Tag: Idiocy

Random Discourse – A Case of Idiocy

Leave a comment

A case for repealing 377A

I refer to last Tuesday’s article (‘Study looks at sexual behaviour of gay men’).

The effort to glean information for the prevention and treatment of sexually transmitted infections is admirable. But I am not surprised that the study has fallen far short of its target of 1,000 participants and has managed only a meagre 40.

With Section 377A of the Penal Code still in place, sex between men remains illegal in Singapore.

No matter how much confidentiality is promised, there will be understandable reluctance from potential participants. For, in effect, the study asks that gay men make the admission of having committed a criminal act.

Section 377A not only hinders important studies from being conducted, but also ties the hands of educators who should be teaching young ones the proper way to regard safe sex, irrespective of one’s sexual orientation.

In short, 377A is detrimental to the fields of medical research and education.

It should be repealed (just as Section 377 of the Penal Code outlawing oral and anal sex between men and women has been repealed), so that studies such as the above can be conducted without impediment.

Pamela Oei (Ms)

This was an forum letter published only on the online version of the Straits Times forum. The research in question was to determine the prevalence of syphilis and HIV infection among homosexuals. Tan Tock Seng Hospital consultant Mark Chen, explained that this was done because it has not been proven conclusive here even though overseas data has shown that homosexual men are more at risk of syphilis and HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

To justify something in the name of research reminds me of Japan, which says it is killing whales for ‘scientific research’. While I do not always agree with environmentalists or animal- rights activists, I would like Japan to actually explain what research are they doing by killing those animals, and why do they have to kill so many every year to do such research. Would they not be able to do the same without killing those magnificent creatures? In fact, I had often considered Japan to be shameless to use research to justify the killing. Thus, I can’t help but also consider it shameless when after failing to repeal Section 377A by arguing that it discriminates against a specific group of people, the argument now is that it is detrimental to the field of medical research and sex education.

To refresh everyone, Section 377A states that: “Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.“

I take that to mean that any form of sexual intercourse between two male persons is a criminal act. Pamela Oei’s premise is that anyone who submit to this study would be admitting to having committed a criminal act and she believe that is the sole reason why there is a low number of participants. Have she considered that one of the reasons could be a lack of interest in such studies? Anyone who argues that homosexuality is related to a higher risk to STDs / VDs is often called a ‘homophobe’. So why would homosexual men participate in a study to determine something which they have always believed to be false? Sadly, Pamela Oei could only think of Section 377A as the only reason why there are few takers to this study.

Next, Pamela Oei’s argued Section 377A ‘ties the hands of educators who should be teaching young ones the proper way to regard safe sex. I would like to ask her, how would that be true? My limited knowledge on safe sex revolves around two very basic principles, they are: (in the words of the Sammyboy forummers) ‘raw is war’ – meaning you should never have unprotected sex; and it is best to be loyal / have only one sex partner. I believe these simple principles would apply to both heterosexuals and homosexuals. The other important knowledge about safe sex would include rudimentary knowledge about the kind of nasties that can be transmitted either orally or via the genitals, how fatal they are and the damage they do to one’s life. In summary, safe sex would be about the risk of unprotected sex, the seriousness and consequences of catching any of these diseases and the prevention. How would Section 377A be an obstacle for educators to impart such knowledge?

Pamela Oei should really understand how utterly lame and ludicrous she is. At times I wondered why some of the people who aren’t homosexual themselves seems more interested in homosexual activism than the homosexuals themselves. Perhaps they simply have nothing better to do and participation in such activities makes them look hip, cool or inclusive and even make them appear enlightened.

Addendum:
I believe some people will want to ask does that mean only a slave can speak up against slavery and I suggest you save the effort.

Two reasons. First, slavery is often forced upon another person and the same cannot be said about homosexuality – where the homosexual lobby often claims that it either a choice or a matter of genes. Second, I will not fall into the trap and elevate something which I consider as wrong to the same level as freedom.

I’ll tolerate any person who decides to be a homosexual, but just don’t expect me to celebrate or endorse that decision. Nor expect me to roll over and shut up in the face of any attempt to celebrate or endorse it.

Random Discourse – Skills Upgrading for Foreign Workers

4 comments

‘Foreign workers should get training too’, says MP Yeo Guat Kwang
Sep 19, 2011 (Straits Times)

Foreign workers should get skills upgrading similar to what Singaporeans go through, suggested labour MP Yeo Guat Kwang.

Noting that this would ‘create a level playing field’ for all workers, he said training and certification for work permit and S Pass holders should be done within the first two years of their employment.

Successful certification should then be used as a condition for work pass renewal, he said.

Mr Yeo, speaking to The Straits Times in his capacity as chairman of the Migrant Workers Centre (MWC), said training could be done in two ways – either through in-house courses conducted by employers, or via the Singapore Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) programme.

I was hit by a Tin Pei Ling moment after reading this – I don’t know what to say. (I am also glad I wasn’t eating when I read this, because I would have choked.)

It wasn’t because I can’t think of what to say, but because there’s a few things going through my mind then and I needed to organise them. However, my mei Audrey beat me to it and she pointed out that if the skill set of these workers are obsolete, what we really need to do is not renew / extend their work permit when it expires. In her opinion, the policies should be concurrently tightened in such a way that the new intake will be qualified enough. (On further thoughts, I believe this would be a little difficult to implement even though I agree with this in principle. The reason being, what are employers who can’t find a better qualified staff going to do when the permit of his current employees expire?)

Frankly speaking, I consider the above suggestion to be completely ridiculous and hare-brained. The first first thing that came to my mind was: “Who is going to pay for it?” (The PAP has taught us too well to always ask this question, and that actually came before “Are you out of your fucking mind?!“)

If employers are expected to pay for these training on their own without any government assistance, it is then only logical to expect them to raise the price of their services – which ultimately will be paid for by consumers like me. That simply means my cost of living will increase and how is that going to be of any good to me while the threat of a double dip recession looms? How does Mr Yeo expect me to accept these ‘extra hardships’ while I am expecting a few more years of stagnant wages if I employed?

As to the WSQ programs, are these programs partly paid by the government? If so, shouldn’t priority be given to upgrade Singaporean workers to be more productive so we can reduce our reliance on foreign workers? It would be preposterous for the government to fund the training of foreign workers from taxes levied upon the citizens when the government has always been stingy prudent when spending money. It seems to me that Mr Yeo is so confused he can’t get his priorities right. Perhaps he is tired and if that is the case voters in his ward should help him along with his retirement from politics in 2016. After all, he has certainly given me the impression that he – if not the so-called labour movement that he is a part of – does not take the interests of Singaporeans to heart at all.

In fact, I would like to see more priority given in ensuring that all of these foreign workers are really qualified in the first place. The Ministry of Manpower [MOM] should do do more verifying the qualifications of all foreigners seeking employment in Singapore, especially after the case where 18 Chinese nationals were jailed over with forged degrees. I was recently told that even maids now have to take an English exam before they can be employed here, and I certainly like to see some foreigners taking up Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians [PMET] positions in Singapore go through the same English test as well because I have very often come across emails which are almost intelligible.

These days, I have seen foreigners with dazzling qualifications from universities I have never heard of taking up IT positions of other roles in the department. Unfortunately, their performance made some of us wonder whether they are actually capable of what they are employed to do. That’s not mentioning that we have never heard of those universities in the first place. Perhaps I am just an ignoramus but one of my colleague had tried to look up their rankings and none of these universities even ranked anywhere near NUS or NTU.

That is why I actually hoped that the MOM would set up some kind of central examination center where foreigners applying for professional and technical positions in Singapore should be tested, just like how IT professionals obtain their Microsoft Certified Professional [MCP] certification. They should be made to pay for the test, and until they have pass that test they should not be given employment in Singapore at all! If they failed this ‘verification test’ they can be allowed to retake as often as they like as long as their visa remain valid and they can pay for it (but not more than once every two weeks). That would give some charlatans second thoughts if they try to push their luck, not to mention generate some revenue out of these foreigners for our country as well.

If the government is concerned that this might drive the talents away, let’s stop kidding ourselves. I am sure even the government acknowledged that many of these are not even the best countries like China or India has to offer. A lot of those really talented ones either stay in their home country to make a name for themselves or head off to the United States. Since those who are coming here are almost certain not to be the best, why are we even sucking up to them at all? If they feel humiliated by a simple test then it is clear their characters are flawed. So, good riddance to bad rubbish!

As I mentioned earlier, we should get our priorities right and our priority should be to ensure that these people at least measure up to our standards of talent while the weeds are rooted out. So, just why the hell are we even talking about upgrading the skills of foreign workers in the first place?