Friday, April 30, 2010

"Leave the light on"

A must-read, thought-provoking and poignant piece by a fellow coursemate of mine.

"Leave the light on"

Sexual Education: Where to draw the lines?

It was reported in today's Straits Times ("Govt calls for more transparency in sexuality education", ST, 30/4/2010) that the "MOE's philosophy on sexuality education is that it does not encourage nor promote masturbation, abortion and oral and anal sex. Its sexuality education programme does not condone promiscuity and sexual experimentation by teenagers, or promote homosexuality, but promotes abstinence and teaches teenagers how to say no to sex. However, contraception is taught in schools to protect young people against diseases and unwanted pregnancies".

Reading the above, the question that came to my mind was: does this mean that issues, such as masturbation, oral and anal sex and homosexuality, are not and/or cannot be taught in local sex education classes? Or are teachers/instructors allowed to teach about these issues but must portray them in a negative light? [as we know from the AWARE saga, being "neutral" about such issues is also not welcomed]

Monday, April 19, 2010

The Singaporean-PR gap

In today's 《早报现在》/"ZbNow" (19/4/2010), there was a feature reporting about the recent measures by the Singapore government to differentiate between Singaporean citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs), mainly through cutting down on the benefits available to the latter.

The main part of the feature was excerpts from interviews of 2 local academics, namely Associate Professor (AP) Peter Borschberg of the NUS History department and Assistant Professor (Assist Prof) Chung Wai Keung of the SMU School of Social Sciences.

According to Assist Prof Chung, while the presence of foreigners in Singapore is a perennial phenomenon, it has perhaps recently become a problem because Singapore is taking in immigrants in "too many and too fast" a manner.

He adds: "If all these immigrants are just here to find work, the problem will perhaps not be that serious. But when Singaporeans know that these immigrants are also applying to become PRs or Singaporean citizens, that is when the problem gets compounded".

"If these immigrants are all Caucasians who are highly-educated and are economically well-off, the problem may not exist. However, the reality now is that most people are being exposed to immigrants who are lowly-educated and cannot converse in English. This is the key aspect of the problem".

According to AP Borschberg, using material incentives such as welfare and subsidies to highlight the value of citizenship and to attract PRs to become citizens may result in people becoming citizens due only to the material incentives, thus perhaps diluting the normative value of citizenship.

Assoc Prof Chung adds: "Citizenship is a form of national identification. A differentiation in welfare benefits levels has not really differentiated citizens from non-citizens. The current policy of Singapore appears to give people the impression that PRs are second-class citizens. The rationale behind such a policy appears to be geared towards incentivising PRs to become citizens faster. The question is: is this logic or rationale appropriate".

Also, in Assoc Prof Chung's opinion, using material incentives to attract PRs to become citizens may have the unintended consequence of attracting only those who are more concerned with material welfare. Those with better conditions will most probably not be swayed by material incentives and thus, it is more likely that it will be those from a lower socio-economic status which will be swayed.

Friday, April 09, 2010

A sentimental case for keeping "cross-country" bus services

Two days ago, on 7th April 2010, 赵琬仪 wrote an article in "ZbNow" (《早报现在》) entitled 《当巴士路线变短》("When bus routes are shortened"), in which she perhaps provided a sentimental case for preserving "cross-country" bus services in Singapore.

However, in light of the fact that the first half of her article was mainly a personal recollection of her growing-up experiences with long bus rides, I will only be translating (an amateur translation at that) the second and arguably more substantive half of her article here in this post.


《当巴士路线变短》; "When bus routes are shortened"



...

Recently, as preparation work for a report on the LTA's review and restructuring of bus routes islandwide, I looked at reports related to the improving of bus services over the past two years. Attempting to encourage commuters to transfer from bus to bus or bus to MRT and thereby arriving at their destinations faster, the LTA is planning to shorten long bus routes to make bus services more reliable. By 2015, in an improvement over the current 71%, 80% of public transport commuters will be able to complete their journeys within an hour.

From the perspective of the authorities and that of commuters who are rushing for time, the above would reflect Singapore's urbanisation process.

While using my left brain to digest the principles of the LTA's decision, my right brain was, at the same time, thinking about how public transport can inspire creativity or those little but interesting moments of life. In the 1980s, there were popular music from Hong Kong that described how couples met on the public transit and fell in love; in the 1990s, there were also rock and roll groups that used public transit as the backdrop of their ballads. Meanwhile, local director Royston Tan has attempted to develop a movie around the longest bus route as a theme.

Chris Tse -- "I'm sorry I'm a Christian"




I am a Christian. I’m sorry.

I’m sorry for the way that I come across
So fair and faith friendly and full of myself
Judging your spiritual health by the words that you say
And the way that you dress, and the things that you do
Or maybe just judging you.

I’m sorry for the way that I live my life
So confident of my own beliefs that
I would never even think to think about thinking about yours