A 7.6 magnitude earthquake off the coast of Sumatra caused our office building to shake for a couple of minutes yesterday evening, around 6:30 pm or thereabouts. I thought I was falling sick (not surprising given how tired I have been recently), and am having a dizzy spell, but after a while it just didn't feel right.

It wasn't the first time we felt tremors from earthquakes in Sumatra. I recalled the first time it happened, it was slightly before lunch time and we had to evacuate the building and mill around outside the building (I remembered one of my friends protesting as her boyfriend dragged her out, "my email, I need to finish my email, client is expecting it before lunch!" and when she was downstairs and outside the building, "can we go back now? I need to send out my email." and her boyfriend hushing her)  Just when we returned from an early lunch, however, another set of tremors shook the building, and the management decided to declare a half day holiday - I stayed on in the office because I had work, and also because I had class later in the evening. My head of department appeared at the door to my office and asked me to go home - I am not sure if it is out of concern or because the firm wanted to avoid any liability should the building collapse while I am still inside.

The second time it happened was an evening, around 7 pm or so. And I was darn miffed because I was trying to finish an advice and go on study leave thereafter (it was close to my exams). My room-mate had to pull a protesting me out of the office and I was grumbling all the way because the security guards will not allow us to return to the building until it has been verified to be sound, which took an hour or so. You should see how many lawyers were panicking over unfinished work on the lawn outside the building - especially the litigators who have court deadlines. 

( The First Time We Were Afraid, The Second Time We Were Cheesed Off, The Third Time .... )

 If you love Singapore too much, first it will break your heart, then it will break your soul.

The above statement has been attributed to Alfian Sa'at, often referred to as the enfant terrible of Singapore's literary scene.

I love Singapore, it is a love that needs no justification, nor any explanation. I grew up here, it is my home, and the home of my family and many of my friends. It is the only home I have ever known. How can I not love her?

And yet, today, when I was doing my usual rounds of blog-surfing, I came across a blog post that commented on an advertisement for a job-opening. This is the advertisement, which is for a Sales Development Engineer:



Did you read the last line? It stated "Preferably non-Singaporean (PR welcome)"

I cannot even being to say all the things that are wrong with this and what it tells us about our country. All I can say is, when I read that line, I felt something break in me. And the line by Alfian Sa'at came to mind.

This is probably the second time I have posted videos of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I always thought he is just a comedian, but goodness gracious, this man is smart, well-read and very very sharp. In comparison, the comedians we have on TV back here are really really pathetic, though admittedly it has been years since I bothered watching guys like Jack Neo and Mark Lee on TV and surely they must have improved, there is no more downside left!

I am still wondering though - if country X is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, and country Y is, then in a war, is country Y bound to treat their prisoners of war from country X as prescribed under the Geneva Convention?
( Watch the videos! )

Thou shalt not be a victim.
Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
Above all, thou shalt not be a bystander.
             ~Holocaust Museum, Washington DC

It was inspirational. It was awesome. I have never seen such a gathering of intelligent, witty, passionate and knowledgable women in my life, and if you had told me just two months ago that such a gathering is possible, that there are 1,414 women in Singapore who will willingly spend their entire Saturday holed up in a cold convention hall where only water is provided simply to kick out a bunch of Christian fundamentalists who thought that they will be able to successfully pull off a take-over of a secular NGO, I would have laughed in your face.

This is not a bunch of ladies who lunch and chat politely and quietly about how to do good over tea and scones, it is a bunch of ladies who have learnt how to fight for their rights, to stand their ground, to defend their turf, to bang tables and demand to be heard. It is a bunch of women who understood whether instinctively or through bitter experience that to "SHUT UP & SIT DOWN" will not get you anywhere. And if in the process, they were told off for being "rude" or acting like "hooligans", well, so be it. I did not, and I am sure most of the women in that hall did not, get to their current position in life as independent knowledgeable women, by being meek and subservient.

The Christian fundamentalists were simply outclassed. They were out-organised (what on earth happened to the red-shirts mid-way through the EGM, only the white-shirts remained to keep the crowd under control), out-prepared (one self-declared "Feminist Mentor" whose claim to the title is her being cited on page 73 of a book on outstanding women, and one research paper on the superiority of abstinence over condom use by some academic in Utah of all places does not good preparation make) and out-voted (what happened to the busloads of bible-toting ladies?). Women who spent their lives fighting inequality whether it is for themselves or for women in general, women who never joined AWARE previously but whose lives have been touched by AWARE, women who refused to allowed the name of Christianity to be sullied by the actions of a gang of bullies, women who believed in the importance of a secular state for a diverse community, women whose inate sense of fairness has been offended. All these women turned up, and queued for hours, first to get into the meeting hall, and later to get to the sole microphone to give the Christian fundamentalists a sound dressing-down. The depth of knowledge and experience these women represented - lawyers, academics, NGO activists, event organisers, students, social workers - is breathtaking. Collectively they knew so much about feminism, the fight for equality, comprehensive sexual education, activism, social issues etc etc - listening to them speak at the microphone was like having a crash course in civil society work. I think even the Old Guard were surprised at how many of us turned up - as one of them said, you gals came out from the woodwork, we don't know where you came from. The new Exco, inexperienced, unable to defend their views or (with the exception of Josie Lau who earned respect for keeping her cool under relentless fire)  even to maintain their composure, did not have a chance.

We Singaporeans always mock ourselves for being apathetic. On 2 May 2009, we have proved ourselves wrong.

I had previously, in one of my earlier posts, said that Christians should speak up against Christian fundamentalists. You can imagine how grateful I am to find blogs by Christians who condemn the behaviour of the Christian fundamentalists who took over AWARE. Right now, a Christian by the name of Gwee Li Shui has posted a note on Facebook setting out his views on why Christians should object to the behaviour of Christian fundamentalists in the AWARE saga, and generating hundreds of responses - I thought I'll repost it here.

( Christians in Singapore, please read this ... )

I was having drinks with a friend and we were discussing the AWARE saga - and as things now stand in the saga, we started talking about the role of woman in the family and Christianity (disclosure: I am an atheist, she is a Christian). And I remembered something I once read in the Bible (a long time ago when I read and re-read the Bible day after day) - there was a passage that I particularly like because it spoke about the role of a woman. I did a search when I came back and realise it is Proverbs 31:10-31.

( Who can find a virtuous woman ... )

I find that I still like this passage on re-reading it. It portrays a woman who is independent, skilled, hardworking and resourceful. Very much what a modern woman still aspires to be.

My friend also mentioned a passage in Tales of Narnia that she felt was very insightful as to just what is a true Christian. I just looked it up in my copy of The Complete Chronicles of Narnia and I think (we were drinking at that time yah?) the passage she referred to is this:

( If any man does a cruelty in my name, then though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves ... )

( Response from MOE (Emphasis added) )</div></div>

I usually disagree with Chua Mui Hoong of the Straits Times. Heck, I disagree with the Straits Times on a lot of things. But this time round, this time, I am with her on the points raised in her article. For once, I honestly hope that her views reflect the views of the government. And I say this as an atheist and as a woman who still has fond memories of her church-going days.

We the citizens of Singapore
pledge ourselves as one united people
regardless of race, language or religion
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation

So the cat is finally out of the bag. Or as mrsbudak quoting someone said "The Sith Lord has finally come out of the woodwork."

The takeover of AWARE is an organised coup by a group of Christian fundamentalists (I am not even going to call them conservatives anymore) who believe that their way is the only right way and everyone else is wrong. 

Blogging about religion is always a rather risky business in Singapore, given how sensitive we are about the potential for religious dissent. However, I think it is time that we all buck up - if we can tell members of the Islamic faith to stand up and speak up against Muslim fundamentalists, I really do not see why we can't say the same about the Christians (or for that matter, the Buddhists and the Hindus and the Jews etc etc).

I don't think I am being unreasonable - all I am asking for is respect - respect for the human race in all its diversity. I suspect that my own personal views on many things will be considered conservative in nature, but what draws a bright shining line between me and fundamentalists is that I respect that there are other people, some in circumstances that I cannot even begin to imagine, who thinks differently or choose courses of action that I do not condone for myself. And I accept that, because I am in no position to tell another person with respect to his or her own actions affecting himself or herself, what is right and what is wrong. I accept that the world is imperfect, and to pretend otherwise is simply to live in an ivory tower that does nobody any good.

AWARE is a secular NGO that promote gender equality, furthering women's rights. Is a lesbian not a woman? Is an abused wife not a woman? Is a teenage girl with an unwanted pregnancy not a woman? Is a divorced woman not a woman? Is a single woman not a woman? Is a single mother not a woman? Is it fair to a young girl struggling with her sexuality to keep her ignorant of means of birth control? Can you, as a women rights group, pretend that there are no lesbians, no single mothers in Singapore? Is there only one way to be a good woman, a good human? Is there only one way to lead a good life? Good by whose standards anyway? And who are you to judge?

The AWARE EOGM is taking place on 2 May 2009. I am asking all women of Singapore (men can't vote sorry), please, register as members of AWARE, and turn up to vote on that day. I am not asking that you vote for any one side. I am asking that you come and listen and vote according to your convictions and your beliefs.  AWARE is the most prominent woman rights group we have in Singapore with the ability to influence legislation. It needs to representative of us, not of only one interest group. Christians (including Catholics) form less than 15% of our population, which means Christian fundamentalists form a much less significant proportion of that. Why should they speak for us, or act in our name?

Even if you are apathetic and think that this does not concern you, chew on this poem that has been making its rounds around the internet lately:

Give these fundamentalists an inch, and where will you and your children be in ten years time?

One of the good things that have come out of the on-going leadership tussle at AWARE - I have never ever seen so much discussion among my friends and colleagues about the role of women and the role that NGOs such as AWARE should play in Singapore society, and how this interfaces with religion. 

Personally, I think that one's religious convictions is just that, personal and no one's business but her own (with an important caveat carved out for persons who think that terrorism and mass murder are accepted means of practising their religion). Christian conservatives have as much right as any other person to run for office in any organisation, including AWARE. Similarly however, I expect Christian conservatives to adhere to the fundamental principles of the organisation they are participating in as much any other person. A Buddhist who joins a church with a view to converting its members to Buddhism is acting in bad faith, to put it mildly. And ditto for persons who seek to join a secular organisation with a view to changing it to one that advances a religious agenda.

Thus far, I have not found anything that the new Exco has published or issued regarding its agenda. Given how its members have in effect, staged a power-grab, I find it rather curious that the new Exco is unable, until now, put forward its plans for AWARE. I want to know where the new Exco stands on a host of issues because these directly impact on the programmes that AWARE has been running, including its views on:

1. work-life balance;
2. sexual harrassment in the workplace; and
3. family planning (including abortion and use of contraceptives).

I consider the whole anti-gay hysteria to be a bit of a red-herring. As far as I am aware (pardon the pun), AWARE has never actively championed gay rights, save for its endorsement of the (ultimately failed) campaign to repeal section 337A of the Penal Code (which criminalise gay sex). There are individuals in AWARE who champion gay rights, but as far as I know, they have never succeeded in pushing this agenda through AWARE. And that brings me back to my original point, I really don't care whether the Exco members include gay activists or Christian conservatists, so long as their personal agenda are not imposed onto a secular NGO whose stated mission is to advance gender equality.

The new Exo is legitimately elected under the constitution of AWARE, and while the background of the Exco collectively gives rise to questions, I am of the view that we need to give this Exco a chance to explain its agenda (which it has not) before blindly casting our vote to throw them out. I am hoping that such a chance will arise at the EGM on 2 May, but until then, I will reserve my vote as an AWARE member. I need to know more.

I don't really understand why this is considered a comedy - unless it is a tragi-comedy?

This line by Jon Steward about what he assumes the press should be applies to Singapore too, don't you think?

I’m under the assumption, and maybe this is purely ridiculous, but I’m under the assumption that you don’t just take their word for it at face value. That you actually then go around and try and figure it out.




</div></div>

 

</div></div>

</lj-embed>

One of my bosses used to tell me "numbers don't lie". I never agreed, because I always thought numbers are a lazy shortcut that hides or fudges the underlying assumptions. I had an absolutely horrendous experience with my Finance, Economics and Statistics modules of my post-graduate programme, because I just can't buy into this whole "everything-is-explained-through-formulae-and-numbers" argument that everyone seems to accept unquestioningly.

Anyway, this is a lovely quote from an article I came across that sets out quite well what I always thought:

"In the world of finance, too many quants see only the numbers before them and forget about the concrete reality the figures are supposed to represent. They think they can model just a few years' worth of data and come up with probabilities for things that may happen only once every 10,000 years. Then people invest on the basis of those probabilities, without stopping to wonder whether the numbers make any sense at all." (emphasis mine)

I do not really agree that quants are the root of the credit crisis, or that we should pin the blame on one man who came up with a deceptively simple formula (I don't think it is simple, but that is just me). Heck, the root of this crisis, like all crisis is human greed, that blinds us to some fundamental truths.  One thing I am glad about though is that this hopefully marks the beginning of the end of the blind faith in numbers.

I admit it. I am a member of the Facebook group "I Judge You When You Use Poor Grammar". I don't think I am fanatical about proper grammar - I am from Singapore after all, a country whose meek and obedient citizens have gleefully resisted the government's call to use proper English instead of Singlish (an utterly fascinating but (to non-Singaporeans, incomprehensible) mixture of English, Mandarin, Malay and other dialects).

Nonetheless, virtually nothing riles me up as much as reading a badly drafted document, email or blog entry full of slang, bad grammar and spelling errors. My guess is that as English is not my mother tongue in the strict sense of the word, I had been taught to respect English the way many people are taught to respect Maths  (just as 1+1 = 2, so it is always "you are" and never "you is"). 
 

( I Judge You When You Use Poor Grammar )

I have been thinking about the S$46,000 French cooking class taken by one of our Permanent Secretaries. Interestingly enough, most of my friends (most of whom are high-earning professionals) do not have a problem with Mr. P.S going for the holiday - it is money he has earned legitimately and it is for him to do with it as he pleases. I tend towards the same view, though there is something in the back of my tongue - something sour about the whole thing that I could not really identify. I don't think it is envy - partly at least because I cannot even imagine earning so much money, and partly because well, I am quite happy with where I am in life right now - I don't really feel the lack, money-wise. I may be a lesser mortal, MP Chong, but no, I don't think the slight unease I am feeling  is  envy.

It was over Chinese New Year that I realised that the backlash is really from the grassroots - the retirees, the middle management, the small business owners (i.e. most of my relatives who are still in Singapore) - they were scathing about the whole issue, and sound almost betrayed. I have never ever in my life heard my father so furious over anything government-related. For the first time ever, my relatives were urging me to leave Singapore since I actually have the ability to do so - Australia, China were listed as places I should be looking at. Some of them are already planting into their children the idea that they should try to obtain PR in other countries once they are able and then sponsor their parents for PR as well. It was strange - very strange, especially in the earlier years they usually tell me to marry and settle down and stop dreaming of leaving Singapore because this is a good place to live and "all your family and loved ones are here."

I was having my daily dose of the New York Times just now, and I think I found a passage that perhaps explains this surprising change of heart (save one, my relatives had been stauchly pro-government as long as I can remember) - the quote below is in relation to the bonuses paid to Wall Street bankers despite their role in plunging the global economy into its worst crisis since the Great Depression, but it is applicable here as well.

"“This has been building for 20 years,” said Richard C. Ferlauto, director of corporate governance for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. “Regular working people haven’t gotten ahead in the economy. They understand that tremendous wealth has been created, and they say, ‘Where’s mine?’ ” He continued: “These guys seem to be living in another universe. So the symbolism of the umbrella stand and the private jet is powerful.” The umbrella stand, of course, was a reference to the $15,000 umbrella stand that the former Tyco chief executive Dennis Kozlowski bought with company funds — and that is part of the reason he is now behind bars." (emphasis added)

To apply it to our circumstances - it is the symbolism of the cooking class that has hit most people - the idea that while people like my parents and relatives, who are all honest hardworking peasants who spent within their means and saved religiously, found that escalating costs of living meant that they will be reliant on their children for the rest of their retirement and in event of extreme poverty, may obtain less than S$400 per month from social assistance, whereas high-ranking civil servants and politicans can splurge on exotic holidays that cost more than what most ordinary peasants can earn in a year. These guys live in such a different universe from most ordinary Singaporeans - how can we expect them to understand, really understand, the challenges Singaporeans face in their daily lives and implement policies that are beneficial to Singaporeans? Better perhaps to leave while it is possible to do so, or if not, get the children out.

Scarcely has the whole ballyhoo about a top civil servant and his family going on a five-week cooking class in Paris that cost around S$46,000 (exclusive of lodgings, air tickets etc), died down, one of our esteemed Members of Parliament put his foot in the mouth. By the way, if you not Singaporean, take note that a gross annual salary of S$48,000 puts you in the 76.5 percentile of the population in terms of salary for 2007.

Just in case you are too lazy to click the link below and read, I quote:

"MP Charles Chong noted that Mr Tan didn't 'brag' about how expensive the trip was in the article.

'Maybe it made lesser mortals envious and they thought maybe he was a little bit boastful,' he said. "Would people have taken offence if his wife (a senior investment counsellor at a bank) had paid for everything?'" [emphasis mine].

MP Chong, I will be grateful if you can clarify what you are actually trying to say. Are you by any chance saying that your pay package determines whether you are a "greater" or "lesser" mortal? Or are you saying that a permanent secretary is a "greater" mortal than everyone else lower down the hierarchy?  Does it take a genius to realise that a public servant writing in the newspapers about a five-week holiday that cost more than the annual salary of more than three-quarters of the population (most of whom are not entitled to five-weeks of paid leave) is in very very bad taste, even in a boom year?

Remember, at the end of the day, however flawed our system of democracy is, we the peasants, are the ones who vote for you, MP Chong (yes I am in your constituency and I am currently quite inclined to make copies of that newspaper report and spend the Chinese New Year holidays stuffing copies into every single letterbox in Pasir-Ris Punggol GRC with the above quotes underlined and highlighted for ease of reference), and are the suckers who paid for your monthly MP allowance of S$13,900 and Mr. Tan's (evidently) top-ranked salary as taxpayers.

Seriously, what is wrong with our MPs and our elite public servants nowadays? Even if they are not the public-spirited persons they hold themselves out to be (and seriously, I have lived 30 years in this world and am not that naive) for heavens sake, common sense people, common sense!!! We are not even talking about political instinct here!

( A Lesser Mortal )

P.S. Just to make it clear where I stand on this. I don't give a hoot where or how Mr. Permanent Secretary spends his hard-earned salary - he got it through his gainful employment and he is entitled to spend it as he deems fit so long as it is legal. The amount of salary he commands is a separate issue that as far as I am concerned, irrelevant in this context. The bone I had with him is the sheer lack of tact and startling lack of understanding of our society he has demonstrated by publishing an article where he wrote almost boastfully about the cost of such a trip and of his management skills and ability. Subtly, understatement, humility - have these values been cast aside and forgotten?

P.P.S.  Even though I did not vote for MR Charles Chong in the last elections, nonetheless I apologise as a constituent of the Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC for inflicting him on Singaporeans.