A student has posted topless photos of herself on the Internet in order to win a photo shoot. What is also appalling is her responses and her parents' as well.
She claims her boyfriend supports her move and he is a long-term partner. What she needs to know is that he is being the devil's advocate, pushing her towards the path of superficiality. I don't know if he will still stand by her as she loses her physical assets with age. If he can support such a thing, it serves to prove my point.
To her, this focus on her body is fun and makes her happy. I am speechless with horror. Then she says she would not model full-time because she would get bored. Such a fleeting mindset.
Then her parents say it was up to her to do what she wanted. Such a statement should not come from parents! They have the responsibility to teach morality to their children. She is only 20 and so she is not yet an adult. She is still under their authority. Their concern is only whether this move would affect her future. Such a worldly worry.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
The controversy of V's Day in Malaysia
I read the article with a sense of unfairness, since I am a Christian. At the same time, some of the opinions expressed are understandable because there are Christian black sheep who spark them off.
Love is associated with lust because they give in to their passions against their conscience. Their actions have perverted the true meaning of love. Premarital sex and adultery permeate even the Christian community because they don't practise their faith. However, it is very unfair to label all Christians as participating in immoral activities, partying and implied pre-marital sex. Our church teachings certainly don't advocate them. Pre-marital sex is a sin and 'indecent partying' aka clubbing is frowned upon. Immorality is definitely against our tradition. Such unproven opinions are unwelcome. The TV personality has a narrow perspective. I really hope she feels compelled to apologise to us.
At the same time, V's Day does not corrupt people. It is the choices made by individuals that give this impression. This day may have its source in Christianity but the story behind it is not filled with debauchery. St. Valentine was a priest who held marriages in secret for soldiers. The emperor had banned marriage for them due to his fear of their reduced level of commitment towards war. Perhaps these critics don't read enough on the origin of the day and thus make such sweeping statements.
I am glad the churches in Malaysia clarified this point and said that it is a secular observance not carried out by churches in the world. Thank you for clearing our name! I hope those critics feel ashamed for making such untrue statements. Then again, will they?
Love is associated with lust because they give in to their passions against their conscience. Their actions have perverted the true meaning of love. Premarital sex and adultery permeate even the Christian community because they don't practise their faith. However, it is very unfair to label all Christians as participating in immoral activities, partying and implied pre-marital sex. Our church teachings certainly don't advocate them. Pre-marital sex is a sin and 'indecent partying' aka clubbing is frowned upon. Immorality is definitely against our tradition. Such unproven opinions are unwelcome. The TV personality has a narrow perspective. I really hope she feels compelled to apologise to us.
At the same time, V's Day does not corrupt people. It is the choices made by individuals that give this impression. This day may have its source in Christianity but the story behind it is not filled with debauchery. St. Valentine was a priest who held marriages in secret for soldiers. The emperor had banned marriage for them due to his fear of their reduced level of commitment towards war. Perhaps these critics don't read enough on the origin of the day and thus make such sweeping statements.
I am glad the churches in Malaysia clarified this point and said that it is a secular observance not carried out by churches in the world. Thank you for clearing our name! I hope those critics feel ashamed for making such untrue statements. Then again, will they?
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Clubbing for kids?!
What is the world coming to? So what if there is no cigarette smoke and softer music? How much softer can the music be? Fast beats are still needed for disco dancing. It can be softer in terms of volume, yes, but not in terms of tempo. Why expose kids to such activities? Is there any real benefit in doing so? I really don't know what the organizer, who is a mother, is thinking. "Innocent fun", my foot! There are other ways to achieve this.
These activities are for those 18 years old and above. Why make the kids grow up so fast? If indeed it is "good clean fun", why hold it in a night spot? This kind of defeats the meaning of the term? I think it is more of the selfish purpose of satisfy- ing parents' own whims for nostalgic clubbing. Some kids are really too young for this and though there are kid-related activities in the event, these activities can be held elsewhere. It is the venue that is a problem. Alcohol is still available for the parents. Paying extra for it will not diminish the chances of the negative consequences related to it from happening.
These activities are for those 18 years old and above. Why make the kids grow up so fast? If indeed it is "good clean fun", why hold it in a night spot? This kind of defeats the meaning of the term? I think it is more of the selfish purpose of satisfy- ing parents' own whims for nostalgic clubbing. Some kids are really too young for this and though there are kid-related activities in the event, these activities can be held elsewhere. It is the venue that is a problem. Alcohol is still available for the parents. Paying extra for it will not diminish the chances of the negative consequences related to it from happening.
Monday, February 14, 2011
The ideal academic syllabus
UK plans to make some much-needed changes to its learning syllabus for schools. I wonder why the deficiencies occurred in the first place and am glad that changes are to be made to restore the deficiencies.
The topics to be learnt by students are monarchy history, literary works in the Canon and mental sums. These should have never left the syllabus at all. Monarchy history is part of UK's nationalism, something every citizen should know, and the literary works serve only to reinforce UK's reputation as the country best known for what literature really is, which means the works are worth studying. Mental sums are really basic tools one should equip himself with.
It seems that for more than 10 years, primary and secondary students have been studying trendy and practical-based subjects. Should not such subjects be greatly included in the syllabus for older students, say at least pre-university ones? If they have to be included at such low levels of the academic syllabus, they should consist of only a small percentage. As a result of this unbalanced focus, the lower-level students have little understanding of basic school subjects. What a tragedy. Indeed, "the existing national curriculum embodies poverty of aspiration"!
How can the famous prime minister of UK Winston Churchill be removed from the school syllabus? It is such an insult to the efforts he made to secure the country during the war.The geography syllabus includes only UK itself. It may be patriotic in nature but is limiting in knowledge. Knowing about the geography of the world the students live in will be a tremendous benefit to them.
Yes, yes. Mr Gove's statement of granting the students access to great authors like Lord Byron and John Keats, and UK's history is well-said!
The topics to be learnt by students are monarchy history, literary works in the Canon and mental sums. These should have never left the syllabus at all. Monarchy history is part of UK's nationalism, something every citizen should know, and the literary works serve only to reinforce UK's reputation as the country best known for what literature really is, which means the works are worth studying. Mental sums are really basic tools one should equip himself with.
It seems that for more than 10 years, primary and secondary students have been studying trendy and practical-based subjects. Should not such subjects be greatly included in the syllabus for older students, say at least pre-university ones? If they have to be included at such low levels of the academic syllabus, they should consist of only a small percentage. As a result of this unbalanced focus, the lower-level students have little understanding of basic school subjects. What a tragedy. Indeed, "the existing national curriculum embodies poverty of aspiration"!
How can the famous prime minister of UK Winston Churchill be removed from the school syllabus? It is such an insult to the efforts he made to secure the country during the war.The geography syllabus includes only UK itself. It may be patriotic in nature but is limiting in knowledge. Knowing about the geography of the world the students live in will be a tremendous benefit to them.
Yes, yes. Mr Gove's statement of granting the students access to great authors like Lord Byron and John Keats, and UK's history is well-said!
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Subconscious xenophobia
A letter from a youth implied some unhappiness with the presence of foreign students in his school. I do not attempt to understand the logic behind his arguments.
He feels that having them in our schools places we local students at a disadvantage. I beg to differ. I feel that their studious attitude and their unwavering determination; quest for learning actually drives us to be on par with them, if not better. They are a motivating force, if we but see.
He points out their age as a factor when it comes to the threat they pose to us. Being older does not mean being smarter. The fact that they are put in the same standard as we are, despite being older, means they are unable to cope with the actual standard their age equates to. His assumption that they have studied the syllabus of the standard they are in, just because they are older, is definitely groundless. Admitting the foreigners to their actual standards just to ensure equality for we local students seems rather self-centred, I feel. The fact is that they will not be able to cope with their real standards as a result.
Also, their age may make them more mature but it does not relate to their academic abilities as a result. I believe it is their character and background that cause them to be studious. They know that their families have paid a huge sum of money for them to study here and so they study hard as a form of repayment. Also, their lives back in their countries may not as smooth as ours are in our country. Their attitude is a result of having survived a harsher reality.
It may seem as if I doubt the abilities of foreign students but I really am not. After all, I have tutored them. I admire them for their attitudes and I know our local students can learn from them in this area. It sure beats lamenting their presence and feeling unfair as a result. Why not also try to understand where they are coming from instead of judging them for the benefit of self?
This state of mind is also present in older Singaporeans towards Filipino maids. The latter has been in the news for blocking the pavement in front of Ion. Upon reading the article, this perception floods my mind.
The management of Lucky Plaza chased the latter off the place because it felt that they were overcrowding the place and thus being a safety hazard. Somehow I feel this reason is not good enough. They had to scout around for other places to gather at. Poor them. I abhor Kelly Chen's remark about the fact that they "downgrade the image of Ion." Ion may look exclusive with its branded shopping outlets but its management still allows locals dressed in sloppy attire to walk on its grounds. These locals also "downgrade the image of Ion", right?
I am definitely on the side of Janice Goh who cited Hongkong's similar phenomenon as evidence for her view. She even used the word "discriminate" in her statement. Way to go, girl! Also, Eileen's view is very objective. She mentioned that as long as they don't litter or block the way, they pose no problem since it's only once a week. This is the best perspective of all.
He feels that having them in our schools places we local students at a disadvantage. I beg to differ. I feel that their studious attitude and their unwavering determination; quest for learning actually drives us to be on par with them, if not better. They are a motivating force, if we but see.
He points out their age as a factor when it comes to the threat they pose to us. Being older does not mean being smarter. The fact that they are put in the same standard as we are, despite being older, means they are unable to cope with the actual standard their age equates to. His assumption that they have studied the syllabus of the standard they are in, just because they are older, is definitely groundless. Admitting the foreigners to their actual standards just to ensure equality for we local students seems rather self-centred, I feel. The fact is that they will not be able to cope with their real standards as a result.
Also, their age may make them more mature but it does not relate to their academic abilities as a result. I believe it is their character and background that cause them to be studious. They know that their families have paid a huge sum of money for them to study here and so they study hard as a form of repayment. Also, their lives back in their countries may not as smooth as ours are in our country. Their attitude is a result of having survived a harsher reality.
It may seem as if I doubt the abilities of foreign students but I really am not. After all, I have tutored them. I admire them for their attitudes and I know our local students can learn from them in this area. It sure beats lamenting their presence and feeling unfair as a result. Why not also try to understand where they are coming from instead of judging them for the benefit of self?
This state of mind is also present in older Singaporeans towards Filipino maids. The latter has been in the news for blocking the pavement in front of Ion. Upon reading the article, this perception floods my mind.
The management of Lucky Plaza chased the latter off the place because it felt that they were overcrowding the place and thus being a safety hazard. Somehow I feel this reason is not good enough. They had to scout around for other places to gather at. Poor them. I abhor Kelly Chen's remark about the fact that they "downgrade the image of Ion." Ion may look exclusive with its branded shopping outlets but its management still allows locals dressed in sloppy attire to walk on its grounds. These locals also "downgrade the image of Ion", right?
I am definitely on the side of Janice Goh who cited Hongkong's similar phenomenon as evidence for her view. She even used the word "discriminate" in her statement. Way to go, girl! Also, Eileen's view is very objective. She mentioned that as long as they don't litter or block the way, they pose no problem since it's only once a week. This is the best perspective of all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)