Can’t understand the Chinese salesperson? Learn Chinese

The Straits Times, in a reaction story on Chinese nationals who do not speak English at front-line jobs, wrote:

There were also calls for Singaporeans to be more tolerant and patient towards China service staff. Several readers urged Singaporeans to brush up on their Mandarin.

Tired of being misunderstood by hawkers and salesmen, Hong Konger Sandy Young, 34, took up a six-month Mandarin course.

Now, the designer is able to order her food in Mandarin and even converse with cabbies.

‘I urge those who do not understand Mandarin to make an effort to learn it; life will be easier,’ she said. (“Readers write in with tales of woe, worries”, December 16, 2007)

Since when did all Singaporeans speak Mandarin?

We do not arrest people who punch others on the street: Police

Punched in the face and slammed twice onto two cars, Singaporean manager Mr Ho was infuriated to find that his American attacker will not be arrested by police here. The Straits Times wrote:

The suspect was taken away by officers from the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), a group of [American] law enforcement officers who ‘protect’ members of the United States Navy and Marine Corps

… The police said they questioned the suspect but did not arrest him because the alleged offence – voluntarily causing hurt – is not a seizable one.

A police spokesman said: ‘The complainant was advised to lodge a magistrate’s complaint should he wish to pursue the case against the defendant.’ — Straits Times, “Punched, slammed onto cars by drunk US sailor”, December 16, 2007

According to our police:

The key difference between a seizable and a non-seizable offence is that for seizable offences (such as murder, rape, voluntarily causing grievous hurt or causing hurt with weapons), police officers are legally empowered to arrest without a warrant. For non-seizable offences (such as misappropriation of property and mischief), police require a warrant of arrest or an order from a magistrate to make an arrest. — Asst Director, Police, Audrey Ang, 2006, from yawningbread.org.

Because Mr Ho was only hurt — but not grievously hurt — by his attacker, he would have to make a complaint with one of this form before any action could be taken against his attacker. While Mr Ho’s case is not strictly one of road bullying, it is worth noting that road bullying is a criminal offence in Singapore and bullies are frequently jailed and caned:

There can be no place on our roads for road bullies. Such persons must be made aware of the severe detestation the law expresses in regard to such crimes. They must not be allowed to go away thinking that they can beat up somebody else on the slightest provocation for the price of a few thousand dollars. If this sort of incidents occur, when they get out of their vehicles and assault others who may have aggravated them by their driving or for any other reason, prison sentences must now follow… — Magistrate Gilbert Low, 2004, from mrbrown.com.

Whether the lack of action is a result of bureaucracy (such as when our police decided not to do anything when a person was beaten up by a gang of hooligans) or because the offender in question is an American sailor, Singaporeans will sure miss the resolve Singapore had when it decided to continue with the caning of Michael Fay — despite pleas and opposition from then President Bill Clinton.

Post-exam trash, pre-exam goodies

Career choices have never bothered me as much as they now do; after all, it’s another 2 years before I graduate, right? But in just such a short span of time, I have already gone through 3 semesters, with another one in just a little over a month’s time.

And my elder brother has just advised Sharon and me to start balloting for our house. Yes, he did. According to him, if we wait till we intend to marry to start looking for one, we’re going to wait about 5 years for our own house.

To think Sharon always tells me that I better not “propose” like a typical Singaporean guy, who brings his girlfriend to HDB showrooms or wedding fairs.

Anyway, while clearing out my notes for this semester, I figured post-exam trash will one day become pre-exam goodies for someone else. So here goes.

COM 207 – Communication History and Theories

  1. Charles Darwin
  2. Sigmund Freud
  3. Chicago School
  4. Harold Lasswell
  5. Paul Lazarsfeld
  6. Kurt Lewin
  7. Carl Hovland
  8. Norbert Wiener
  9. Claude Shannon
  10. Wilbur Schramm
  11. COM207 Abridge Guide – Lasswell, Lazarsfeld, Lewin, Hovland and Wiener

COM 225 – Image and Sound Production

  1. COM225 Study Notes – Narrative, Mise-en-scene, Cinematography & Editing

HMJ1 – Japanese Language Level 1

  1. Japanese Level 1 – Spelling and Vocabulary List
  2. Japanese Level 1 – Troublesome Words – Long Vowels, Double Consonants and more

Letter: More feedback channels needed in the SAF

SAF would do well to protect whistle-blowers Straits Times, July 17, 2007

Sir/Mdm,

In the report, ‘PM Lee’s son in NS reprimanded by SAF’ (ST, July 13), Mindef spokesman Colonel Benedict Lim was quoted as saying that ‘all SAF servicemen with complaints or grievances should take them up through proper channels for redress’.

The SAF Act described these ‘proper channels’ as lodging a complaint to an officer next senior in rank to the offender – which was what 2nd Lt Li Hongyi did initially by complaining to his supervising officers, though no disciplinary action was taken against the offender.

Although 2nd Lt Li’s act of ‘broadcasting his letter’ was improper, it highlights a frustration shared by many servicemen with the current system of providing feedback – more often than not, it is not taken seriously.

If a second lieutenant’s lodging of a complaint with supervising officers was met with nonchalance, I shudder to think how they would react to a similar complaint by a non-officer.

Instead of reiterating the importance of following the proper protocol for complaints and grievances, the SAF should look into providing a more effective and less bureaucratic means for soldiers to provide feedback, lest even more disgruntled soldiers start ‘broadcasting’ their grievances.

For one thing, the SAF can institute proper whistle-blower protection so that candid and useful feedback and complaints can be made by servicemen of all ranks without fear of reprisal, as anonymity, according to Col Lim, is not a privilege enjoyed by them.

The Illusion

Cutler wrote:

As he spoke, my mind began to wander. I started furtively looking around the room, searching for famous, interesting or familiar faces. Having eaten a big meal just before the talk, I started to get sleepy. I drifted in and out. At one point in the talk, my mind tuned in to hear him say,
… the other day I spoke about the factors necessary to enjoy a happy and joyful life. Factors such as good health, material goods, friends, and so on. If you closely investigate, you’ll find that all of these depend on other people. To maintain good health, you rely on medicines made by others and health care provided by others. If you examine all of the material facilities that you use for the enjoyment of life, you’ll find that there are hardly any of these material objects that have had no connection with other people, either directly or indirectly. Many people are involved in making those things possible. Needless to say, when we’re talking about good friends and companions as being another necessary factor for a happy life, we are talking about interaction with other sentient beings, other human beings. So you can see that all of these factors are inextricably linked with other people’s efforts and co-operation. Others are indispensable. So, despite the fact that the process of relating to others might involve hardships, quarrels, and cursing, we have to try to maintain an attitude of friendship and warmth in order to lead a way of life in which there is enough interaction with other people to enjoy a happy life.
As he spoke, I felt an instinctive resistance. Although I’ve always valued and enjoyed my friends and family, I’ve considered myself to be an independent person. Self-reliant. Prided myself on this quality in fact. Secretly, I’ve tended to regard overly dependent people with a kind of contempt — a sign of weakness. Yet that afternoon, as I listened to the Dalai Lama, something happened. As ‘Our Dependence on Others’ was not my favorite topic, my mind started to wander again, and I found myself absently removing a loose thread from my shirt sleeve. Tuning in for a moment, I listened as he mentioned the many people who are involved in making all our material possessions. As he said this, I began to think about how many people were involved in making my shirt. I started by imagining the farmer who grew the cotton. Next, the salesperson who sold the farmer the tractor to plow the field. Then, for that matter, the hundreds or even thousands of people involved in manufacturing that tractor, including the people who mined the ore to make the metal for each part of the tractor. And all the designers of the tractor. Then, of course, the people who processed the cotton, wove the cloth, and the people who cut, dyed, and sewed that cloth. The cargo workers and truck drivers delivering it to the store, and the salesperson who sold the shirt to me. It occured to me that virtually every aspect of my life came about as the result of other’s efforts. My precious self-reliance was a complete illusion, a fantasy. As the realization dawned on me, I was overcome with a profound sense of the interconnectedness and interdependence of all beings. I felt a softening. Something. I don’t know. It made me want to cry.

An excerpt from The Art of Happiness by H.H. Dalai Lama & Howard C. Cutler, p. 55 – 57. Cutler wrote of his thoughts during a talk by the Dalai Lama.

Cards: Taboo?

nanzi wrote:

During a simple gathering, a woman (near 50 of age) was astonished to see that some kids were gathered and were happily playing cards. She asked me, “How can they be playing cards?”

Just a few days ago, my other half expressed incredulity at her tutee’s ignorance of “clubs” and “spades” or the number of ‘J’s and ‘K’s within a deck of cards. Apparently, the mathematics question she was explaining dealt with probability and made used of a deck of playing cards as a scenario.

Given the hostile climate against playing cards in most educational institutions — I heard the more “premier” schools have saner rules; some even have bridge clubs — I suddenly wondered why was knowledge of the contents assumed of all mathematics students in the first place?

Fur Trade


I read many comments on YouTube about “muthafuckin chinks and chinese”. I think they are missing the point here. By the way, it’s up to you which pill to take. The blue one would cause you less discomfort; the red one would cause them less.

Of Solitude and Minorities

I have an obsession with solitude. At times, I am reminded and reinforced of this obsession, albeit I have largely been unaware of how, why and when such “socially-unacceptable” mindset crept into my soul. I am unsure if being a middle-child or having a room to my own for the most part of my life has anything to do with it, but I never believed in subordinating anyone’s needs to anyone else’s.

For that matter, I never enjoyed having anyone to accommodate to my needs. I believe it is nigh impossible to accommodate to everyone’s needs sufficiently enough. It gets worse in large social events, like gatherings and what not, which is perhaps the reason why I am uncomfortable with the idea of socialising and why I never think of myself as a social creature.

It seems that I have further isolated myself in the past four years after making the decision not to have animals as food. Becoming a vegetarian did not lead to my unsociable tendencies, it simply reinforces why I prefer solitude to company. My ex-room mate would never eat alone for fear of being labelled as a “loner”, a “loser” or what not. I have met many who share his sentiments and would prefer to skip a meal than to be caught eating alone in public.

I am, however, the loner and loser in the society’s eyes. In fact, I enjoy eating alone. Eating alone means I won’t spoil someone’s day by requiring to eat at a place with vegetarian options and in the process, causing someone to miss out on a particular favourite food that is not available there for that particular meal. Eating alone means I won’t need to subordinate my own needs to others either.

There are places that I could never find food for myself and there are places that offers only vegetarian food. But the difference is of course, a non-vegetarian could consume vegetarian food but a vegetarian could never have a proper meal at KFC. Either way, this seems like a huge compromise on all parties, thus a good alternative may seem to be choosing a predominantly non-vegetarian location with vegetarian options.

However, these four years have taught me that when it comes to food, most people are rather particular and do not enjoy compromising for that one or two meals in their entire life time. I have never dared to recommend any vegetarian-only places to anyone unless they specifically asked me to or they are close friends or family members that I feel can respect me and my choice of diet.

But most of the time, really, when I’m dining with a group of friends, I find it extremely uncomfortable to remind them of my diet and just go with them to wherever they choose and keep my fingers cross about the availability of any food for myself. Subordinating one person’s needs to many is infinitely better than many accommodating one person after all.

I realised I have told many more lies, white ones I guess, after becoming a vegetarian. “Why are you only eating fruits,” to which I could only reply “Oh I’m not hungry” despite being famished. Of course, telling the truth is seldom an option lest the atmosphere becomes awkward for everybody. Just imagine saying things like “Oh because I’m a vegetarian and there’s no food here for me.”

Eating alone spares me from questions and judgement. There is always a standard repertoire of questions after knowing that one is a vegetarian. I am not complaining about the questions, but I am uncomfortable with the judgements that usually follow. Sometimes, I feel the urge to just reply that my whole family are vegetarians and that I have been one from birth. This would save me from most of the judgement, since people seldom question things that one has no control over. But telling the truth usually invites scepticism, amusement or even scorn.

Vegetarians don’t eat eggs, plants also have lives, eggs are also living, God made animals as food for humans, God made man to eat animals, you’re not a pure vegetarian because …, how can vegetarians eat mock meat, I also liked animals …

Of course, I could justify against each and every of their claim and accusation, of course I could prove the ignorance of some of these statements, but I don’t. There are simply some issues in life that aren’t worth arguing over. People will not understand simply because you won a argument. Instead, people further judge you because you argued with them.

The worse of all judgement seems to stem from the Chinese mindset of vegetarianism. Elderly Chinese, at the risk of stereotyping, can be extremely inflexible and uninformed about vegetarianism. In Chinese, vegetarianism is usually associated with religion. In the West, however, vegetarianism is almost often a way of life out of compassion for animals. I did not choose to become a vegetarian because of religion, at least not completely. I chose to become one because I did not think it was right for animals, living animals that could feel like we all do, to become food on my platter.

Chinese, however, like to think of vegetarianism as some holy thing, which I disagree. They seem to think that some divine punishment would befall upon those that do not adhere to the “traditional” means of Chinese vegetarianism, or those that break their “promise” as a vegetarian. But what traditional means? What promise and to whom?

There is no correct way of being a vegetarian, except for those who consume fish and still claim to be one. Vegetarians that abstain from eggs and dairy products are called vegans, which I never claimed to be one. I chose not to eat animals for food but still do consume derivatives such as eggs and dairy products that do not involve the killing of animals. Granted, I am aware of the cruelty involved in some of these trades and I should try to abstain from these products as much as possible. The Chinese vegetarian usually do not consume onion and garlic for religious reasons, which I also avoid but simply because I am not used to their strong taste and smell after eating at Chinese vegetarian stalls for many years.

Lately, however, I have began taking more onions and garlic to be more accommodating and less of a liability to friends who do dine with me. The recent trip to Timor-Leste, for instance, reminded me of the reason why I chose to become a vegetarian. It was not religious and the reasons for avoiding onion and garlic was never quite in line with my primary reason for becoming a vegetarian. Avoiding them was only a personal preference that I could and should forgo if it was beneficial to others around me. Becoming a vegetarian was never a “holy” thing for me, it was merely my way of respecting animals.

However, such compromises are usually seen as becoming an “impure” vegetarian in the eyes of the Chinese, not that I am bothered by it. However, such judgements lead to presumptions that I could further compromise, which I don’t. The line is clearly drawn for me that I would never eat from food that is cooked with meat. On the last day before returning to Singapore on my Timor-Leste trip, we stopped by at Bali and the team went for dinner at a Malay restaurant. There was clearly no food that I could really consume and even the potatoes seem to have meat within. I just finished the plain white rice and had a drink. That is my resolve and something which I would never compromise.

During the Freshmen Orientation Camp at my school earlier this year, one of the game involved playing Captain’s Ball with a dead chicken. I was extremely uncomfortable and even disgusted by such an idea. I never knew the supposedly bright and matured minds of the country could come up with such an insensitive idea. I took some courage to approach the orientation group leader (OGL) to voice out my concern from participating in the game at the risk of being ridiculed or ostracised. Even more disconcerting was that after voicing out my concern, the OGL was noticeably perplexed despite knowing about my dietary needs and encouraged me to play on. He did however relent in the end. Perhaps, it was divine intervention when a huge downpour cancelled this “game” of theirs to my relief.

Events that I have taken part in in the past four years have made me more aware and sensitive to the needs of others, which I thought was grossly lacking in the sensitivity department in the organising and planning of many of these events. I wonder if the “dietary requirements” section in every registration form was included for formality sake. I wonder if the organisers ever knew that Halal is not vegetarian, although it could very much be argued that all vegetarian food is Halal. I wonder if the organisers knew that not every vegetarian is comfortable with eating from vegetable dishes cooked with meat.

But ultimately, what is more agonising, or perhaps amusing, is the fact that people of the mainstream culture often accuses people of minority culture of impinging on their way of life when the reverse is usually true. Many vegetarians would have heard things like “Oh I can never live without meat” when we never said anything beyond stating that we are vegetarians. Other seemingly more righteous individuals may argue that vegetarians are a deluded and hypocritical bunch by eating mock meat. Most of those who just started on a vegetarian diet may feel extremely defensive upon hearing such remarks and an uncontrollable urge to rebuke such remarks, but really, sometimes it is easier to laugh them away than to engage in meaningless quibbling with the more antagonistic sceptics.

A while ago, I chanced upon a Singapore gay and lesbian group website, People Like Us (PLU) while doing research for my papers on alternative media. While I confessed that the notion of homosexuality has eluded me for the most part, reading about their history, their futile attempts at gaining societal acceptance and the response from government leaders had made me understand these people a little more. While everyone has heard horror stories of gays actively hitting on their friends as well as stories about aggressive and often antagonistic animal rights adherent criticising meat consumption, the vast majority of people in minority social communities, gays, lesbians and vegetarians-alike, are just minding their own businesses.

At the Pre-University Seminar, Minister of State Lim Swee Say replied to queries from a student about the denial of permit for a gay forum by PLU with the following remarks (as cited in PLU’s article):

“….. As for the gay forum, I do not believe that a single group of people in Singapore has the right to publicise its lifestyle and impose it on others. I am an avid golfer, but I do not hold a forum on golfing to say how much I love golf and convince others it is good.”

It took me, one with mainstream attitude towards sexual orientation, quite some time to see the irony in this. PLU aptly described the government as being “confused about who was imposing upon whom” (PLU, 2003).

The mainstream society is always impinging on the minority by imposing their own arbitrary yardstick to determine what is right, natural or aberrant. It took many lives, brave men, brave women, Martin Luther King Jr. and his “I Have a Dream” speech to challenge mainstream perceptions against his race. While I may be a member of only one minority social community, I am glad I woke up in time to accept and understand many others who may be ostracised in other minority social communities, voluntarily or involuntarily.

Of Expletives

This post started out as a comment to Yiren’s entry on ‘Vulgarities’ but quickly snowballed into a mini-commentary instead.Hokkien expletives are generally not my cup of tea because they’re largely genitalia-related, but I’m absolutely fine with the word ‘fuck’.

Sometimes it’s not the word per se that is vulgar but the way that the ‘expletive’ is put across. For instance, I used to take offence at ‘lucky bastard’, which literally carries an extremely derogatory meaning. But then again, nobody really means that one’s an illegitimate child when they lash that out. I just learn to be more sensitive with such words the next time.

Back to the f-word, I used to refrain myself from using it. But then I realised ‘fuck’ per se is just an expression, much like an innocuous ‘shucks’ or a slightly less refined ‘shit’. My primary school English teacher used to share with us how her son would substitute ‘shucks’ for ‘shit’ or ‘fish’ for ‘fuck’, but does that make the ‘expression’ any more refined?

Inherently, ‘fuck’ is just a slang for ‘having sex’. I wonder then why aren’t the words ‘having sex’ as profane as ‘fuck’ is? In that respect, shouldn’t ‘lucky bastard/bitch’, ‘bloody retard’ or even ‘spastic’ be much more hurtful than a natural and inherently innocuous act of, having sex?

When things screw (yet another slang for ‘having sex’) up, many people would curse ‘Shit’. ‘Shit’ per se is senseless. I mean, what has one’s excrement got to do with anything? One can thus conclude that ‘shit’ is little different from the Hokkien expletives worshipping the human genitalia. But the fact that ‘shit’ is considered mildy offensive while ‘vagina’ and ‘penis’ (in Hokkien) is considered extremely offensive is food for thought.

English is a living language. Words are constantly being added (think ‘blog’) and revised. The widespread acceptance and usage of common expletives such as ‘screw’, ‘shit’ and ‘fuck’ had prompted lexicographers to revise and add on to the original meanings of these words. ‘Screw’ is no longer just that innocent-looking metal pin with helical thread but also an act of sexual intercourse. Similarly, ‘fuck’ is no longer just an act of sexual intercourse but also an exclamation for anger, annoyance or contempt. In fact, ‘fuck’ is so versatile that it can be used as a verb, noun, adjective, adverb or interjection.

You know you really need the f-word when you need to use more than one adjective to describe something. “The movie’s damn bloody freaking good!!” will never do as much justice as “The movie’s fucking good!!” When “Get lost!” doesn’t work, “Fuck off!” definitely sends a more unequivocal message.

I’d say we use our wisdom to embrace some of these changes but should also be more mindful to our peers who may be less tolerant of expletives than we are.