban the eating of sweets, but it would be even more ridiculous if SMRT had to come up with something like this:

“LIST OF CANDY ALLOWED IN TRAINS”
Mentos
Tic-Tac
Etc…

Of course, this is exaggerating, but my point is, in any process of policy formation, it is impractical to set specific guidelines on what can and what cannot be eaten, or drank, for that matter.

Despite this reality, it still begs the question: if the issue is whether trains could be left clean, as long as we as citizens exercise personal responsibility, surely this problem wouldn’t have arisen? After all, we have had this policy without such strict enforcement for so many years, and the trains are generally clean.

Besides, other countries don’t make a mountain out of a molehill regarding eating / drinking in trains. In Japan, for example, tidbits in trains are fine, and people are generally responsible enough to keep the trains clean. The only rule they enforce very strictly is not to talk over the phone in the train, and that’s protection for the pregnant and the elderly from the harmful effects of mobile phone radiation (How considerate the Japanese are, don’t you think?).

In addition, it’s perfectly understandable that some forms of food and drink are out of the question, like oily food and sugary drinks, but even plain water is out?

It is therefore somewhat unfair to penalize the majority for the irresponsibility of some minorities.

What this policy implies about our MRT culture is that we still have much to do to improve our MRT culture. The fact that simple rules have to be enforced so strictly means that, we as society still haven’t won the trust of the authorities, and from one another, to be self-responsible. SMRT initiated the clampdown because it does not trust the ability of the people to exercise self-discipline, and some members of society complain because they do not see the same self-discipline being exercised in other members of society.

It also goes to show the simplistic approach SMRT has taken towards improving train conditions, as enforcement officers show no flexibility and compassion in the course of their duties.

Trains have to be kept clean. As long as this objective is meant, why constrain ourselves with so many unnecessary rules and penalties?

Guest Post: The Meaning of Life V.2

2009-07-22T16:42:00.001+08:00

WRITTEN BY: IVAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The meaning of life is perhaps mankind’s most fundamental question as it gives reason to our existence. For millennia, many philosophers, and even scientists, have tried to decipher this mystery. Yet, many argue that life has no special purpose, and the reason that we are here is due to random chance. However, the ability to ponder about our very existence on this planet is something that defines humanity from all other life forms as we know it today.

Life and consciousness have an extremely complex origin and have often been debated in science. It is our nature in reality that makes us wonder about our place in the cosmos, and without it, our lives would be meaningless and our existence, futile.

In my opinion, life is all about making the world a better place than it was. As a whole, it is the spirit of humanity that keeps us from having wars ever so often, and allows us to progress. Since the appearance of our species, many fights and violent happenings had occurred, and it is only because mankind is in itself an inherently angst-driven being. Yet, why is it that people nowadays seem to show more care and concern for others than thousands of years ago? Well, the answer lies in the fact that many people nowadays are trying their best to aim towards harmony amongst all. Despite having wars and terror attacks plaguing the general public, it is no doubt that many of us have advanced from a fight for survival to a fight for peace.

Many times, the amount that people can go toward standing up against atrocities and injustice has shown that we are not always following the course of evolution. In the Darwinian theory of natural selection, stronger species tend to survive better than weaker ones, and fighting between humans is generally a result of this. Yet, is our movement toward world peace nature or nurture? It can be both, but the latter is the most likely cause. The shift toward global unity lies within us, and it is what gives life its meaning. If everyone does their own little part to contribute toward society, the change will be tremendous and our place in the large expanse of the cosmos, justified.

Life is full of unpredictability, and many times we might meet obstacles and challenges. The will and power to overcome them also gives meaning to life, and it is our determination that changes our lives. Through all the trials and tribulations, we have all made it to what we are today. I firmly believe that life is about surviving each day, and it is this that gives us the reason to live on.

The New Rage? ROADKILL TEDDIES!!

2009-07-22T10:32:00.000+08:00

A soft toy designer has come up with a macabre new range of road kill teddies.

The first to be launched is Twitch the Raccoon which comes complete with its own body bag to keep the maggots out, reports Metro.

Twitch also has an identity tag revealing it was "run over over by a milk float last Thursday, near the Hangar Lane Giratory system in London".

A zip on each side of the toy allows the owner to remove Twitch's innards and stuff them back in again. A tyre print runs across its back.

Creators, Compost Communications, style themselves 'toy terrorists' and according to their website: "We squash and burn and bludgeon and maim. But we're also toy fanatics like you. We love toys."

Toy creator Adam Arber, 33, from London, said: "I got the idea from looking at my mother-in-law's dog which is quite ugly and I thought it would make a great toy. A friend of mine had taken some pictures of road kill and the two things gelled into one idea."

He said he thought the toys, which cost £25, would appeal to people with a sense of humour and "probably not anyone easily upset".

Coming soon are other characters including Grind the rabbit, Splodge the hedgehog and Pop the weasel.

The toys go on sale this week at Play Lounge in Soho, London, and from mid-December on www.roadkilltoys.com.

Taken from: http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2616729.html?menu=news.quirkies

I have a warped sense of humor and I WANT THAT TOY!!! (Someone get the entire range for my christmas present!!) There's something appealing about that bulging eyes, tyre marks and spilled innards... And the best part is, I can decide how much innards to leave dangling out. Hahahaha, it'll be nice to have a little private "Happy Tree Friends" episode at home. *Wolfish Grin* Their advertisements left me choking with laughter...

Taken from : http://www.roadkilltoys.com/content/view/34/179/

That's not all! There is also "Earl the dead cat", the last cat you'll ever need.

The only Mad Dog Productions product still available, Earl the Dead Cat has been hanging around doing nothing since 1985. A flat, understuffed toy cat with X's for eyes, Earl comes with a humorous death certificate listing all the reasons a dead cat is better than a live one. Well, a lot of them anyway. For one, he doesn't need a messy litterbox or eat smelly cat food. He doesn't wake you up in the morning by sitting on your nose and mistaking it for a catnip mouse. And he doesn't scratch when the kids swing him around by his tail.

Taken from: http://www.earlthedeadcat.com/