In broad daylight? How daring!

The couple at East Coast Park having oral sex repulses me to no end. If they really can't keep their mouths off each other, they can do it at home or in a hotel room. By doing it in the open at a place where families usually gather at, they are really advocating that their act is a good thing and may cause children to follow suit. Obviously, they don't bother about this hidden message they are conveying and are merely giving in to their selfish, fleshly desires after having been sexually and emotionally aroused. What an odious pair!

This also pertains to the two naked men committing a sex act in the lift and void deck of a HDB block.

Singapore's 'Edison Chen'

Gary Ng is a man who films his sexual partners and posts the video of their sexual act online. When questioned on criticism towards his deed, he attributes it to jealousy of him. What a naive thought! He does not seem to realise that it is nothing to be proud of and that he is being immoral. This pride is further manifested by the usage of his real name.

He even films them without their knowledge even when they disallow him from doing so. That's sheer betrayal of trust! Women usually agree to have sex with men they trust. He claims he cares for their future by editing away their faces in the videos but that is an audacious lie! If he really does, he would have respected their decision not to be filmed.

Criticism against condoms to counter Aids

Aids campaigners have spoken out against the Pope for staunchly expressing that condoms merely worsen the surge of Aids. I strongly disagree with their opinion. It is not because I am a Roman Catholic but that I see the truth in his stand. Condoms are not 100% effective in preventing the ejaculation of sperms into the vagina and there are other forms of sex such as oral sex to indulge in, which can cause Aids. The best method is really sexual abstinence unless procreation comes into play, or sexual monogamy.

"Incredible" service

The editor of Digital Life wrote about how a bank's staff member misinterpreted her handwriting and subsequently blotched her cheque transaction, causing her to pay out 10 times the actual amount. I agree with the editor that the staff member should have fallen back on the other details in the cheque if she was unsure about a particular detail. Her explanation seems to reflect a lack of thoroughness and professionalism, and I get the feeling that the staff member was not completely apologetic about her mistake.

I was rather appalled at this incident when reading about it.

Interviewing potentials

Virdi Bhupinder wrote a letter to question the manner in which job interviewers conduct their sourcing for applicants. He feels that some questions they ask are absurd: Please send us your photo, What is your race and Can you speak Mandarin for a front-line job?

I partially agree with his opinion. Asking for his photo is a natural part of the selection process. First impressions through a person's features and physical appearance can tell others more about him. The question about his race is redundant though. His name already gives an indication of it. His ability to speak Mandarin is also evident from his name, but it is not necessarily accurate. Some non-Chinese have learnt to speak it. It may be an intrinsic part of the job to have this ability. I feel he has not thoroughly examined the rationale behind the questions.

Cheating by society's role models!

Stomp featured the photograph of this pair of parents colouring a picture on their son's behalf in an art competition. The boy was playing at a playground. The father even took photographs when the boy received a prize for their work.

This is preposterous! If the boy is not ready to take part in such a contest, they should not have entered his name in the first place. They are being cheating embodiments here. If this is their way of loving him, it is a dishonest way and they are teaching him the wrong values. Being there for their son does not mean doing everything for him, and breaking rules in the process. He will never learn what personal responsibility and independence are in this case. What is more, announcements had been made for parents not to help their children in the contest but this pair of parents audaciously disregarded them.

My mother did sew a pencil case and a skirt on my behalf for my school assignments, because I am hopeless at art. That is bad enough, I admit but this is worse. It is a competition with prizes awarded. Thank goodness future entries done by the children's parents will be disqualified to maintain fairness.

Disability discrimination

Cerrie Burnell has been accused of scaring kids with her one-armed body. What an argument! Is it her fault that she was born with just one arm? Do her critics regard her feelings when they accuse her?

I think it is a form of exposure for the kids, to know that there are such unfortunate people who do not let their disabilities hinder their desires to live life. I do not think her critics have any justification in their arguments. The father who was worried that his daughter may get nightmares is paranoid, I feel. His daughter is merely learning about the reality out there, and even if she does not see it now, she will see it sooner or later. I think parents like him should have used the opportunity to field her queries and to teach her to sympathise with Cerrie. Two years old is the age when children start learning about things around them.

I agree with some viewers who applaud her for her courage. She is really using her own disability to show that it does not make her any different from the other hosts on the programme. I am also heartened that BBC does not discriminate her as a result. Indeed, as she says, these parents are just frightened of her lack of features but as parents, they should be mature enough to deny their fears in order to educate their children on her disability. They can even confess that they are afraid of the sight, but that requires humility and courage. I'm proud of her for choosing to see good in the controversy surrounding her and for seeing the importance of being a good role model. She willingly accepts her difference from others too, to the extent that she would not change it even if she had the chance to. She is actually a better role model than these parents, if I may say so!

It is so sad to note that disabled parts go to able-bodied actors instead in stage productions. Society should be made more aware of the fact that disabled actors are just as good at acting and hosting than able-bodied ones. Even the programme controller advocates her warm and natural characteristics as the criteria for having employed her. Why can't these parents look beyond her disability, at her beauty within? Sir Bert Massie hit the nail on its head when he labelled the parents as "ignorant and prejudiced" and expressed that they lack responsibility in making their children the scapegoats for their biases. It is bad enough that they do not want to educate their children on what is natural. What kind of parents are they?