The following reminds me of the obsession with having enough savings that underlie our economic policies here in Singapore.
“The miser would argue that he hoards wealth to alleviate his fear of poverty.What is remarkable about this mindset is that the miser is never truly feels relieved of anxiety; a miser is constantly worried about money and devoted to servicing his worry.
…
The Prophet (s.a.w) once asked some clansmen about their leader. They mentioned his name and said, “But he is a bit of a miser.” The Prophet (s.a.w) said, “A leader should never be a miser.” And then he added, “Do you know of any disease that is worse than miserliness?”“
- Hamza Yusuf (2004), Miserliness in “Purification of the Heart” p25
“The human race is an unfair and stupid competition. A lot of the runners don’t even get decent sneakers or clean drinking water. Some people are born with a massive head start, every possible help along the way and still the referees seem to be on their side. It’s not surprising some people have given up competing altogether and gone to sit in the grandstand, eat junk food and shout abuse.
What we need in this race is a lot more streakers.”
One may argue that not all domestic workers go through shit. But this is highly arguable. Domestic workers spend most of their time indoors and as such, however they work and live remains hidden from public knowledge. There is also a lack of research conducted on the working and living conditions of domestic workers. I am not arguing that most domestic workers are indeed being abused. I hope not and would like to think this is not the case (because I like to believe that most Singaporeans are not douchebags). I am just saying that we do not know.
Singapore’s Health Promotion Board has recently launched a new anti-smoking campaign by focusing on a statistic that reveals “children with parents who smoked were 4 times more likely to purchase cigarettes, as compared to children with non-smoker parents.”
(http://www.hpb.gov.sg/news/article.aspx?id=6028)
This campaign will probably be one its most ineffective campaign yet. Advertisers assume that parents who smoke do not want their children to pick up the cigarettes. While this at face value seems to be very commonsensical, it ignores the fact that most smokers who have young children have yet to experience the adverse effects of smoking itself.
The campaign’s target audience is young adults who are either already a parent or who may eventually become one. If these young adults are smokers, the campaigners hope they would consider quitting so that their children may not be influenced. Otherwise it hopes to deter potential young adult smokers from starting the habit. The inherent problem in this campaign is that the young adults themselves being young, may not have experienced the adverse health effects of smoking. And hence, they would not see the problem of their children eventually smoking in the future.
Admittedly, the campaign does have some notices or warnings of sorts that tells of the harms of smoking. But to what extent is such warnings useful? The young adult smokers would not readily buy such messages. If they do, they certainly would not have started smoking in the first place, because such warnings have already been quite prominent for a long while now. As such, they may therefore not readily see any problems in their children picking up smoking when their children in turn become young adults.
The following is a personal eulogy on the late JB Jeyaretnam, written by a schoolmate. I thought it was quite nice and it’d be good to put it up here. And so, here it is. (This in no way means I am endorsing any political figure or party in Singapore.)
A Personal Story on JBJ
Jamie Chen Siya
“I first got to meet and speak to Mr JBJ 3 years ago. I was on my way to his office to interview his long time friend, Mr Ng Teck Siong for a story. Mr Ng is the Chinese guy always seen accompanying Mr JBJ when he’s out selling books (Mr Ng is my friend’s father) The proposed story was one of my bright ideas that I had for my editor, someone who was the loyal follower of the man, but never featured.
The interview was in one of those buildings opposite Bugis Junction. I can’t remember the road, but it was a building which was not bright and clean which was full of small chinese trading business offices inside. It was dingy, old, musky. Nothing like the credit suisse lobby at one raffles quay or any of the buildings in shenton way. The shop “windows” were covered with those verticle type blinds. Not very modern at all. I made my way to the second floor. There was no one in the building. I got to the unit. When I opened the door, I saw an office the size of about 2m by 5 m, and a huge desk in the middle, dividing the office into two. That was Mr JBJ’s working space. I do not know for how long such a big man could be in that windowless and cramp space, but it was probably what he could afford.
I remember seeing a mess in his office- there was a pencil drawn portrait of Mr JBJ lying on a stack of papers in his office and some print out of the black and white photographs taken of him with posters protesting the casino decision.
I don’t really recall my interview with Mr Ng. But what I recall that day was Mr JBJ returning to his office, probably from selling books. He asked Mr Ng who he was with, and Mr Ng said oh someone is here to interview me and sort of introduced us. Mr. JBJ shook my hand outside his office in that empty corridor and the cold escalators with no one else around us. He bent as he shook my hand because I am quite petite. It was such an endearing moment I never forgot till this day. A gentle giant, in an ah pek striped polo t shirt with beige slacks held up by a belt. His choice of foot wear? Laced up sneakers. The kind with the curled up tips which looked very comfy, but also not very trendy. It was difficult to imagine that he was once a judge, a lawyer, and a politician full of fire (still is..) – because he was so very gentle when he spoke to me. Mr JBJ had the most refined accent I had ever heard. It was not an english accent, it was the JBJ accent. No singlish nonsense. He asked me who I was, I said I’m a freelance journalist and there was none of that gruffiness or adverse reaction which I read about in another journalist’s eulogy of him. I think its because I told him I was a student. He asked me all these while we were still in our handshake. It was a warm, genuine, patient handshake. I remember thinking his palm was very soft.
That was the one and only time I spoke to him. The rest of the occasions I saw him selling his books in public, I never had the guts to approach him.
I will always remember Mr JBJ for the kindness in his eyes. Mr JBJ, you were so endearing to me and to many many others. You will be sorely missed.”
“HE’S so shy,” chirped the Pointer Sisters in their 1980 hit of the same name.
That about sums up the Singaporean dude. His lack of confidence, according to a recent survey, is one of the top reasons for his being unsuccessful in love.
Add to this a small social circle and long working hours — it’s no wonder Singapore men and women are not hitting it off.
“Singapore men are overly modest. Fear of failure and rejection holds us back,” said singleton Vincent Lai, 26, an assistant editor.
According to an online survey, more men (23.9 per cent) than women(19.3 per cent) come up short in the confidence department.
Relationship expert Kloudiia Tay, in her 30s, reckons Singapore men have a lot more to prove. “Being Asians, they feel they need to be in the driver’s seat, but at the same time, they are afraid to lose face,” she said.
“For example, a guy once told me that if he saw an attractive girl, he wouldn’t dare strike up a conversation with her, but he would do so overseas as the culture encourages it, and he has nothing to lose if he is rejected.”
A poll by MyeCitizen (www.myecitizen.sg) surveyed 581 Singaporeans — (259 women and 322 men).
Some Singapore women, like marketing assistant Jemima Tsoi, 21, feel that men her age are “childish and immature”, which is why she would rather date those who are a little older.
In fact, 69.7 per cent said they would comfortable if the age gap was between one to five years, while 21.5 per cent would prefer a difference of 6 to 10 years. More women (9 per cent compared to 6 per cent) said they would be okay with partners more than 10 years older.
According to Ms Tay, women who marry older men do so because of financial security, while those who wed much younger men do so for companionship. “These women tend to be in their 30s or 40s. They are confident, financially-secure and more decisive than younger women,” she said.
And when it comes to footing the bill on the first date, many Singaporeans still hold true to traditional ideas of courtship, with 70 per cent saying men should pick up the tab.
But more women (40 per cent) than men (16 per cent) preferred going Dutch. Quipped Ms Tsoi: “It could be that we don’t plan to go on a second date with the guy.”
Hitting harder with soft-sell ad;
Subtlety, realism characterise the new MCYS ad
BY: Clarissa Oon
A HEADSTRONG teenage girl tussles with her patient single father before realising that he means well in the latest pro-family television commercial put out by the Government.
There are no slogans, just the word ‘family’ at the end of this commercial shot by critically acclaimed Malaysian film-maker Yasmin Ahmad.
What happened to the beaming two-parent families and winsome little tykes that laughed and frolicked their way through previous commercials produced by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS)?
Singaporeans nowadays have less appetite for such overt messages, much less the didactic ‘Girl or boy, two is enough’ slogans of the 1970s family-planning advertisements, said a veteran of such campaigns.
‘People are more sophisticated now through travel and the Internet and we thought we could take a leaf from how film-makers use storytelling to engage audiences,’ said Mr Richard Tan, the ministry’s director of communications and international relations.
So is the Government’s new tack – a more reality- based soft-sell of the importance of family – working?
Going by responses on the Internet and interviews done by Insight Special, it would seem to be. Many found the commercial moving and not overly cloying.
Finance industry professional Daryl Wong, 33, said: ‘I thought it was pretty sweet. The message seems to be that one does not have to provide the best materially to one’s kids to have fulfilling family relationships – all that matters is love.’
Housewife Clara Kan, 30, found it ‘a good reaction to how many families are structured today’.
‘No more cookie-cutter, perfect family shots with 2.5 children and a dog,’ she said.
However, she added: ‘But I’d love it if they did one with a single mother. That’d be a real turning point.’
It was Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong who suggested that the MCYS commission Ms Yasmin to produce a commercial. She won international awards not just for films such as Sepet (2004), but also for her ongoing series of television commercials for Malaysian oil company Petronas.
‘Yasmin has pioneered the use of storytelling to communicate social issues in advertising. The PM saw her Petronas ads and found them very powerful,’ said Mr Tan.
For example, a Chinese New Year commercial she did for the company shows a young boy unable to produce a drawing of his family reunion dinner during art class.
The viewer later discovers he is an orphan. The ad ends with a simple exhortation: ‘Please go home for reunion dinner if you can.’
Ms Yasmin agreed to work with MCYS on the condition that they gave her complete creative control. It is the ministry’s first time working with an independent film-maker.
Mr Tan admitted that her idea of portraying a widowed single father and his daughter caused them some uneasiness: ‘Normally, the politically correct way of communicating a family is two parents and with grandparents around. But I thought to myself: This is not Yasmin’s style.’
It was his boss, Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, who gave it the go-ahead.
‘He said that if we have to communicate using a slice of life that we don’t normally talk about, we should be brave about it,’ said Mr Tan.
The commercial, which began airing on television on June 21, ended its run earlier this week. It will have a second run in the cinemas later this month.
The MCYS is also planning a second collaboration with Ms Yasmin to produce more family-themed commercials.
Matchmaking is a rather common practice in the past – at least among Singapore Muslims. And it certainly is not the same as modern day matchmaking.
In the past, parents choose a husband or a wife for their children when they think it’s about time their kids get married. Once a potential partner is found, the two male and female simply either agree or disagree. There’s hardly any ‘trial’ sessions – (read: no dating sessions).
Today however, matchmaking is popularly done by commercial organizations. And I find this amusing because we actually have to pay to be matchmaked even though there is the hgh possibility of being mismatched. Another diffrence between traditional matchmaking (by parents) and modern matchmaking (paid services) is that the candidates get to spend time with each other for as long as they like. Heck, they can go on being ‘potential life partners’ for decades without actually getting married for real.
In any case, it seems to me that most people today are reluctant to be matchmaked by their parents. And I think the main reason for this is ego. Yes, it’s plain and simple, people simply do not want their parents to matchmake because they they want to find their life partner on their own. This stems out from the mentality that if a person has to be matchmaked, then that person is probably a loser that no one wants to fall in love with. Definitely not good for the self-esteem (many would probably disagree with me – well, who wants to admit they are egoistic anyway?).
Being egoistic is actually not problematic for most people, but it certainly is problematic for practicing Muslims. The problem starts when (practicing) Muslim Singaporeans adhere to the strict Islamic conduct of “dating is impermissible.” When they restrict themselves to such a conduct while at the same time refuse to be matchmaked, they have effectively closed all avenues to find themselves a life partner. And when this happens, they get sort of mildly frustrated and annoyed. They want to get married because marriage is a highly encouraged act – a Sunnah. However, they seem they cannot do this for reasons that are not apparent to them.
In contrast to Muslim Singaporeans, I have come to know two Muslim men from South Asia, in their early 30′s, who are waiting for their marriage day. Their wife to be? Their mothers’ choice. And to them, my congratulations.
A few days ago, I met up with an old friend on the bus. He was on his way back home after a hard day’s work at the office. He’s a clerk earning no more than $700 a month. Cheap labour? No, he’s actually serving the nation. It’s called National Service. It seems that he will be released from his obligatory duties in a few months time. From then on, he’d like to pursue a degree programme at a local university. However, sees some obstacles. He offered two of them, 1. his mediocre Diploma results and 2. the lack of financial support. Ahhh….. the classic case of lacking financial support. This is where things get interesting.
Labels
In Singapore, the Malays need not worry about financial burden when it comes to education. A large sum of educational expenses are paid for by a Government body called MENDAKI. This special provision is only for the Malays since the Malays are seen as the indigenous people of Singapore. Besides this, Malays are also often portrayed as “lacking behind” and thus, they need all the help they can get to “catch up” with other members of the society. It is also important to note that MENDAKI identifies itself as an Islamic organization, albeit one that targets a particular race.
In any case, at first glance, you’d think that my friend would not have to worry about financing his education because he has all the characteristics of a Malay. He has a Malay name, he “looks Malay”, eats Malay food, speaks Malay, and does whatever a Malay is expected to do (whatever is a Malay expected to do anyway?). The only non-Malay about him is the word “Indian” printed on his Identity Card.
I can relate to all his woes. I have Indian on my Identity Card too. And the only “Indian” root I have is of my father’s father (i.e grandfather) from Pakistan. He married a local Malay Singaporean lady. My other grandparents are Malay. So technically, I am 1/4 Indian and 3/4 Malay. But we cannot have fractions or percentages as part of our race. We are either this race or that race. And since Singapore adopts a patriarchic system, my race is thus “Indian”.
And as Indians, My friend and I do not enjoy the privileges that other Malays enjoy. Why don’t we then get aid from the Indian support group? That is what they all say. The answer to this is in the fact that the indian support group aka SINDA provides educational financial aid only for pre-tertiary level. Beyond that, any Indian seeking financial support must be a Hindu. And I am no Hindu, neither is my “Indian” friend. We are Muslims, just like the Malays (in Singapore, the Malays are automatically deemed to be Muslims unless they officially declare otherwise).
And as Muslims, it hurts to see a fellow Muslim priotizing political concerns over the needs of another Muslim. In this case, a Muslim organization ignoring the needs of a Muslim simply because of racial issues. Is this not contradictory to the fundamentals of Islam, that there should not be any racial prejudices?
Lacking Behind
Let us now relook at the idea that the Malays are often being portrayed as ‘lacking behind’. Essentially, this means that the Malays are earning less in the labour market and have lower educational achievement.
Singapore Sociologist Chua Beng Huat, once pointed out that the significance of the Malays being portrayed as lacking behind is that they are made to priotize worldy materials when in fact, as Muslims, the Malays should be priotizing religious affairs.
I think he hit the nail on the head. But sadly though, I think the Malays are not willing to admit it. Malays are afraid to admit that pursuing worldly materials can in fact be contradictory to the pursuit of Allah’s pleasure. However, as a Muslim, I accept the idea that Islam does not forbid the pursuit of worldly materials. In fact, the two can coexist beautifully together. But this is not possible in Singapore. For instance, for the Muslim male employees and students, there is always the possibility of conflict between friday prayers and work/study hours. In fact, even normal daily prayers are sometimes neglected due to working hours that do not permit the Muslim to excuse oneself during working hours.
Strings Pulled
We have so far taken a look at
1. how a Muslim organization has taken priority of Government policy of race over a fundamental value in Islam – no racial prejudice.
2. the Muslim is made to priotize worldly materials over Islamic obligations.
and from these two scenarios, we can observe that these are essentially the result of the Government’s actions. That is to say, the Government are telling the Muslims who they are – they are Malays first, then Muslims – and what they should priotize – economic gains first then religious affairs.
And so it seems that the Singapore Muslims have their strings pulled in some matters. I can offer no solution to this problem except that we can only hope that one day, Muslims are given the freedom to define for ourselves, who we are and decide how we want to contribute to society. And for this, it is at least comforting to know that some Muslims have already decided for themselves how they want to contribute. For instance, the case of providing humanitarian aid to populations beyond the Singapore border. And so it is not really a dark picture but it is a picture that can be improved nontheless. We are losing out on a lot of possibilities if our strings are pulled.
———
Note: My critique is not against the mentioned organizations or the individuals working there. My critique is against the system that we are in. And that we are ‘blind’ to the social implications that these systems have.
“Singapore, February 2 1963: Security police launched Operation Coldstore – the mass arrests and detention of over a hundred activists for alleged involvement in ‘leftist’ or ‘communist’ activities.”
While many were detained for a short period of time, some were held for over a decade. One of them was Said Zahari who was detained for 17 years.
In 2005, filmaker Martyn See completed the film production of an interview of Zahari. It was approved and rated PG by the censorship board. However, when See sought license for the film to be screened publicly, the film was banned. This puzzled Martyn See and Zahari himself especially since no explicit reason was given.
What exactly was in the film interview?
The film consists of a 49-minute interview with Said, the former editor of the newspaper Utusan Melayu, about the reasons he and several colleagues were arrested under a draconian internal security law in 1963, when the government was headed by the current prime minister’s father. – Reporters Without Borders
But as Zahari argued, the issues discussed in the inerview was already publicly available in his own books available in Singapore. So, the film definitely shouldn’t have been banned for its content.
Personally, I think the ban was held because it was a film. The number of people who watch films is way much higher than the number of people who read books – an obvious fact that needs no statistic proof. Therefore, it would have reached more people than the books already had.
But today, we live in a cybernetic world. We have the internet. And this is the bane of censorship boards.
—–
“The full 49 minutes of ‘Zahari’s 17 Years’ is now available for viewing on Google Video. I hereby declare that it wasn’t uploaded by me as I’ve surrendered my remaining master copy to the censors on 11 April. Prime suspects should include festival organisers, film buffs, academics, historians, journalists, ex-detainees, all and sundry who may have seen the film or even possessed copies of it at one time or another.” - Martyn See
