The Straight Dope: Can someone be literally scared to death? - "Here the patient was a man in his 70s who'd been diagnosed with incurable cancer and told he had only a few months left. Wanting to live till Christmas, he ate and exercised as directed and walked out of the hospital for the holidays much improved. He was readmitted shortly after New Year's close to death and expired within 24 hours. An autopsy found the cancer diagnosis had been exaggerated; his physical complaints weren't enough to kill him. Instead, he and everyone else were convinced he was going to die, so he did."
You can will yourself to health, and to death too.

Cook's Thesaurus: Vinegars

Memoirs of a Geisha--Mad TV Bobby Lee of Mad TV as Sayuri in The Memoirs of a Geisha - "A story like mine has never been told. That not true. This is just another movie about a poor but beautiful girl turned into a callgirl. This time, she is geisha... 'I can put fist in my mouth. 50 yen I stay all night' '40' '50 firm. I can shoot ping pong balls *whispers*'"

The Official God FAQ

The Christian Paradox - "Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that “God helps those who help themselves.”... On this essential matter, most Americans—most American Christians—are simply wrong, as if 75 percent of American scientists believed that Newton proved gravity causes apples to fly up... The power of the Christian right rests largely in the fact that they boldly claim religious authority... But their theology is appealing for another reason too: it coincides with what we want to believe. How nice it would be if Jesus had declared that our income was ours to keep, instead of insisting that we had to share. How satisfying it would be if we were supposed to hate our enemies. Religious conservatives will always have a comparatively easy sell."
Sounds like Singapore to me too.

Richard Dawkins: Beyond belief - "What angers Dawkins most is the way religion gets such an easy ride. "We treat it with a politically correct reverence that we don't accord to any other institution," he says. "Even secularists talk about Jewish, Catholic and Muslim children. There's no such thing. Children aren't born with a particular religious gene. What they are is children of Jewish, Catholic and Muslim parents. If you started to talk about monetarist or Marxist children, everyone would consider you abusive.""

Naked-marriage-sex ban - "An Egyptian cleric's controversial fatwa claiming that nudity during sexual intercourse invalidates a marriage has uncovered a rift among Islamic scholars."

Revenge of the Tattooed Nerds - "Over the last couple of weeks I’ve been talking to people with “nerdy” tattoos — computer logos, video game themes, science, math, and engineering imagery. Below you can read their stories in their own words"

What, If Anything, Is A Byzantine? - "We might better name the Empire at Constantinople with the title of the "Romaion Empire" from the Greek "Basileia Romaion" [Empire of the Romaioi]."
Bah, mere semantics.

There are also battered men - "Men are presumed to be able to take care of themselves because they are generally bigger and stronger; but that advantage can be neutralized by a weapon, a surprise attack, or a man's reluctance to use force against a woman even to fend off her assault. (The most reliable research shows that up to 35 percent of victims injured by violent partners are men.)... male victims often have to deal with attitudes that are considered Neanderthal if expressed toward women - for instance, that they must have done something to provoke the assault... most of these groups espouse a radical feminist ideology that reduces the complex issues of abuse to "women good, men bad" - a secular religion with the patriarchy as the devil."

Singaporean skydiver falls to his death in Perth - "The seasoned Singaporean skydiver had reportedly made 270 jumps before this incident."
Time to ban skydiving!

NKF... And defamation - "It raised a question whether the republic’s defamation law is also – apart from preventing the innocent from any slanderous assault – protecting wrongdoings by the rich and powerful from being discovered... the defamation law became a weapon of the wealthy. You don’t often see a bricklayer suing a property tycoon for libel or defamation, only the other way around... Its frequent use has contributed to the sort of litigious society the government wants to avoid. The law has also rendered whistle-blowing (an insider revealing a grave wrongdoing) either in a government department or in a large corporation a virtually suicidal task. Because of the expenses, Singaporeans simply choose to turn a blind eye when they see something radically wrong, and society is the loser."

inex: You know what?

"We have girls getting molested here and what the fuck do we get? People accusing us of discrimination. racism. Is there any fucking wonder why we rather not push the issue? Why we would rather suffer in silence? Even my fellow LJier who was a victim of their sexual haressment(I read her post, and was astound to see other girls come forward with their own accounts, and yes all their molesters were banglahs.) could not bring herself to make a big issue out of it. "


Me: While freely conceding that from copious amounts of anecdotal evidence, Banglas appear to be committing a disproportionate number of molests, we must, I think, agree that denying that, all things being equal, a bangla is more likely than a local to blind you with foam spray and molest you along Orchard Road on Christmas and New Year's Eve is an unavoidable concomitant of a society that condemns racism and refuses to prejudge individuals based on their biological attributes, even if they are statistically correlated with certain actions, and that the rigors which Singaporean women have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.

akikonomu: i've read accounts of the incidents in other blogs, and they don't mention banglas

Me: oh?
maybe they were blinded :P

akikonomu: nope.

Me: come, tell me more

akikonomu: what is more likely is the orchard road tourism board hired some teens to sell the stuff
it's their lame christmas = some other festival thing
i remember in 2004, christmas was mardis gras due to all the street performrs and clowns
this year christmas = songkran

Me: so everyone thinks it's banglas because they're racist?
has happened in previous years leh

akikonomu: not everyone

Me: well no one is saying ALL banglas molest
or ALL people who molest are banglas
just that most molests seem to be done by banglas

one thing sociologists like to do, I noticed in the module, is to find exceptions and crow that they disprove the rule

akikonomu: listen to me: some people who got spray blogged about it. their acconts don't involve banglas

Me: did they get sprayed and molested?

akikonomu: they got sprayed indiscriminately

Me: not the same

being sprayed all over
and being sprayed and molested

the first is annoying
the second is criminal and violating

I don't know lah
wait for the police report

I remember that immigrants are believed responsible for crime
but actually commit less crime

OTOH, why do they all congregate there?
and why do we have so many anecdotal reports

akikonomu: mmm. how many people got molested

Me: that's why must wait for police report lor

but this sort of thing, how to investigate?
easy to assimilate into the crowd

akikonomu: aka what is happening now is a moral/social panic, disguised by xenophobia
or rather, it IS disguised xenophobia

i don't really blog about stuff i can't confirm =D
from our conversation, you already see how incomplete my info is.


A: our society condemns racism in name only lah!

all individuals are prejudged based on biological attributes. that is an undeniable fact about being human. or being alive, for that matter... all animals prejudge based on physical appearances. it is hard wired into our genome and a consequence (or cause) of evolution

the simple truth is that, if you don't want to be molested and have foam sprayed in your face, 1) don't go to orchard rd during countdown 2) don't wear revealing clothing.

Me: anyway people (including I) would argue that it's natural, but we shouldn't do it

in this case, everyone does it. just that when race comes into the picture everyone becomes touchy-feely and politcally correct

but actually does it anyway

A: yes. so what i sthe difference b/w discrimination by race vs discrimination by other physical (i.e. non-controllable) parameters?

race is a touchy subject because of historical precedent

Me: precisely
and culture is deterministic also
and people discriminate (or at least pre-judge) by it
there's no way not to without going insane

A: yes, one might argue that to view every single person on an equal level without bias would be, at best, hopelessly naive.

you always need counter-examples to convince you lah. e.g. if a bangla stopped to help up an old lady who fell on the floor
(that said the old lady might sue for molest, you never know singaporeans)

it woudln't be racist to say "a lot of the people spraying foam and molesting were banglas"
it would be racist however to say "all banglas are molesters"
but it wouldn't b eracist to say "a bangla is more likely to be a molester"

it's a fine line

Me: mmm
but people can only think in false dichotomies

A: that is because they are eager to jump to assumptions and see things that are not there.

Me: literature!
to quote my lit friend: "anyway the point, again, is that the intention DOES NOT MATTER"


Unnamed sociologist: is the writer opposed to the discriminate use of full stops in sentences
i cant believe that's an 8 line sentence with nary a stop
painful read.

it's a cultural thing. indian women are objectified in their own countries, and the men bring that culture over here

[Addendum: Someone else - if u ve watched amazing race...there're episodes where the female contestants in india were all molested on trains filled with indian males

i wonder if it's their culture or sth

but definitely..i think women rights need to be protected]


B: lack of a/c can do weird things to ppl
even lky had to acknowledge a/c as the best invention of the 20th c

George Soros & A Global Open Society - A Dialogue with a New Generation

Someone suggested to me that we go for this event together, but unfortunately was unable to make it at the last minute; if the following seems too much of a narrative, you can blame her (hehe) since she asked me to tell her what the talk was like. In any case, though we had to pre-register, there was no confirmation of attendance, so in theory anyone could have crashed. Bah. My observations and notes are integrated into the passage, so although at times it may sound like I spoke at the session, the fact is I didn't.

I've always had some bit of skepticism regarding dialogues with the youth, not least because the youth who get to take part in or even spectate at these events are hardly representative of youth in general, coming as they do from a handpicked group. Do these outstanding students, one of whom was acclaimed as "the best" of our next generation, really represent the future generation of Singaporeans? How in touch are they with the bulk of their generation? Indeed, I am given to believe that participants in these events are always the same few people, or at least the same type of people, most of whom probably know each other. Then again, the bulk of the future generation are like the bulk of all generations - apathetic (to one degree or other), so the problem is how to bring the airy-fairy concept of an "Open Society" to the masses. Also, at this talk there were a grand total of 2 youth on the panel - one SMU student and one NUS student, so it was hardly a "dialogue with a new generation" (then again, the Young PAP was headed by a 45-year-old at one point in time, so I guess it's all relative).

I have always been of the opinion that there is no reason to go to too many talks, seminars, symposiums and conferences, since one hits diminishing returns sooner or later. After a while, you find yourself hearing as well as saying the same things (which you of course already know), and those who attend or participate in such are likely already educated and versed in such issues already, and so do not have that much to gain.

Soros singled out the failure of states and repressive ideologies as 2 serious threats to freedom and an open society. Yet, I would think that even in the absence of these 2 factors, apathy would be a powerful threat to an open society. Given that he was discussing how the US was becoming less open ("An open society that doesn't understand the concept and doesn't abide by its principles") in its war on terror by parting from "reality" and entering a "fantasy world", hitting innocents and endangering civil liberties in the process, I'm surprised he didn't discuss it - given that George Bush has been instrumental in rolling back civil liberties, Soros's campaign to oust him would've succeeded if he'd managed to raise turnout among fellow opponents of Bush.

When his turn came up to talk, Kishore Mabhubani asked a "provocative" question. He claimed that the "West" had a nominally open society, but a functionally closed one, while the rest of the world had nominally closed societies, but functionally open ones. When I heard this I was flabbergasted, and my shock did not diminish as he finished his "provocative" question, for in elaborating, it seemed he had conflated the "West" (already a term some deride as being unhelpful) with the USA, and offered nothing at all to substantiate the latter half of his "provocative" question (ie showing how the rest of the world has functionally open societies); just because the USA is not as open as it should be, used to be or is claimed to be does not magically make the rest of the world functionally open. Nor does the US being imperfect mean that the rest of the world has the imprimatur to be more imperfect. He claimed that the US has nurtured the illusion that it is open, so its citizens do not feel that there is a need to know more about the world and now travel less, know less and care less about the rest of the world. I am not sure that this is a new phenomenon, even if it might have become more pronounced in recent years.

In reply to Mabhubani's "provocative" question, Soros replied that the US has robust institutions and a tradition of freedom, so although it has lost its way, it can find it again because it can change, and people criticise the government. So despite the best efforts of the Bush administration, the attempts to make the US a less open society will fail.

Assoc Prof Locknie Hsu next made some general remarks about disputing the veracity of accepted facts, but very importantly zeroed in on how Soros had not defined "democracy" and "open society". I think that lawyers sometimes are too zealous about definitions, resulting in the definitions of concepts almost everyone has an instinctive grasp of becoming more and more precise lose more and more accuracy, until one can have oral sex without this being covered by the legal definition of sex (as it applies to the case). This was a very important point, and I wondered why Soros had not tried to define these concepts in his opening remarks (or indeed Kesavapany in his Welcome Address - after all, the key phrase *did* appear in the title of the dialogue session).

Soros replied to the comment about his not defining his key terms by saying they had no definition, and that people had to define these concepts for themselves. He did conceded, though, that the rule of law was important in an open society, and so you need some legal definitions. I would note that the problem with being so iffy is that definitions can be hijacked in pursuit of political agendas (some would argue that trying to promote civil society in a country is in itself a political agenda, but I have much more faith in the noble intentions of NGOs without vested interests trying to improve the lot of a country's citizens than the motives of repressive governments trying to stifle and control their citizens), and governments, with the aid of co-opted intellectuals, could find all sorts of excuses, including "Western Imperialism", "National Sovereignty", the people not being ready and "Asian Values" to disenfranchise their peoples.

Dr Suzaina Binte Kadir was up next and she voiced the usual question about the alleged dichotomy between economic development and democracy, and if a certain level of economic development was needed before democracy could be attained. This was hardly a new question to me, and I think at least half (probably more) the people in the hall were better read and more well-informed than me, so I wondered why the point was being brought up since it would be neither novel nor informative (see above about diminishing returns). A more interesting question was her asking if some people enjoying an open society was predicated on these people's getting rich at the expense of the rest of the world's population, and if a just and equitable distribution of wealth was possible in an open society (actually I didn't understand why this was necessarily the case, but nonetheless it was an interesting question, being what seemed to be a personal jibe). And then another slightly worn question followed about the role of religion and specifically Islam in an open society.

Soros's answer was that material reward and prosperity was needed for a society to become and remain open: "I spent half an hour grandstanding about an Open Society, but for the first 50 years of my life I was making money... When you're hungry you think about making money... I couldn't stop making money." He said he became successful first before he devoted himself to promoting Open Societies, and that he respected people who did that without becoming rich first. But then he qualified this by saying that an Open Society helps create prosperity by liberating people's creative energies - a bit iffy, and ignoring the role of transparency and openness in encouraging good governance and limiting governance, but fair enough.

Then followed some de rigueur remarks on his part about freedom of belief/faith being necessary because no one was infallible, and an observation that since there is no Church/State divide in Islam, no separation like in Western socities, Islamic politics becomes guided by religion. He drew a parallel with religious fundamentalism in the US, and how "literal interpretation of scripture, frankly", was in conflict with critical thinking because the rules would be set down once and for all. He observed that Islam was struggling with this, especially with regards to women, and that conditions have changed since Islamic scripture was written, and modern realities had to be reconciled with them.

Professor Tommy Koh asked Suzaina if secularism was necessary in an open society, and asked if there was a contradiction between Islam and an Open Society. She replied that although there was no Church-State separation in Islam a la the Enlightenment, they were thinking about how to attain it and so the two were not irreconcilable, at which I chuckled, having witnessed what apologists have managed to do - nothing is irreconcilable!

Next came the two students. Alvina Teh asked how the international community could be persuaded to support an Open Society in a country, since military force, being against the principles of an Open Society, was proscribed - in short, how to bring Open Society to a country needing freedom. Soros replied that people had to be protected when they couldn't protect themselves, and wryly remarked on the UN as a failed tool for protecting people: "It is an imperfect organisation, like all big organisations. Maybe a bit more imperfect than most".

Mabhubani, noting the popularity of UN bashing, then quoted an immortal line he attributed to Margaret Thatcher (the original quote is welcome): "If you don't like the UN, look at a mirror. It reflects you... It's the 109 member states that have screwed up the UN". He then related how a Western intellectual, when asked by him to define the "International Community", said it was the views that developed Western states dictated to the rest of the world.

Soros mused on how the Security Council reflects the power balance in 1945, and warned that only they can fix it, or it will become increasingly irrelevant. But then, I observed that those with the power to fix it have no incentive to do so. An application of game theory, it would seem.

Soros talked about how Canada was the first country to propose the phrase "responsibility to protect", and that when it did so, there was an uproar, but last year, the phrase was sneaked in to a summit document.

The last panelist was Benjamin Lee, who asked how India and China would feel on the developed societies leading the way forward in pursuit of Open Societies (presumably on their being left behind, I think). He also questioned how, if individuals were on the same level as states, an Open Society was not to degenerate into anarchy. Finally, he asked the million dollar question - how far Soros would rate Singapore as an open global society, and where on the spectrum it would lie (someone would definitely have asked this during Q&A if it hadn't during the panel session. I know I would have).

The million dollar question was, of course, greeted with much mirth and approval. Soros was forthright in his appraisal: "Obviously Singapore does not qualify as an Open Society". This was, of course, also greeted with much mirth and approval. He qualified his words, of course, by saying that Singapore was prosperous and so eventually would become an Open Society. The usual platitudes about our enlightened leadership, his admiring their achievements and hoping they would take the next step in the country's development followed. He even talked of how he met one person who was sued for libel and bankrupted, and commented that the use of "libel can be a tremendous hindrance to freedom of speech, or freedom of expression", and recommended that it not be used to suppress those freedoms anymore, to more applause from the audience.

And with that, the Question and Answer session started. Some of the questions were: insipid, uninspiring, trite, irrelevant or one or more of the above, so I will not bother recounting them or their replies here.

One person reminded Soros that he hadn't answered Benjamin's question about anarchy, and so he replied that each society had to draw its own line, and he was not advocating introducing Western democracy to the world. Of course, I think this had its own perils (see above on "Asian Values").

Some people asked Soros financial questions for some reason, even though this talk was not about finance at all. His answer to one was interesting in its own right, though, so I will record it here: he said that he was against market funamentalism because financial markets do not tend to equilibrium since perfect knowledge does not exist; the expectations which people hold change the future, so markets tend to extremes, and he recommended intervention if they swung too far from equilibrium (but not to guide them to equilibrium in the first lace).

One NUS Business School student took trade disputes to be a sign of isolationism in the EU. Huh? In (sort of) reply to that, Soros observed that the EU was a prototype of an Open Society, since no one has majority power, and that the way its principles developed was one step at a time, proceeding incrementally towards an end goal, while realising the imperfection of each step, but that it couldn't go on developing at this rate because it had been driven along by the elite, and people felt alienated so they needed to engage the grassroots (again, nothing new here). Meanwhile, one HCJC guy asked whether speculators destabilised the global community (to which Soros gave the clever answer of their destabilising it half the time and stabilising it the other half).


A "SMU alumni" (sic) asked if Soros felt he was fighting a lost cause, and said he was appreciative of what he had done. Tommy Koh interjected: "You're so young and yet so cynical... I think 'Open Society' is a sunrise concept, 'Democracy' is a sunrise concept". He then continued by saying Soros's answer earlier (about Singapore not being an Open Society) was too abrupt, and that this sort of thing was not a black or white issue: the US was moving from a "totally open" society to a more closed one, while Singapore was moving in the opposite direction, so he should say "Well done. Continue making progress."

Soros admitted that other societies existed which were worse off, and that this was a relative thing, depending on the direction in which a society was moving, and was hopeful for an opening of society. As for lost causes, he related what he'd been told by Kovaliov, who was the human rights commissioner of the Russian parliament and had helped bring the Chechen war to an end: "All my life I've been fighting lost causes", and that if you don't fight for a lost cause, you won't get freedom so one should do it regardless of the chances of success. It sounded a touch vainglorious to me, even if the sentiment was admirable.

At 4:20 sharp, the moderator, exercising a great deal of discipline, cut the session short. Prof Howard Hunter, making the closing remarks, related how when Soros spoke at the Stock Exchange of Singapore on monday, there was a whole row of investment bankers, and that he'd never seen so many SMSes and notes being scribbled except among a row of 13 year olds on the MRT. He also remarked how it's easy to make a lot of money, but you will be forgotten by history if making money is all you care about. He thanked the audience for their sharp, provocative and pithy questions - evidence of critical thinking in Raffles City, and the session was at an end.

The only thing I have left to note is that as I was entering the MRT, JBJ was setting up his stall and hawking is books, with the sign: "Singapore - a country with no rule of law". Somehow, I doubt it was a coincidence that he was there at that time.


Professor Tommy Koh is a very amusing speaker: "As you can tell, Mr Soros, Mr Kesavapany and I beong to the Mutual Admiration Society, which has many members."

"I have the pleasure of introducing Mr George Soros... I will begin by saying I do not share Dr Mahathir's view of him... he might have slightly exaggerated his power, even though he brought down the British Pound a little."

***

Clarifications in response to queries by HUICHIEH:

I must confess to not understanding Agagooga's point about "definitions can be hijacked in pursuit of political agendas"--how does one do such a thing? Perhaps along these lines--a manifestly unjust regime applies a novel definition of a normally positive term, say, "democracy", and under that novel definition, the regime turns out to be "democratic". But this is no argument against the usefulness of definitions--when such things happen, all the more do we become aware of the defectiveness of the unjust regime's novel definition.

North Korea is proclaimed by its government to be a Workers' Paradise, many Communist countries were "Democratic" or "People's Republics" and Singapore has a press model which is defined as suiting our unique circumstances. As such, I was arguing for Soros to provide rough definitions, rather than for the meaninglessness of definitions (they are only meaningless if defined by repressive governments such that their regimes qualify).

And obviously, one would have "much more faith in the noble intentions of NGOs without vested interests trying to improve the lot of a country's citizens than the motives of repressive governments trying to stifle and control their citizens" (emphasis mine). But it doesn't say very much, does it? The question is not whether one ought to have more faith in the good guys as opposed to the bad guys, whoever they are, but just who are the good and who are the bad guys. Personally, neither NGOs nor governments should get a free pass. The noblest intentions can be the direct cause of the worst evils, while the basest motives may yet be the engine that actually make the world work.

Repressive governments like to rail against the nefarious influences of foreign agents, or claim that they should and can not have any say in the internal affairs of a country (sometimes allegedly because they do not have any vested interests in the future of it). Yet, this argument against external interference does not hold any water - we should evaluate what they do, rather than where they come from (from within or without).

"I'm still an atheist, thank God." - Luis Bunuel

***

"Couldn't happen by chance?... Rarity by itself shouldn't necessarily be evidence of anything. When one is dealt a bridge hand of thirteen cards, the probability of being dealt that particular hand is less than one in 600 billion. Still, it would be absurd for someone to be dealt a hand, examine it carefully, calculate that the probability of getting it is less than one in 600 billion, and then conclude that he must not have been dealt that very hand because it is so very improbable." - John Allen Paulos, Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences

***

"If a white man attacks an Asian, it's racial assault. If a black man attacks an Asian, it's robbery." - Dal Singh Dhesy, who runs a Sikh community group in Birmingham, presumably commenting on occidentalist attitudes

Someone: If a white man attacks anybody from another race, it is racism. If a non-white attacks a white man, it is not really his fault. We should look at the root causes. Ha!


If participation and dialogue on so-called women's issues is restricted to women, then by default all other issues are already relegated to men, which circumscribes women's rights as citizens and restricts their full participation in society.

***

The Master Test Tube Washer:

"In Singapore, we have a small population, we have no such luxury to do basic science. The key is to be practical. We cannot have everything. By nature, I want to see some outcome...I want something I can feel and touch, and knock."

"My job is to create jobs. It's not just to create great science and great things. Don't forget Nobel Prizes don't create jobs. Research, to me, is a means to an end. The end, to me, is to attract and encourage local companies and MNCs and create jobs for all Singaporeans, from the CEO down to the cleaning lady."


And this is why Singaporean research is doomed.

If you treat people like commodities, they will behave like commodities.

***

Someone on my first bank statement being rejected by immigration on a technicality and the second being lost because it was delivered to the wrong place: they better get u a limo when u land


Someone else on the "ah, what is truth?" school: wah lau, how to summarise half a year of me being intelleectually traumatised into one msn conversaiton

...

shit, it's 8pm, i have to shower

Me: why, the water goes off later?

Someone else: coz if you're a girl and you have long hair, it takes time to dryoh wiat, you have long hair too
what am i saying
haha

Me: yes
if you're a guy and you have long hair, it takes a long time to dry too
the laws of physics are immutable as far as gender is concerned


Me: ah well. no wonder literature is a doomed field haha

Someone: Hey considering what happened before, not surprised
Actually, doesn't post-colonial lit make assumptions of colonialisation

Me: yeah. always blame the colonialists
aiyah these lit people are too divorced from reality

Someone else: exactly!
if you don't drive yourself nuts first

Me: hoho
that's why they all kill themselves

Someone: I think the danger has always been the type of assumptions made tend to be bad for civil liberty

Me: either nuts or too depressing
it's not about assumptions, it's about probabilistic considerations

Someone: The left gone relativist

***

Me: how come you didn't come ah

Someone: its a stupid story
I missed the bus
from KL to JB

Me: uhh

Someone: look at it this way
more fodder for your anti-msia post

I missed the bus cos there was no indication where my bus was to be at
I had to search all the bus bays to find my bus plus the buses don't have numbers
and I had to ask all the people whether the bus was the one gg to JB
in the end I missed the bus
malaysia boleh!

Me: were there signs... in malay?

Someone: no signs at all
luckily the ticket only cost me 20 ringgit
lol
otherwise I'll feel fucking pissed if I wasted more than that amount

I guess the good thing about msia is that even though many things make you lose money (i.e. inefficiency, corruption), its affordable to us singaporeans cos of the exchange rate lol

***

My Favourite Misanthrope (MFM): I have trouble reconciling this melodrama with your usual frivolity
until I recall that you used to write highly emotional posts back when you were still a slave

Me: you call this melodrama?

MFM: the idea of you crying over ***

Me: by the standards of this sort of thing, it is not melodramatic at all

I am not given to strong emotion usually
but even I am human

MFM: bah. humans.

Me: we are weak and frail creatures of carbon

To the morons (I consider the term to be appropriate here in lieu of the usual "idiots", because something supposed to praise their religion was taken by them to be an insult to it) who got offended by Meritocratic Jesus, all I have to say:

"Did you see the latest WWJD bracelets? I am offended by those blasphemous heretics! How dare they compare themselves to the Lord and insinuate that they are following in his footsteps? NO ONE CAN BE WORTHY!!!111ONE~!!!"

This is what happens when you indoctrinate people without having them consider the meaning of what they're supposed to be doing. Either that or they subscribe to the fire-and-brimstone, Supply Side Jesus school of thought rather than the conventional textual one.

Someone else in the comments:
"Singaporeans are way too politically correct to speak their minds these days. They feel uncomfortable when addressing issues pertaining to race, religion, sex and pretty much everything EXCEPT food."

***

Me on going to Malaysia: if I get paranged, come to my funeral

Someone: haha
i will

u want me to read eulogy?
heehee

i'll tear down every cross in sight ;)
that much I promise u

(can i tear crosses off the necks of the ppl who come for your funeral? esp those who said u died early n tragic cos u didnt' believe in God n He struck u down?) =p

Me: haha
your choice :P


Someone on accepting a rosary: [accept it,] gives her peace of mind

Me: would you accept a wiccan good luck charm?

Someone: no way
but this aint' wiccan

Me: yeah but it's the same principle
it's a religious object of religion other than the one you subscribe to

Someone: but u have no religion..so it's diff for u

Me: err.
yes, but I have similar feelings towards donning religious artefacts


Catholic friend: ***'s catholic meh? how come she gave you a rosary?
there's no harm in just accepting it

Me: would you accept a wiccan holy charm?

CF: actually yes
I've accepted a japanese buddhist/taoist charm before

Me: good for you
most of your brethren wouldn't

how about a satanic charm?

CF: er no. that would be too scary
and that would be AGAINST Christ

Me: so there


Someone else: u shouldn't knock it till u try it
i know it's fashionable and all to be atheist now

Me: should you knock drugs before you try it?
suicide? prostitution?

besides, I've tried it.

you must be joking
christian fundamentalism is surging in singapore


"Whenever we read ... the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize humankind. And, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel."

- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

On Friday evening, LMD kindly drove some of us up to JB for Cowboy's wedding.

Our guide was late, so we only crossed the border after midnight and this, coupled with the rain, meant that the members of our convoy who desired ample drinking time were disappointed.

Malaysian traffic lights have countdown timers which flash in the last 10 seconds. Very useful. Too bad we don't.

On the way up, someone saw a sign for Ponderosa and remarked that they hadn't seen one in Singapore for quite some time, and lamented that the quality of the joint had gone down. I remarked that maybe they got bad and moved to Malaysia (unfortunately, on the trip down I saw a sign for Ponderosa golf resort, so it probably wasn't the Restoran Ponderosa which they saw).

Even the roads in the Moors in Yorkshire - the middle of nowhere - aren't as bad as those in some parts of JB (the parts approaching Austin Hills).

When we arrived at Austin Hills Golf Resort, we found that it was huge - even palatial. The entry hallway had huge pillars, but was otherwise sparsely furnished and populated, contributing to a Mines of Moria feel. The corridors, halls and rooms were all large; the corridor on our floor was probably as wide as Raffles Link, and our room could easily have fit 4 king-sized beds (it already had 2) - considering the promotional price of RM$100, this was dirt cheap. However, the interior of the room was too bare, and looked too empty. Perhaps a table and a chair in the middle of the room would have made it feel less barren. Also, one of the power plugs in our room was spoilt, the fridge was empty (no minibar) and the toilet had no shampoo (let alone conditioner), toothbrush, toothpaste or hairdryer (I heard some girls went to the toilet downstairs). A map laid on the table helpfully marked out possible walking/running routes, but we were told that we "must register with the reception a day before your jog/walk/cycle" (yeah right). Annoyingly, the lifts had no sensors (meaning the doors closed on people while they were walking in), and one of them had a button for the second storey which couldn't quite work, and after pressing it repeatedly to no avail, I gave up and whacked it - causing the doors to open. One room's kettle also didn't work. Maybe after building such a big place they had no money left over. And to top it all, a sign on the way out of the resort read: "Thanks and welcome again" - this is probably not one of the resorts managed by a Singaporean. [Addendum: The resort was not terrible, in fact for the price it was great; I'm just pointing out some pertinent points.]

When we got down to the bar there was a tudung-ed woman sitting there. I hope she was drinking Jus Oren.

The security people wore black berets and looked quite silly. I even spotted what was proably a baton on their belts.

The next morning, after 3 (!) hours of sleep (admittedly after a game of Scrabble which I in usual form lost), a procession set off for the bride's house to fetch her. As we pulled into the general area, all the cars started blaring their horns (must be some quaint Malaysian custom). We were looking forward to what devious plans the bride's "姐妹" ("jie3 mei4" - lit. "younger and older sisters" - in this context referring to her coterie of hangers-on and female companions tasked with protecting her from the depradations of the groom and his bully-boys) had come up with to torture Cowboy.

Disappointingly, we were made to wait for a long time, so they got only about 15 minutes to torture him. In the end, one person spun a hula hoop around his arm while Cowboy sang a song, and then we all charged the staircase (with one person even vaulting over the railing), only to be stopped at the door. Various people were forced to eat various unsavory things (corresponding to the Chinese categories of "酸甜苦辣" ("suan1 tian2 ku3 la4" - lit. "sour, sweet, bitter, hot") including wasabi sandwiches and bittergourd. A raw egg was then passed up his trousers (an encore performance of which was witnessed at night) and he finally was let in to see the bride. So, question: why is it always the groom who is tortured, and not the bride?! Gah.

After that, it was off to church for the ceremony. Unusually, the wedding march was played by a girl on a violin, though it was a touch too slow (someone said it sounded more like the funeral march). The priest, in his homily, urged the couple not to be influenced by Hollywood ("We are Asians, we have very high conservative values" - uhh...). He also remarked that as a confirmed bachelor, he couldn't really give the couple advice for their marriage (which makes one wonder how the Catholic Church, full of confirmed bachelors, can make pronouncements with such authority on sex and marriage). I was very happy, though, that unlike the last Church marriage I was at, there was no nonsense about the wife obeying/submitting to the husband (maybe because this one was a Catholic wedding, and the last was a fundie wedding). There were 2 flower girls present, but they didn't throw any flowers on the carpet (maybe there were worries about cleaning up).

After the end of the ceremony, the bride threw her bouquet, but no one wanted to catch it, so it ended up hitting a pillar... and landing on the floor. In the end someone picked up, so maybe there'll be more good news in the blogosphere soon!

After lunch at Cowboy's place, we returned to the hotel to catch up on sleep, except for poor Terz who was sorting photos for the slideshow in the evening.

It is interesting to see teenage girls walk. They haven't yet mastered the more subdued swaying gait that adult women have and are still transitioning from the bouncy walk that pre-pubescent girls have (like how sub-10 year old boys and girls tend to move the same way).

The waiters looked somewhat shoddy; many didn't even wear proper footwear, and they didn't look very happy (another reason why I think the resort is not managed by a Singaporean, and so much for Malaysians being more friendly and jovial, flaming aside).

Someone remarked to me that hotel food in Malaysia is inferior to restaurant food, since it can't have the magic ingredients (pork, lard and alcohol - some of the latter is added to fish, for example). I agree - fish steamed in "superior" soya sauce (it tastes like the normal soya sauce) can't beat fish steamed in XO sauce. Also, our first dish was not the usual "BBQ combination", but a "Four Seasons Platter", since a BBQ combination is not a BBQ combination without char siew and suckling pig.

The flower girls made another appearance, and this time they threw flowers on the carpet (the resort staff will clean it up anyway). I wonder if Screwed Up Girl still wants to be a flower girl.

The evil man operating the dry ice machine smiled evily at us as he gassed us with copious amounts of sublimed carbon dioxide.

I wonder if anyone has solved the problem of the awkward silence that ensues when people who don't know each other are seated at the same table.

All brides look the same. So what's the point?!

Usually during the yamseng(s) there'll be at least one guy who goes "Yam-yam-yam-yam" when he runs out of breath. There wasn't this time.

I noticed that some of the songs played during the wedding were the same as ones played during JC orientations. Which makes you wonder about their evil social engineering agenda (or alternatively, just what the Students' Councils have in mind).

After the dinner the barflies were jabbering entertainingly. And my Asian Prince card was very well-received (so to speak).

A new perspective on couples counting angbao money on wedding night (a practise which my sister has spoken about in less than glowing terms in the past): It lets them settle the bills as soo nas possible, and they can get rid of all the money, since it's not good to carry so much money around. Both parties are probably too tired to perform anyway!

A trip to Malaysia is not complete without having some (preferably late night) hawker food, so at about 1+am, Cowboy led some of us out for supper. I've always wondered about the quaint Malaysian practice of going to a Kopitiam Restoran to eat Maggi Mee soup. Or better yet, of frying the Maggi Mee again. The latter seems to fall in the same category as baked beans on toast.

At the Restoran, signs very strangely informed us that the Air Halia (ginger water) was "Ikut Pasaran" (priced according to the market price), and the Nasi Campur and Nasi Beriani were "Harisa Ikut Pasaran" (don't ask me how this is different from "Ikut Pasaran"). The supply of Ginger and cloves in Malaysia must be very inelastic! Or maybe in Malaysia they're like saffron and caviar elsewhere.

I tried sup kambing. Very good, but probably as bad for you as Ma Ling Luncheon Meat (though the recipe I found didn't look that bad).

I have thought up an arcade game based on driving in Malaysia. At first it was called "Miss the Potholes" - your objective is just that, but this has since been relegated to the easy mode of a more complex game, the advanced mode of which has you racing to your objective within a certain time limit. You also have some cash, into which spare time is converted at the end of a stage. This cash can be used to repair your car (damage is suffered if you go over a pothole) or illegally zhng (modify) it. To get to your destination more quickly, you can (nay, must) make illegal u-turns, run red lights and generally break all the rules in the book (you even get a small time bonus when you do so). You have to be wary, though, of the police, who will appear every now and then to catch you. When they do, you have the choice of paying a hefty bribe or doing things the legal way and losing a lot of time. I considered adding in mobs of people coming after you with parangs, but couldn't think of a way to add them in without compromising gameplay. Pity, that.

Almost all the time, I didn't smell the Malaysian smell, and when I did, the food was comparable to (or once, worse than in) Singapore. So this is more evidence in favour of my theory of relativity!

Some of the Malaysian suburban neighborhoods can pass for Eastern Singapore (the Katong area) - lavish praise!

On Sunday morning Cowboy again led us out for breakfast and we got to try KL-style chee cheong fun (it's mostly other stuff, with very little chee cheong fun - plain chee cheong fun just can't compare, though the type with prawns/char siew inside is good). I thought of asking for wanton mee with ketchup just to see whether the hawker would freak out, but decided against it.

At the Restoran, when the rain got heavier, it started flowing down the ceiling beam and dripping onto the table, including into someone's glass. Someone suggested taking a picture and captioning it: "Malaysia boleh!"

Some Malaysian roads are paved with brick - maybe it's a way to avoid potholes.

The Perodua Kenari and Kancil both look like very cock cars. I hope the rest of the line isn't as bad. Looking at their homepage, one is inclined to think not, but then again the Kenari and Kancil don't look that cock there either.

On the three-laned road just before JB immigration, there were 4 cars travelling abreast. And on the Singapore side there were many signs cautioning against littering and asking drivers to slow down.

Someone was lecturing a group of us on the differences between Malaysia and Singapore, and he characterised them like so: In Singapore, you get ahead on the road by obeying traffic rules (not strictly true, but fair enough), but in Malaysia you need to break every rule and take every shortcut in order to do so.

Fair enough, but then in the latter case, while you yourself might get ahead, others are delayed and a few might even crash in swerving and/or braking to a halt in trying to avoid your dangerous and illegal manouevres.

So I guess it is an appropriate analogy in more than one way.

The same person also boasted of how Malaysia has more millionaires (or was it billionaires) per capita than Singapore (despite its per capita GDP being a third of the latter, according to geekgeek), and this gels with the traffic analogy - everyone thinks they have a chance to beat or lead the pack, but in the end the country as a whole lags behind.

A hat tip to LAPD Laughing As People Diet (a Malaysian too!) for the information that this blog was reviewed in Lime Magazine:

Dawn Yang vs Agagooga

"Lime Mag gave Dawn Yang's blog a 4 star rating compare to the other famous Agagooga who only managed to obtained 3 stars...

im kinda disappointed not to find any pics of Agagooga. i can't use the picture of a blue power ranger being tied up as him kan?. aiyah. lack."

If someone has scans or can lend me the thing, I will be most grateful, still being sore after wasting $7 on a crappy magazine last month, only to be greatly disappointed by the lame cover story (which was what I bought it for).

***

Someone: u can hang out more in temples. buddhist girls date outside religion people

hahahaha it's ironic. and u know many guys go to church just to buaya girls and the girls would give in easily cos they have to only date other christians, so they think 'what the hell'

and atheist guys are at a disadvantage. they have no buaya hunting ground they can pounce on every week

the government being so anxious to pair people, should set up an atheist social club that all the atheists llike you can converge in to find other atheists who are disadvantaged by the muslim and christian date insiders only policy


And this just in from the teeming millions:

Someone else: There's this mgs gal standing in front of me on mrt who looks like a less feminine version of u. Wish she were further so i k take pic of her. Too crowded too

***

The Straits Times can't do maths:

[On the NTU hall strike] "The current monthly rate of $160 for a single-occupancy room has been almost double to $350 in the new

"It is a curious thing... that every creed promises a paradise which will be absolutely uninhabitable for anyone of civilized taste." - Evelyn Waugh

***

Women are like elephants - they never forget.

I remember our history teacher was telling us in Sec 1 about why she chose to work in a boys school instead of a girls school.

She said that girls might buy cakes and all that, but you can scold a boy one day and the next day he'll wave hi to you. That won't happen with girls.

On a side note, I was accused over the weekend of disliking women. How shocking. In any case, as my oft-repeated maxim goes:

"Men like women.
Women like women.
Nobody likes men."

***

Okla. Pastor Arrested on Lewdness Charge - "A pastor who has spoken out against homosexuality was arrested after propositioning a male undercover police officer outside a hotel"
I'm not normally a fan of Freud, but there's something to be said for projection.

What's the point of detoxing? - "The body is well capable of getting rid of toxins - that's what the liver, lungs, kidneys and skin do. So what's the point of detoxing?"

Starbucks Economics - Solving the mystery of the elusive "short" cappuccino. - "Here's a little secret that Starbucks doesn't want you to know: They will serve you a better, stronger cappuccino if you want one, and they will charge you less for it. Ask for it in any Starbucks and the barista will comply without batting an eye. The puzzle is to work out why."

Someone: this should interest you

Presenting to you, DARE 21”, the sexiest, most outrageous party event of the new year. This bash is like no other, because we promise an enjoyable evening for you, with cheap drinks on the go, and good friends to be with. What more can you ask for? If you need an incentive to go, let me tell you a good news! For ladies, if you dress less than 21 inches from top to bottom, you will get free entry and a free drink! Therefore. for gentlemen, you know what the incentive is right?

science bash
they get better ideas every year
next it'll be free entry in the buff

i thought i'd seen it all, this one drives me speechessl
i'd feel insulted and objectified if i were a girl

Me: get short girls

HGWT

25. Beautification - real or psychological (exfoliating scrub, toner, blue tracing paper [aka blotting paper], face/skin lightening cream, facials, nail polish, bust enhancement/implants, eyebrow shaping, revealing clothes, various other varieties of snake oil) and then feeling offended and objectified when men look at them admiringly. Either that or trying to look like a guy

Someone: they prob figured that was the least they could ask for without getting sued for promoting indecency or smthg

hahah short girls, good one
let's rustle up a posse of ugly midgets

post it up so one and all can marvel at the increasing stupidity of science students

Me: this beats STRIP

Someone: i'd like to know who comes up with these ideas
clearly a bunch of horny science guys

i mean, don't the girls have any say in this
what's the incentive for them. to be ogled at?
that happens whatever the case

Me: free drinks?

Someone: aiyah. i think skimpily dressed girls are de facto in any case
it's just to bait the guys

evolution gave us the short end of the stick
if only more guys realised that

Me: where there're girls, there're guys

women like women
men like women
nobody likes men


Someone else: that's not sexy. that's complete prostitution

I am going to Malaysia this evening for a wedding, and won't be back till Sunday morning/afternoon. On my part, the following has gone some way towards dissipating my energies, allowing me to enjoy the rustic charms of our neighbor (or maybe the nap I had had something to do with it). For those who enjoy dead horse flogging, the following should be of some interest. For those who don't, flaming me will be an excellent way for them to spend their time and energy. Either way, everyone will be happy!


It is instructive to compare the sort of comments in the following 2 blog posts:

Post A: A half-joking post making fun of Singaporeans' HDB flats (More comments on Tomorrow.sg)

Post B: A half-joking post making fun of Malaysia in general and musing about why and how people from the 2 countries engage in this timeless game

The provocation or perceived provocation in both posts is the same: someone from one country making fun of the other.


It's been more than 6 full days since Post A was posted, and more than 2 full days since it was recommended on Tomorrow.sg, so enough time has passed to analyse the comments on each post, leaving aside the veracity of the original snipes at the other country in the first place.

Post A: Received not many comments, and those that were posted are placid. Some dryly noted that staid as a HDB flat might be, it beats slums and dingy huts. The mood was generally amiable, if a little annoyed at times.

Post B: Tons of flames insulting the blog owner and wishing various disasters to befall him, plus various threats to cut off Singapore's water supply. An outraged mood was palpable, with many roused to great anger.

Some comments not in the comments box:

1) "the ego in you bring up average shallow sinkie ,i know spr more than you as i am right in yr backyard and comparing apple with orange and claim yours is any beter is an act of self comfort-as good as mascubating"

2) "i feel totally disgusted by u.
I mean, maybe only a handful are like what u said, u CANT speculate ppl this way.
I seriously hope u get jailed for this entry.
And yes, i wont take ur side. =)"

3) "what would it be if malaysia cut its water supply to singapore? will u guys be drinking salt water instead?"


Possible ad-hoc statements to make to rescue the paradigm that Malaysians and Singaporeans respond the same way to the parlour game of bashing the other country:

- Too little time has passed; 2 days is quite long already, and anyway I'm leaving for Malaysia - irony of ironies - this evening and doubt much will have changed by the time I return on Sunday
- No sensible Malaysians visit(ed) my blog (the corollary of which is that no sensible Malaysians visit kennysia.com and Minishirts Minishorts 412 Precondition Failed), and no stupid Singaporeans visit tomorrow.sg
- Tomorrow.sg has less hits than 412 Precondition Failed and kennysia.com. Considering that Tomorrow.sg gets many hits a day (an average of 69,115 in October, 66,962 in September so doubtless more now), is a prime target for Singaporeans and has 652 readers on its RSS feed as of time of writing, whereas 412 Precondition Failed gets about 2,000 a day, I find this very unlikely.
- Although Singaporeans and Malaysians respond the same way to the parlor game, Malaysians are more vocal and willing to leave remarks, and Singaporeans are quiet, even online (seeing coffeeshops and taxi drivers though, not to mention online forums and blogs...)

All of which strike me as most unsatisfactory (on the level of Creation "Science").

Many of the Malaysians who posted showed themselves to be ignorant country bumpkins who are incapable of rational argument and tolerating those with different views from their own; they can't stand seeing an opinion they don't like, so they must ban it. The Singaporeans have so far proved (and will prove in the coming days) that they are not like that. Malaysians do seem particularly fond of ad hominem attacks, while most Singaporeans (those who bother commenting in the first place) at least address the issue in their rebuttals. And at least Singaporeans can take a joke, or don't turn into raving lunatics at half-jokes.

It is ironic that in defending the honour of their country, they just sadly proved my point. Irrational prejudice against all people of a certain group is contemptible, but rational prejudice against most people of a certain group certainly isn't; not all people rushing at you with parangs want to hack you open, but it's best to act as if they are (actually the person was practising his leaping parang kung-fu). Are we then prejudiced against people rushing at us with parangs? Not all people walking around your house at night trying to be quiet want to rob you, but it's best to act as if they are (actually the person dropped keys in your house is your uncle whom you didn't recognise in the dark, and didn't want to wake you up, being considerate). Are we then prejudiced against people walking around our houses at night? Shooting the parang-wielder and person walking around your house at night without challenging them first, of course, is unacceptable.

As a side note, I must say that it's interesting how some Singaporeans criticised me for allegedly damaging cross-strait relations and generally being obnoxious (I have my periods), but no Malaysians responded in similar manner on the other side.


Someone: no matter how seemly we may behave, our manner may still grate on the malaysians

see ah, we singaporeans are very snobby ah, if we act gracefully we are posing and acting high class ah


Someone else: you need to learn how to be more economical in your debates lah
so that you don't seem like a broken record
the more you stir the milo, the more it becomes well-stirred.

Me: really, it's been going on for decades
who am I to interfere with such a long-lived tradition?

In charity, too, the rich get richer - "In late November it was reported that the American Red Cross still had $400 million of the $567 million it had collected for the tsunami. Meanwhile, many of the countries hit by the waves, all of which have their own national Red Cross or Red Crescent societies, continue to beg for more help with housing, health and education programs."

There is Eternal Life for Animals: Books - "Based on Bible Scripture, There Is Eternal Life For Animals presents Animal Afterlife from a Christian Perspective. All animals go to heaven. How do we know? We look in the book that God left us, the Bible. This book takes you through the Bible and proves through the scriptures that there is life after death for all the animals."
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest - "Signor Cascioli, author of a book called The Fable of Christ, began legal proceedings against Father Righi three years ago after the priest denounced Signor Cascioli in the parish newsletter for questioning Christ’s historical existence."

NTU hostelites stay put to protest fee hike - "The fees will rise to $350 for single rooms and $240 for double rooms for the new premises... In June last year, the residents were told by the administration that the new rates would fall between $175 and $190."
There is hope for Singapore yet. Time to put on the knuckledusters!

Someone on simple girls: "the ones that you often want to beat over the head with a stick
especially when they come crying to you after that "sincere guy" turns out to be a jerkwad in disguise"


Someone (2) on simple girls: they'll lose their simplicity after awhile lah

Me: after their virginity
hahahahahahaha
man the sincere guys are going to come flame me
as long as they don't parang me I'm fine

Someone (3) (on the above): cos sex is complicateD? ;p


Someone else: you could go to the van gogh museum and join my 'van gogh sucks' club

Me: impressionism is not my thang anyway
sloppy.

Someone else: exactly. and van gogh is extra sloppy

Me: not as bad as modern art

Someone else: i'm actually a damien hirst fan...
sheeps and sharks
comedy value high


Someone: i have decided when i get a dog it will be a female boston terrier called Polly
(it is short for Polymer)

Me: ... engineers

I'm going to a wedding (in Malaysia, hehe) where there is this no black rule:

"You should wear anything but black for the church service in the morning. Unless you’re a guy wearing a black or dark suit, which is fine. Try to avoid black dresses for the morning ok?"

On reflection, if men can wear black suits, they can wear black pants.


Attending a wedding for the first time, a little girl whispered to her mother, "Why is the bride dressed in white?" "Because white is the colour of happiness and today is the happiest day of her life," her mother tried to explain, keeping it simple.

The child thought about this for a moment, then said, "So, why's the groom wearing black?"

"He was awesome in his conviction. I tell you, by the time he was done, I was close to feeling the presence and might of Allah myself. That was surprising and a little frightening, that Mahmud could stir such feelings in me, of all people. I was amazed. But then he had finished his expounding, and after a few moments the sensation ebbed and I was my own self again.

"What do you say?" he asked me. "Can this be anything other than the truth?"

"I am not in a position to judge that," said I carefully, not wishing to give offense to this interesting new friend, especially in his own dining hall. "We Romans are accustomed to regarding all creeds with tolerance, and if you ever visit our capital you will find temples of a hundred faiths standing side by side. But I do see the beauty of your teachings."

"Beauty? I asked about truth. When you say you accept all faiths as equally true, what you are really saying is that you see no truth in any of them, is that not so?"

I disputed that, reaching into my school days for maxims out of Plato and Marcus Aurelius to argue that all gods are reflections of the true godhood. But it was no use. He saw instantly through my Roman indifference to religion. If you claim to believe, as we do, that this god is just as good as that one, what you really mean is that gods in general don't matter much at all, nor religion itself, except where it is needed as a distraction to keep the people of the lower classes from growing too resentful over the miseries of their worldly existence. Our live-and-let-live policy toward the worship of Mithras and Dagon and Baal and all the other deities whose temples thrive in Roma is a tacit admission of that view. And for Mahmud that is a contemptible position."

- Robert Silverberg, Roma Eterna

I read a shocking defense of human sacrifice for the first time:

A: The Mayans went to their sacrifices willingly as they believe its a privilege to die for their Sun God.

B: not true. I believe most of their sacrifices are war captives.

A: But it is their culture!! U're not about to apply some white man's brand of shit and judge them based on that are you???

B: they are war captives wat, its like saying rape victims deserve to be raped because its the culture of the rapist.

A: Would you say the Greeks are immoral chauvinistic pigs because under their culture... women aint allowed to vote? That they value women only as vessels in which their seed is being baked? Or that they are all paedophiles because they practise "Greek love"?

Point is at that point of time within the Mayan civilisation, waging war and sacrificing to their gods are their way of life. They believe that the Sun God must receive a daily or weekly or something(i forgot the time frame) sacrifice for it strengthen his power against the forces of darkness or something.

Yes we don't agree with human sacrifices. But we must look within that particular culture's mindset at that point instead of using our current standards to judge them.

B: so you're saying that despite the fact that the iraq war is generally an "illegal war based on false information and lies", it is justifiable for one culture (american) to attack another( iraq) bacause its the basis of (american culture).

---
I think you don't get the point, from the point of the victor, it is acceptable, but from the point of the victim it is not acceptable. so you're saying that only the victor's culture applies.

did the mayans only fight with other mayans and seize captives from them? sure, I accept human sacrifices from the context of willing ball game players.. but to say that prisoners of war are willing sacrifices is a far stretch. that's like saying nazi pow sent to the gas chambers went willingly.

A: And how do you know they didnt go willingly? Cos of Mel Gibson's portrayal?

I didn't say its ok for America to attack another. It's wrong by current standards. Neither did I say victor's culture applies. The losing tribe(mayans), should they win the war, would also do the same to the losers! It's just their culture to do so.

But you must also know that the Mayans or Aztecs were a pretty war-like and aggressive people. Waging war is pretty much their way of life.

Yes they wage war largely among the various tribes of the Mayan culture. And who ever loses will definitely be offered up as sacrifice to the gods. Its their way of offering thanks to the gods, and as well as not depleting their own tribe.

It's all too easy to judge the ancient cultures with our own current standards. The Greeks practise homosexuality, the Egyptians incest, Mayans human sacrifices...etc... the list goes on...

And my point is we must not be too quick to judge based on our perspective. Only a two centuries ago, people were judging homosexuals harshly and labelled them as unclean, abberration, spawn of satan...etc... at that point of time... it WAS the accepted viewpoint.

Galileo was incarcerated because he believed in something that was not of that culture at that point of time; that the earth and not the sun revolves around.

Sure you can look back and say that our ancestors were stupid pigs for believing that the sun revolves around us. But at that point of time, it is an accepted fact.

How can you judge them when their belief and way of life is set on that?

And once again no I'm not saying its ok for one culture to attack another. I'm saying it's not ok because I am brought up within this century's standards.

But who are we to criticise a culture that had since long vanished whose way of life is vastly different from us?

Do we say our Chinese kin from China are barbarians because they eat dogs? They probably don't see it that way because dogs are quite part within of their culinary culture!

B: yeah. but you're treating an entire culture as monolithic.

ie: everyone from the privilege class down to the slave caste agrees that their culture (of keeping slaves is totally correct).

the victims of human sacrifice isn't just the warriors.

I just don't agree with absolute moral relativism , I still think some objective criteria like the golden rule, or consensualness should apply.


A Dialog on Aztec and Maya Religion

"I think that there is ample evidence that a great many Mayans and most of those under Aztec rule did, in fact, consider human sacrifice (or at least the scale upon which it was practiced) to be wrong (or at least unjust). The latest evidence suggests that the Maya collapse was not due to environmental factors, but to a decision by the common folk (who bore the burden of sacrifical demands) to vote with their feet to avoid the honor of meeting their ancestors heart/head in hand."

And I would hardly call prisoners of war willing sacrifices.

Someone: gssq giving relationship eligibility advice sounds like a good post :)

Me: heh
you think it's interesting? or even will help people?

Someone: i think it would be VERY interesting to many people
notwithstanding the irony of a single person advising others on relationships

***

Despite it being Malaysian in origin (they make it sound like they're from Manhattan, down to using the market's [which ironically isn't even called the Manhattan but rather the Fulton Fish Market] logo and proudly stating "since 1822" and waxing lyrical about the fish market's history, with only one paragraph betraying its origins), I have no qualms about recommending Manhattan Fish Market, which currently has an outlet at Plaza Singapura. So that makes it 2 things about Malaysia that I wholeheartedly like (the other being Malaysian Airlines).

The service is great; one friend was hesitant about having rice or fries with her main course, and the proactive waiter suggested changing it to a salad.

The food is quite good, and it's a bit cheaper than Fish and Co too; the latter used to be good, but success has made them complacent - prices have gone up and good quality and service have gone down.

Perhaps the only grouse I have is how they show videos of fish. The first time I went there, it started out okay, but after a while disgusting sea creatures came up on screen, the sight of which undoubtedly would have doused the appetites of the patrons, but then it seemed I was the only one to notice.

***

Never buy NTUC brand charcoal - it doesn't even catch fire after you leave it in a lit stove for a long time.

***

The Jedi Mind Trick strikes again:

Someone in a comment box: i read up on the bible and the christian god is nothing like what you say. you have many biased opinions that seem validated.
but on further examination and pondering it's not.

Me: Your opinions would be taken a lot more seriously if you supported them with concrete examples and properly constructed arguments, rather than relying on vague assertions and broad sweeps of your hands.


Someone else: that is like saying "i read a physics textbook and now i believe i know as much as feynman"

Me: no
it's saying: "i read a physics textbook and now i believe i know as much as feynman. furthermore, you have many biased opinions that seem validated. but on further examination and pondering it's not. who cares if I won't (or can't) point them out?!"

Someone: hahahahha
"upon futher examination and pondering i have decided an intelligent higher being exists"

Me: this is also how the malaysians flamed me (if they bothered criticising my arguments instead of me, and saying I should be banned from blogging and/or sent to jail in the first place just because they didn't like what they read)

oh not just malaysians

"We know of an ablution [an ablution is a washing of the body, especially as part of a religious rite] in the ritual of Eleusis; the laurel-wreath oration of Demosthenes speaks of purificatory ablutions in the mystery of Sabazius; the cult of Attis had its taurobolium, and the mystery of Isis knew a sanctifying baptismal bath, as did the mysteries of Dionysus and of Mithras. Upon mature consideration modern scholarship has rejected the ideas that such rites exerted an influence on the baptismal doctrine of the New Testament."

More Jedi mind tricks

After hearing so many tales of people's tussles with the NUS administration, it is my turn to experience for myself how wonderful it can be.

I sent in my bank statement to NUS on the 9th of December. The person in charge was on leave, so I called her a few days later to alert and to remind her about the document. About a week later I sent a reminder email.

Yesterday evening, the Netherlands side contacts me, informing that they still have not received the document, and that if they don't get it soon, I might not be able to get my Visa in time (which means I might not be able to go).

This morning, I've been trying to call both of the people in charge of Student Exchange, but neither of them is picking up. It looks like I'll have to trudge down, or contact a higher power.

There was also a package sent to me by Utrecht at the end of November which I had not gotten after a long while. After I called NUS sometime in mid-December, they claimed that it'd just arrived, and I got an an email saying "please collect your package by 14 November"; they didn't even bother to change the date.


On the other hand, the administration on the Netherlands side is great:

"Dear Gabriel,
Thank you for your reply. I am also very sorry that it has still not arrived here. I hope we can find out where the document got lost. I hope to hear from *** soon so we can at least try to trace it down."

They sent it out by SpeedPost on 13th December and it reached Holland on 15th December, so it's lost somewhere on their side.

“Advances in technology have led... to vulgarity... Process reproduction and the rotary press have made possible the indefinite multiplication of writing and pictures. Universal education and relatively high wages have created an enormous public who know how to read and can afford to buy reading and pictorial matter. A great industry has been called into existence in order to supply these commodities. Now, artistic talent is a very rare phenomenon; whence it follows... that, at every epoch and in all countries, most art has been bad.

But the proportion of trash in the total artistic output is greater now than at any other period. That it must be so is a matter of simple arithmetic. The population of Western Europe has a little more than doubled during the last century. But the amount of reading—and seeing—matter has Increased, I should imagine, at least twenty and possibly fifty or even a hundred times. If there were n men of talent in a population of x millions, there will presumably be 2n men of talent among 2X millions. The situation may be summed up thus. For every page of print and pictures published a century ago, twenty or perhaps even a hundred pages are published today. But for every man of talent then living, there are now only two men of talent.

lt may be of course that, thanks to universal education, many potential talents which in the past would have been stillborn are now enabled to realize themselves. Let us assume, then, that there are now three or even four men of talent to every one of earlier times. It still remains true to say that the consumption of readlng—and seeing—matter has far outstripped the natural productlon of gifted writers and draughtsmen. lt is the same with hearing-matter.

Prosperity, the gramophone and the radio have created an audience of hearers who consume an amount of hearing-matter that has increased out of all proportion to the increase of population and the consequent natural increase of talented musicians. lt follows from all this that in all the arts the output of trash is both absolutely and relatively greater than it was in the past; and that it must remain greater for just so long as the world continues to consume the present inordinate quantities of reading-matter, seeing-matter, and hearing-matter.”

- Aldous Huxley, Beyond the Mexique Bay, A Traveller's Journal, 1934


Lamenting the decadence of the contemporary era is a parlour game that has been played since the dawn of time.

"In literature as in love, we are astonished at what is chosen by others." - Andre Maurois

***

Top Gear Pacific Rims

"Jeremy & James try out a lot of Korean and Malaysian cars, whcih (sic) are all dreadful
One of them was even granted as (sic) THE worst car of 2004"

Narration: "Maybe we'll fare better with something from Malaysia. A Proton. Now, the last Proton I drove was something called "The Impian". It was a very long journey, and the car was so awful that, to be honest, I wanted to harm myself.

But this is the new Gen 2, at 9500 pounds. And it seems much more promising. I like the look of the thing, I really do. I like the price. I don't even mind the gold larme (?) gear modern stereo.

Proton these days owns Lotus, and Lotus has helped them develop this twin-cam 1.6 litre engine, and various bits of the suspension. Because of its connections, Proton is claiming sporty handling for the new Gen 2.

But I can't help feeling that at this level, it's not really the priority. And I mean I'd gladly trade the Lotus-developed suspension for some Toyota-developed door trim.

Our quest to find a decent car from Korea or Malaysia was not going well."

***

It's A Wonderful Life (1946) - "It was actually a box-office flop at the time of its release, and only became the Christmas movie classic in the 1970s due to repeated television showings at Christmas-time when its copyright protection slipped and it fell into the public domain and TV stations could air it for free."
Hurrah for decent copyright terms. Incidentally, the moral of the movie is: if you dedicate your life to other people and don't live for yourself, you're going to end up very miserable.

Ultra-Orthodox Jews more likely to jaywalk - "It is rarely said that religious types live dangerously, but it seems they do when it comes to crossing roads. A new study in Israel suggests devout Orthodox Jews are three times as likely to be risk-taking pedestrians as their neighbours in secular communities."

Learn the Art of Dancing Dirty - "If you ever wanted to learn how to dance dirty, but can't stand Patrick Swayze, there's good news for you. Learn the Art of Dancing Dirty, 1988 is an instructional video that has nothing to do with Patrick Swayze, showing you erotic dance moves with the help of two creepy "Dance Instructers" Felix and Marla. And when I say creepy, I mean it. These people couldn't make your skin crawl more if they were covered in hissing spiders dressed like Dracula."

Convert Graffiti 2 to Graffiti 1 on Palm device - "This is a Graffiti 1 conversion for Palm Zire 71, Tungsten C and Tungsten E/T2/T3 users"

The politics of publication - "Rather than assessing the research itself, those who distribute the money and positions now evaluate scientists by performance indicators (it is much easier to tot up some figures than to think seriously about what a person has achieved). Managers are stealing power from scientists and building an accountability culture that "aims at ever more perfect administrative control of institutional and professional life". The result is an "audit society", in which each indicator is invested with a specious accuracy and becomes an end in itself."