Why You Speak Like That Lah?

Source taken from virtualtourist.com

Most of us grew up in Singapore with having to master English, our medium of operation in Singapore, and also our Mother Tongue. People say it’s hard to master the second laguage, especially if it is a Chinese. But without realising it, people have all learnt a third language- Singlish.

It baffles those, particularly the foreigners, when they hear of it as to why do we add such monosyllabic words to pepper our sentence and at the end of it, those who are unfamiliar with it may be amused, but more likely, they may have cringed at the way poeple have dissected and distorted the language itself.

What sparked this discussion of the Singlish is that recently, on the 23rd of October, The Straits Times online started an online thread to discuss of how certain Singaporeans may refer to Singlish as our culture and even even express the need to maintain this ‘identity’ after a debate on a television show.

According to an article response to that television show, the person mentioned that how Singlish was possibly started was when our early forefathers came to Singapore years ago and had to learn English to be able to work etc. So being non-natives of the English language, they naturrally had a tough time trying to learn it but grasp bits and pieces of it here and there, and that came with what we have now, the terms used in Singlish. An example would be the ‘lah’.

It baffles me just as much as those Caucasians and non-natives to Singapore as to how some people here are very proud of the Singlish and even go to measures to link it to our ‘culture’ in Singapore.

Thing is, if we have gone through rigorous formative years in primary and secondary school to learn about the English Language, why are we subjecting ourselves to ridicule by practising such horrid language?

I am not dismissing Singlish, but I am merely stating that it becomes a real issue when people are not able to disengage themselves from talking in Singlish when speaking in a professional setting.

It would be embarrassing when supposedly Singapore is known to operate on the English Language but its people speak atrocious English on the international stage.

Furthermore, what is so good about being supposedly ‘famous’ for Singlish? That, first of all, is being infamous. Second of all, that is not our culture. Yes, we grew up interacting with family and friends with peppering our sentences in Singlish, but that does not equate to culture. As such, there is a need to separate Singlish from being our culture, lest we develop future generations who aren’t able to separate proper usage or not.

Besides, culture evolves with time and modernisation. So it would seem impractical to stick to using Singlish as it was belived it was used by the forefathers years ago.That would mean rigidity in mentality and a lack of an open mind.

Am I Fat?

Photo source AP, taken from Straits Times Online

“No one wants curvy women” and “Too big for ad” were the two headlines, which graced the newspapers within the past week regarding female body sizes, specifically regarding two models that are supposedly on the big side.

The fact that there were two stories published within a few days apart from each other is saying a lot about how abruptly once again the issue of the right body size is resurfacing yet again and it even sparked an online debate on the topic of what else, women and their curves.

The media is in essence, a double-edged sword. It is a powerful medium, which can sway in any direction and of course can even be abused. Women and their body shapes and sizes have long been at the centre of much discussion over the years and there have been negative effects that entail such uproar in the media.

All these debate about the preferred kind of body shapes aroused because of the media because all it has to do in this case, publish an article on models who have been supposedly cast aside due to how they longer fit into the runway model ideal weight and size and then just as immediately, it becomes an issue for media consumers to think about. That is what the media does. It tells us what to think about instead of telling us what to think. This is a clear example of how the media is an agenda-setting tool to reach out to the masses.

With regards to this issue of ideal women size, it is damaging to the young impressionable girls and women as a whole too. As a result of the articles, it will prompt girls to start re-thinking about the ideal size for girls and women and start getting ideas on how to fit into that mould that the media has portrayed. Sadly, some fail to realise that what the media portray may be a far cry from what is right after all.

These two articles are simply said, epitomizes why society as a whole is deluded by the real idea of beauty and in some extreme cases, it has resulted the decline of self-confidence in girls and has caused them to take extreme and unnecessary measures such as purging and going on extreme diets just so to achieve that dress size zero that the media repeatedly portrays. These girls feel the pressure to do so because they feel that their weight is the only constant they can rein control over and by being in control, they do not deem themselves as failures and in a skewed manner, it will boost their self-confidence.

Some may argue that there have been stories etc that promote healthy living and being happy with one’s body image, but realistically, most girls still believe that skinny is beautiful.

Whether you personally agree with that statement, what we can do is to be critical of the media messages received instead of lapping it all up.

Underneath Those Clothes

Source: Straits Times Online, Wong Kwai Chow

The past few years when I happen to channel surf the television and caught a glimpse of those dangerous stunts performed by the former Renci founder, Ming Yi for the President’s Charity, I’d find myself feeling really warmed by his spirit to be at the forefront to go all out to raise funds for charity.

But just recently, Ming Yi and his aide were convicted of four charges, including fraud and giving false information. Now, a few years ago, National Kidney Foundation was embroiled in a court case, which revolved around similar events that is surrounding Ming Yi and his aide right now.

What’s my point in highlighting the issues here?

Basically it is like a revelation of how we humans place much emphasis on the appearance and how we connect what we see with what we think it is. The context of “see” of here does not necessarily mean knowing and understanding, but merely seeing it per se. And we think does not mean we truly know it, but merely having a perception of how it is and at times, what we think can be far off from what things are actually like.

Take the example of Renci founder, Ming Yi. He dresses simply in traditional attire for a Buddhist monk and there seems to be no airs about him at all. Yet when all these news surfaced about him and his aid being involved in this legal saga, it has made people sit up, and left people in shock.

Generally, most people connect how one’s physical appearance looks like to one’s character. For instance, when one sees a Caucasian man, one would most likely think that the above said man would be generous, courteous and a gentleman because most people associate such qualities to Caucasians and therefore assume that the Caucasian above in question is just like that.

This shows how people generally make a sweeping statement and a generalization for people just by the way one looks.

So therefore, indeed it is true that first impression lasts, but to try and break generalizations and to train ourselves to not label people just by the way one looks is a difficult task, but it isn’t impossible at all.

The thing about generalizations is that it is not all true and at times exaggerated and far off from reality. So why is hard that people still make generalized impressions just by how one looks? Especially when generalizations to a certain extent can be flawed. Is it because it is convenient?

Therefore, it is always important to look beyond the exterior because what’s inside is what truly matters end of the day.

So in the end, one may look and dress like a gangster, but who knows that inside he is actually a generous and pious man after all.

That’s Why We Are Different

Girl: What do you think of this girl?
Guy: Very pretty but not quite my type.
Girl: Why?
Guy: She seems like the kind of girl who goes out clubbing a lot.
Girl: How do you know? She looks like a perfectly homey girl.
Guy: She just looks like one. But I’d do a double take if I see her because she is very pretty.

I had the above conversation with a guy friend very recently and yes, it was on the topic of girls. Nothing new but these kind of conversations never fail to amuse me because to engage in such conversations with the opposite gender will provide a lot of insight into how different males and females thought processes are as well as how each thinks before coming to a conclusion or  in this case, forming an opinion.

From the above scenario, it hit upon me that gender actually does play a role in the process of how we form our perceptions without realising it. Apart from the obvious difference in physical matters, males and females are inherently different in terms of our psyche also. For instance, when it comes to love, generally men purportedly want the intimate physicality while women are known to crave more for the intangible and more permanent feelings. We want security and attention to be showered upon us among others.

Though the process of how humans form our perception follows a fixed routine, the factors may vary from gender.

For instance, when individuals do selection, we cognitively do so based on a few factors like based on individual characteristics, mass media, social network, motives and the likes.

Therefore, when a guy and a girl are put to go through the same thought process with the factors listed above, the response and eventual results will differ not only cause they both are two different individuals, but also because both are of different genders.

Coupled with how each individual has differing beliefs, habits as well as the past experiences, knowledge and the mass media that one subscribes to, will prove to have an impact.

So for my friend, he is someone who is a non-believer in clubbing and comes from a relatively strict family whereby such activities though seemingly harmless is not encouraged and surrounds himself around people who generally prefer to do other activities to clubbing will find himself labeling certain people who do not conform to the mental schema as club-goers though he knows that one should not judge a book by its cover.

It makes me realise that though we have always had the message to not be harsh and pass a judgement based on something superficial been drilled into us time and again, it is in a way rather a difficult task to make do because the cognitive process in the way one selects and eventually forms an opinion is closely linked to the environment we are in.

So maybe the solution would be to do a double-take on the person and the perception attached, to give the person a deserved second chance because once in a while we would be in their position too.

Are You Feeling Naughty?

For those of you who commute to school by train for instance, did you happen to see an advertisement by Naughty G?

For those who are unaware, it is basically an energy drink, which is said to boost energy, stamina and well, performance too. Now, by just reading the text of what the product can do, you would visualize another energy drink ad. You might do a double take when you see the title but would most likely brush it off though it may have sparked some curiosity in you as to what this product is exactly. Now re-evaluate the ad when you see it with the visuals incorporated.

Here is a snapshot of the bus print ad. Whether it’s found on the bus, bus stop, in the trains, in print ads or online, they are very similar in terms of design and information put forth. The ad has been running for a few weeks now and it was spotted at places like Clementi MRT Station and even in the trains.

Image source taken from http://i976.photobucket.com/albums/ae243/tcca85/naughtyGposter.jpg

Now, there is absolutely no issue with a newly imported product, which is believed to increase one’s energy and stamina, especially for athletes. Having more choices to choose from, apart from Redbull (also another energy drink) is always good. But to market the product as a sexual performance boosting product may be crossing the line a little when it is displayed in places where there is an abundance of school-going children who may be as young as seven (at an age when they are able to read and understand basic words) exposed to it.

Scroll back to the top to have a look at the visuals again and you will definitely notice how the models are posing in a suggestive manner and coupled with phrases such as “horny goat weed” and “miracle molecule l-arginine” it will create question marks in children’s heads and even cause these children and teenagers to research on all things sex-related maybe even prematurely for some.

This is worrying because there is a trend in underage sex among teenagers in Singapore with the starting age getting much younger than before. With such ads displayed prominently in public places, it will in a way encourage them to try the drink and then “test it out”. There is nothing wrong to try the product, since it is an energy drink, but it will spark a chain reaction to it as well, which most likely will be undesirable especially without adult supervision and guidance.

Unlike teenagers and young children, young adults are able to discern ads that are projected to them and evaluate it much better than these young children can. Due to maturity levels.

So I say importing the drinks is fine, but to attach sexual connotation to it and then displaying it to places whereby children are exposed to it is no. Cause surely we do not want those children to become naughty upon reading it.

Media Repression

A week ago, the Straits Times reported on journalists in Hong Kong protesting against media repression. What ignited the protest was the allegation, which claimed that a journalist and his cameraman were “tied up, abused and detained by the police while covering a protest on syringe attacks in the state of Xinjiang in China.” (The Straits Times, 2009)

Regardless of whether the allegations made were true or false, it still brings forth the fact that journalists do get abused in the course of duty. Sometimes the journalists’ respect is disregarded as their role in being the observers and reporters are forgotten. It is thus a pity when journalists are merely doing their job yet they are not being respected as individuals neither are they being respected for being journalists, whose job is to report the truth to the masses.

Which leads us to the next point of where is the press freedom?

Now, the problem when journalists are being oppressed, is that it will hinder growth, improvement and quality of the news material and of course, it will not bring justice to journalism, which operates on reporting the truth to inform and benefit the masses. The end result will be that the news will lose its credibility, as everything will then have to be censored and information omitted here and there before it is presented to the masses.

When dealing with the term journalists for this entry, it is referring to the news reporters who are working for news broadcast stations and print, excluding paparazzi material journalism. Why is there a need to separate and distinguish the journalists is because the former is considered the professional of the two and the news they serve has a much larger degree of importance to and benefits the readers at the same time.

Indeed, regulations are needed to set the boundaries for journalists in order to preserve important issues like racial harmony for instance. This may sound like an oxymoron, but within that frame, there has to be some leeway for journalists to write freely.

Take Singapore for example. We do have rather strict guidelines though reasonable in place to monitor the news being circulated, and once in a while we do get people complaining about how rigid the guidelines are, but it has managed to provide space for people to express their feelings and for journalists to report fairly.

In order to report fairly, journalism as a whole must not be oppressed or pressured into conforming to a certain party to withhold or tweak information, as journalism owes the masses the truth in reporting news.

As such, as being the purveyor of the truth, journalists should not in any case be subjected to any form of abuse but should be respected for their profession.

Meet My Friend, Facebook.

Hands up if you have a Facebook account! Hands up again if you spend at least an hour a day on Facebook to interact with your friends.

The reason why I asked the above two questions is that living in the digital age right now, has brought about a series of changes in the media landscape, especially in the way people interact and communicate with one another. Things have evolved ever so rapidly over the years that maybe, how people interact with one another right now has lost its literal meaning to personal touch.

According to Facebook, it has more than “250 million active users” and of which there are “more than 120 million users who log in daily” which most likely includes you and I.

With such commodities made easily available to interact with one another, one is no longer restricted to only say, sending a letter to get an update on someone’s life unlike years ago. Now of course things are much easier. You can pick up the phone to dial your friend’s number or send a text message, or simply interact online in the cyberworld via means like Facebook, Myspace and Friendster.

So social networking sites such as Facebook allow people to interact and get an update on each other’s life without being physically there and that’s why human interaction now takes a different form.

But what still remains is that though people now communicate by scribbling notes on each other’s wall profiles and commenting on photos for instance, it still does not take out the essence, which is the transactional model in which people communicate.

By posting a message on your friend’s profile page and subsequently receiving feedback in the form of reply from the person, it shows how both parties are communicators at the same time and it’s not a one-sided interaction taking place within the Facebook sphere which makes up the environment.

So yes, maybe engaging your pals in a game of Mafia Wars in Facebook may not be the same as interacting with them face-to-face and being physically there. But it is still communicating, time saving and flexible because you can be continents apart but can still keep updated of each other’s lives and in a cost saving manner. And who can forget, because Facebook is interactive, it provides lots of fun too!

However static communicating via the cyberworld may be, it still is interacting albeit in a different form and there shouldn’t be a restriction to how people should communicate, right?

Because like the saying goes, different strokes for different folks.