Tag Archives: makes me: angry

Nov 30 2011

Maids don’t need privacy

There’s a website (which promptly got locked up) in which employers can complain about their maids. Often this will include putting up their photo and employment pass information, supposedly to blacklist the maids so that future employers can avoid them.

Now this is wrong in so many ways. Firstly, anyone can complain and put up stories about the maids and the maids have no avenue to respond, to tell their side of the story. Secondly, the maids are already in a position of very little power (a lot of them are exploited and abused, there are hardly any laws here that offer them protection and many of us treat them as less than human) and this is a gross abuse of our power over them. Thirdly, splashing their private information all over what was once a public website without their permission is as the newspaper article says a complete violation of their privacy.

But what pisses me off the most at the moment is the use of the inverted commas in the headlines. The article pretends to be an objective account of this situation but uses the inverted commas to make a commentary. And what a commentary – because they are (just) maids, splashing their private information all over the Internet is (a) not a violation of their privacy and (b) those who complain are clearly making a mountain out of a molehill.

Jul 3 2011

Elevators and men

So there’s this incident going around the parts of the Internet atheists hang out in. Here’s a summary and here’s some responses on the issue. Anyway, I don’t want to talk about how appropriate it was for someone to criticise the arguments of someone else during a keynote speech at a conference. I’m slightly more interested in the responses to Rebecca Watson’s anecdote about the man in the elevator. To sum up, at 4am, a man followed her into an elevator and invited her to his room for coffee because he found her interesting. She expressed that this was creepy behaviour and that she felt sexualised. In response, a whole bunch of people have said that she was making too much of the incident.

A lot of men don’t seem to see why this is creepy. Honestly, even though I live in relatively safe Singapore, I get slightly nervous when in the elevator late at night with a strange man. In fact, I’ve even shut elevator doors on men I see coming in the distance (something I don’t do in daylight). When I’m in the elevator with a male I don’t know, I try to stand near the buttons. Basically, I know that as a female, there is always the chance that I could be attacked and I need to be vigilant. And so if some random guy comes into the elevator with me and starts to talk to me, I am definitely going to freak out. And really, if you think that, as a male, you are being unfairly discriminated against, that’s too bad. I’m not going to apologise for this, not when victims of sexual assault are often the ones being investigated instead of their attackers. As men, you have a whole lot more power in society. People tend to believe you more. People don’t judge you on your appearance. People will even come to your defence saying that the victim asked to be assaulted because her skirt was short. In such a reality, I think it’s perfectly reasonable for females to assume that men who approach you in elevators for coffee at 4am are creeps.

 

 

May 23 2011

Two Incidents

Two things happened recently that have alternately pissed me off and disappointed me.

Incident 1:

A wants B to participate in something. B says no, not interested. A refuses to take that as an answer, suggests to B’s higher-ups that this is compulsory and that A is being uncooperative. B participates to avoid conflict. A then presents B with a large bill (not mentioned before) as a result of B’s participation.

Incident 2:

C wants D to present at an event. D is reluctant but C claims that it would be informal and just a sit-down with other people and a chat about D’s experiences. D says ok, foolishly believing C. Some weeks later, D finds out that for the presentation, a paper has to be written and the presentation should last for 1 hour.

To be honest, I expected better.

Apr 19 2011

Pull up your socks

I’m not sure why The Online Citizen displays its mobile site when I visit it on my laptop. It’s rather annoying.

I don’t like the message or the tone in this article Take responsibility by Brandon Ngo. Not only is the tone smug and condescending, the content is offensive and obviously written by someone who has enjoyed significant privileges in his life.  If you were hoping for people to pat you on the back and congratulate you for being self-sufficient and successful, you won’t get it from me. Instead, all I have to say to you is that you are a selfish person and I hope that you are young for then, you might mature a little and learn a bit more about the world.

It’s so easy for anyone to say “work harder” and expect that the simple act of working harder should improve people’s life. Unfortunately, meritocracy or not, that isn’t always the case. For one thing, we don’t all start on a level playing field.

Some of us, through no fault of our own, are born with a silver spoon. Others are born into less fortunate situations. Tell me how this doesn’t matter. Some of us are born into positions of privilege – perhaps you are Chinese or perhaps you are male or  perhaps you are not disabled or perhaps you are straight. Tell me how this doesn’t matter in life. There are so many things that affect a person’s life and to completely ignore all these variables and insist that hard work is sufficient is either naive or dumb.

The sentiments expressed this article are exactly those that the government wants us to believe so that they can continue to refuse to provide adequate aid and support to the disadvantaged. After all, if their poverty is a result of their own reluctance to work hard, then why should all the other citizens, who supposedly worked hard and are thus successful, have to pay taxes to support them?

And let’s be honest. How many of these people living in poverty are just bumming around, being lazy? How many of them are working their asses off and yet still not earn enough money? It’s difficult to be poor – you have children but you can’t afford childcare. Without childcare, you can’t work but if you don’t work, you can’t put food on the table. Or maybe you or your child has a major medical problem and the bills have taxed you. Perhaps you had to sell your HDB flat and now you’re homeless and you can’t afford another flat or even rental on the market. And all people do is tell you to work harder. Because clearly, you didn’t work hard enough. Go get another job. Who needs sleep anyway?

So instead of looking at the structural inequalities and other issues that impact Singaporeans and instead of looking at how to ensure a minimum level of welfare for those who are floundering, we turn on them, accuse them of being lazy and simply stand by the side exhorting them to work harder.

Mar 30 2011

Seriously, what is this?

Occasionally, I lull myself into thinking that life isn’t too bad in Singapore. In fact, I sometimes think that it’s pretty damn good.

Then something will pop up and piss me off. And today, that something is Temasek Review. I read two of their articles on Ms Tin and both were misogynistic and frankly, of little value.

Yes, Ms Tin is young and attractive. So what? What does her physical appearance have to do with anything? What does her romantic entanglements have to do with anything? And therein lies the rub – why are women subjected to such questions about their love life? I don’t see the male MPs being besieged with questions about why they dumped their ex-girlfriend or why they are spending money on branded goods. Male politicians, while people may gossip about how they may be married to someone younger/richer/whatever-er, will never have their ability to do anything questioned because of their looks/marriage partner. It’s also ok to make sexually suggestive remarks about her when it has nothing to do with her ability as a MP apparently. I forget but when did anyone use sexual innuendo to put down our male MPs? Yet, it’s fair game for females.

Also, what’s with calling secretarial work a female job? Because it’s a “female” job, then it’s not worth much or deserving of respect is it? Not like those manly jobs out there.

And the misogyny thrown around in the comments is just awful. Not only are all sorts of abusive gendered insults used, there are so many calls for her to stay at home and produce babies.

It just pisses me off so much. I don’t know if Ms Tin is a worthy candidate or not and I feel bad she’s subjected to such harassment simply because she’s a good looking female.

Mar 3 2011

Life in Singapore is Wonderful

The ST is becoming increasingly annoying and tiresome as the GE looms. Today’s Prime News are all about how wonderful the Budget is. And I’m betting there will be more stories about how great Singapore is in the weeks to come.

From today’s ST:

Unlike in many other countries, there are also no huge disparities in facilities and teaching standards between schools in poor and wealthy neighbourhoods.

I don’t know. My neighbourhood school does not have a indoor sports hall, has a school hall with poor ventilation and is incredibly warm (imagine when they take their exams) and too small for all the students, has a staff room not big enough for the staff (we sit at desks, not cubicles), has stairwells that are so badly designed they are flooded when it rains.

 

Feb 24 2011

Runaway Maids

You know, maids are people too. And they are people working in a country full of people who see them as nothing but cheap labour without their friends and family. Who are you to decide that homesickness or too much work are trivial reasons? Are you them? What may be trivial to you may not be trivial to them. Are you working for less than minimum wage with no off days in a foreign country where you have no friends or family?

Maids aren’t our slaves. And what the hell is this?

If maids are made to manage their own recruitment fees, they would be compelled to hold on to their jobs to pay their creditors back home lest their families are harassed if they fail to do so.

You think that it is reasonable to wish that the maids’ families are harassed by creditors so that you can have a maid who won’t quit on you no matter what? What kind of person are you?

I know maids have become incredibly important in the Singapore lifestyle but since when did that give us the right to treat them as property with no feelings. Of course there are rogue maids out there, just like there are rogue lawyers and rogue teachers. Should my family live under the threat of harassment to ensure I serve out my teaching bond?

I just … I have no words and really, it’s embarrassing sometimes how selfish and heartless we are. Instead of dealing with the causes of them running away, let’s ball and chain them instead.

Stop them from running away for trivial reasons

MAIDS running away has obviously become a disturbing trend, and unless this is addressed appropriately, it could become an infectious habit (‘Number of runaway maids rises to 4,000′; Feb 11).

Except in cases of abuse and severe deprivation, refuge should not be granted to maids. Some of them cite trivial reasons such as homesickness, inconvenience and heavy workload for leaving.

Runaway maids should, in fact, be handed over to the police. So long as live-in facilities are made available for these maids, this unhealthy trend will continue.

One would have thought that raising the recruitment age to 23 years would give them the maturity to stand by their decision of seeking employment and abiding by the two-year contract.

The practice of bringing in maids without them having to pay their share of the recruitment fees in their home country should also be discouraged as it breeds resentment in those who have to work for between nine and 11 months without a salary.

In desperation to get out of their poverty, they agree to this clause, realising little the financial, psychological and emotional impact it will have on them later.

If maids are made to manage their own recruitment fees, they would be compelled to hold on to their jobs to pay their creditors back home lest their families are harassed if they fail to do so.

They would also have the satisfaction of receiving their full salary in hand even if it means having to send most of it home.

Employers, too, would be spared forking out nine to 11 months’ salary upfront on top of having to pay their share of the recruitment fees to their local agents.

Padmini Kesavapany (Mrs)

 

Nov 23 2010

*shakes head*

I read this in the ST today and it made me angry. Luckily, I went out for a nice dinner and came home a lot calmer.

PRIME Minister Lee Hsien Loong urged Malay Singaporeans to measure the community’s success by how far it has come, rather than by comparing itself against other communities, as each had a different starting point.

Maybe we should ask ourselves why different communities have different starting points. If you are born Malay, you are more likely to come from a low income family, more likely to come from a broken / dysfunctional family, have relatives who are not highly educated and be seen as lazy, playful and not very smart. And the reason we compare ourselves with other communities is that this is the reality we live in. We compete with the other communities for jobs, for opportunities, for success. So it’s foolish to think that the Malay community should be happy just thinking that they have made improvements in their own community. I hate that the Malay community is always performing so badly and the only solution seems to be “work harder” which is nonsense because let’s be honest, there are inequalities and prejudices built into society that makes it more difficult to succeed as a Malay than a Chinese.

Revisiting the point at the end of the dialogue, he said: ‘Ideally we just proceed completely race-blind – no race on the NRIC. But inside the brain somewhere, there is one little thing which you cannot take out. And it’s not little, it’s actually pervasive.

This really pisses me off. Really. You talk of a race-blind society (and this I disagree with because with a race-blind society, we ignore the disadvantages certain racial groups start with) but want to put the race on the NRIC. What purpose does this even serve? Aside from very poorly classifying people, I do not see how the race on the NRIC helps in any way.

Arghh. Race in Singapore is always aggravating and I am too tired to write anything sensible.

Nov 5 2010

Men are victims too!

Poor men. Life is so unfair. How is it that women get all sorts of protection like the Women’s Charter? Men need protection too from how unfairly life treats them – unequal wages, disproportionate number of women in politics and other leadership positions, judgement on ability made based on looks, inability to say no to sex within a marriage and so on. What we need is a men’s charter to protect them from all the conniving, cunning, heartless women out there.

I REFER to the reports (‘Making defaulters pay’, Nov 1; and ‘Judge throws out ‘secret wife’ case’, Oct 27). The Women’s Charter rightfully accords protection to women against irresponsible men and ensures financial support for them and their children after a divorce.

But what if a woman deceitfully enters into a marriage with a hidden agenda. Is there any legal recourse for the husband concerned to protect himself?

There are women who do not take the marriage vows seriously, but see it as a legitimate means to circumvent immigration rules to gain residency status or as a quick way to escape poverty. With more Singaporean men marrying foreign wives, cases of abuse of this nature will rise.

Women who are out to exploit the marriage process may, after a few years of matrimonial life, either initiate a divorce or behave unreasonably so that their husbands would have little choice but to opt for a divorce.

Under such circumstances, through no fault of theirs, ex-husbands will be required by law to continue to maintain their ex-wives and divide matrimonial assets.

The Women’s Charter, in its current form, does not distinguish between women who faithfully carried out their roles as wives/mothers and those who entered into a marriage with the wrong intent and abused the marriage system for their selfish gains.

Unless appropriate provisions to deal with such abuses are added to the Women’s Charter, they will become more prevalent. We need to send out a strong signal to all that marriages have to be taken seriously as a long-term commitment and not be exploited for one’s short-term, selfish gains.

Oo Choon Peng