The Meaning of Bravery

Just finished watching the latest episode of House. For those of you who don't know the series, House is a medical drama revolving around the head of Diagnostic Medicine at a fictitious hospital, Dr Gregory House. Along with his multiple very talented assistants, he pulls off miracle after miracle, pulling patients back from the brink of death everytime.

On the surface, this is a simple cut-and-dried medical soap, but as you follow the series, House goes on a voyage of self-discovery. Dr House is cantankerous, belligerent and totally without bedside manners. He is smug and abrasive, always thinking that he is right. And more often than not, most episodes, he teaches his patients lessons in life. This episode was different though... House ended up being the one learning a lesson in life.

The episode is about a little 9-year old girl, already terminally ill, who suffers from hallucinations. The doctors suspect a blood clot in her brain, but the only way to be sure where it is, is to actually temporarily stop her heart, pump out her blood, and then search for the clot. In other words, during the procedure, she would be clinically dead. Despite being told of the myriad risks, and knowing that she already only has one year to live anyway, the little girl agrees to the procedure, simply because she cannot bear to see her mother suffer.

House was very critical of her choice. To him, she is going to die anyway. Why prolong the agony? And the little girl told him very simply, "I don't want to see Mum cry." House derides the choice as one made by chemical imbalances in her brain, but further (and totally needless checks) show that her brain is fine. Needless to say, House goes away learning something new about the potentially limitless nobility of the human spirit.

So what is bravery in today's context? Is it living for someone else? Making choices which are hard to make? Striving on against overwhelming and insurmountable odds? Showing joy in the face of despairing sadness? I think it is all of the above. Atticus put it very succinctly to his children in the novel To Kill A Mockingbird: Bravery is when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what.

But bravery is more than that. Bravery is also doing that which you know is right despite what others say or do. Bravery is knowing when to walk away from a fight when you know fighting is going to hurt the people around you. Bravery is sticking to your guns when you are all alone, bereft of support and understanding. And most of all bravery is smiling during times of the worst physical pain and mental anguish. How many of us can say, "I want to live for that one more year, because I don't want to see my mother cry..." when we have terminal cancer?

To me here are some examples of how Singaporeans can be brave:
1) To stand up and say that despite their flaws and shortcomings, our government has done a decent job in the past 41 years.
2) To stand up and say, I will not emigrate because Singapore is my home.
3) To go up to a punk on an MRT and tell him off for not giving his seat up for a pregnant woman.
4) To tell an idiot that placing a packet of tissue on the chair does not constitute the chair belonging to him, especially when the tissue doesn't have his name on it anyway.
5) To horn at another car who refuses to give way for an ambulance.
6) To take pictures of cars which are parked across parking lots and post the pictures on the web.

Singapore, be brave!

20 Rules Of The Dating Game

Haha. I got this from the latest issue of Duet. If you don't know what magazine it is, then... Lucky you! LOL. Means you don't need a magazine like that. Anyways, all things tongue-in-cheek have grains of truth in them, so laugh along with this post, but think about what the rules really mean for both guys and girls...

10 Rules For Him

1) Call us old-fashioned, but if this is your first date, it is not acceptable to go Dutch. Be a man and pay for the meal!

2) Not enough men today stand up when their date leaves or approaches the table. If it helps, pretend she's your camp commander. (Ermz, I don't even stand up for my camp commander!)

3) If you drive, always take her home, even if she lives on the other side of the island. And if you don't, drop her off in your cab.

4) Accept the fact that she will want to know what you're thinking by the fourth date.

5) Also accept the fact that, in all probability, her parents will be asking you about marriage by the fifth date.

6) Never antagonise or make enemies of any of her girlfriends. You're just asking for trouble.

7) Just because she's talking to another guy at a party is no reason for your inner Hulk to emerge. Get over it. You're her boyfriend, not her cell-keeper.

8) As a man, you are not equipped to have any negative opinion about her dress, makeup or hair. You love, love, love everything. Especially if you think it's dog-ugly.

9) Girls love flowers...

10) ... and a guy who says "You're so beautiful!" in front of their other girlfriends.

10 Rules For Her

1) Yes, you're dating, but he won't necessarily want to spend 24 hours a day with you. Guys like to go out with other friends that won't always include you. Let it be. (hear that girls?)

2) Men don't like to talk. Especially about their emotions. That's what your girlfriends are for, so get over it.

3) Just because he's speaking to another girl at a party is no reason to let your inner she-demon emerge. Just take a picture on your camera-phone and use it as ammunition for your next fight. (hey that's unfair! We didn't get advice like this for our Rule 7!)

4) If he dresses really well, worries about Jennifer Aniston's emotional well-being, knows all about skin care and goes to the gym every day, you are entitled to be a little suspicious.

5) If every other sentence he utters starts with "My mother...", then consider other boyfriends.

6) Just because he doesn't call you every two hours to say "I love you" is not a sign that he doesn't.

7) Don't make him carry your handbag in public. Handbags are for ladies.

8) It's not acceptable to expect him to pay for everything. Even if he wants to.

9) Guys love to watch soccer... (ermz, I prefer pool and tennis)

10) ... and a girlfriend who coos, "You're my hero!" in front of their male friends.

What Women REALLY Want

I was just chatting with a new friend I met on my inaugural diving trip. A woman with a mind of her own, many of her opinions are measured and well-thought out. Like almost everyone else I know, she also has her own sad love story to share. Anyway, in the course of one of our MSN chats, we got around to talking about what she wanted in a life mate... And here are some of her criteria:

- she must be able to communicate with him, communicate about all things under the sky
- there must be mutual trust and respect
- both parties must be faithful to each other and truthful
- if anyone ever wants to walk away (from the relationship), there must be truth (I presume that means there must be closure)
- there must be a sense of fun and adventure
- can make her laugh
- mutual respect
- basically someone whom she can share her life with and trust that the person will be around
- both must strive to become better people, otherwise, things will get stale
- when the feeling is rite, it'll be all there
- these are basic things that a r/s shd have

Most of these are truncated direct quotes from our conversation, thus the slight difference in writing styles.

Taking a second look at all the comments she made, I couldn't help but have two very seperate and distinct reactions, and both reactions being on the opposite ends of the easy-hard spectrum. Confused? So am I *wry grinz*, so once again, as is my wont, let me elaborate.

On the one hand, all the traits and relationship characteristics she said she wanted in a relationship, I felt were so totally basic. It is not just a lover's relationship which needs those characteristics stated above. Familial relationships, occupational relationships, friendships, business relationships, even to a certain extent acquaintance-ships (another Ed-invented word), all require communication, mutual trust, mutual respect, the drive to improve etc. In other words, all kinds of relationships bar none, are built on varying degrees of communication, mutual trust and respect. They are the building blocks of relationships.

So, having to specifically spell out such basic necessities for a successful romantic relationship between a man and a woman begs two questions: 1) Is today's society so emotionally corrupt that we do not even view communication, trust and respect as the basic building blocks of a successful relationship?; or 2) Are we expecting unreasonable amounts of communication, respect and trust in our relationships? Since option 2 sounds a little far-fetched even to me, I'm inclined to think that option 1 is the problem.

As a society, I believe we are getting more cynical by the day. We do not have faith any more, we seldom treat each other with respect, honour and integrity, and our sense of wonder has eroded to such an extent that it would take something (or in this case, someone) truly spectacular and wondrous to sweep us off our feet. We should not even have to specify that we want communication, trust and respect in a relationship. It ought to be a given. Not to be taken for granted of course, but these are the components which should be present in any relationship, not just romantic ones.

On the other hand (and on the other end of the spectrum), the uber-cynical part of me is saying:

We all want communciation, mutual trust and mutual respect in a romantic relationship. Well those things are really nice things to have. But... are these things overated? In the first place, why should we place ourselves in a position whereby our sense of security are defined by the amount of communication, trust and respect we get? Are we such insecure creatures that our sense of self-esteem requires that we need that trust, communication and respect? Don't get me wrong... there is a part of me which knows that every individual wants to be trusted and respected, and to trust and respect in return. However, why can't we enter a relationship without having to worry about the presence of trust, respect and communication? I can think of one excellent benefit: you won't have to worry about heartbreak, because you are expecting your partner to walk out on you any moment anyway.

Before you think that this is too far-out an idea, just observe the emerging trend of pre-nuptial agreements preceding today's marriages. Having a pre-nuptial agreement is a statement saying, "I don't trust you to keep your end of the bargain if our marriage turns sour. And I don't respect your judgement when it comes to this marriage." And if the marriage does turn sour, both parties can whip out the pre-nuptial agreement and go, "Aha! I KNEW this would happen..." However, I happen to also know of many happy relationships and marriages which go on with both parties essentially leading individual lives, coming together to copulate and cooperate on things which can only be achieved by a couple instead of an individual. And they are happy too. Is that type of relationship any better, or any worse than other kinds?

Question then... Is it then possible to have a happy romantic and physical relationship without communication, mutual trust and mutual respect? Totally dispassionately thinking about it, I actually believe it is possible to have a happy and fulfilling relationship without a high level of trust, respect and communication. Of course a minimum amount must exist, but these do not have to be the "be all and end all" of all relationships. Perhaps it would be more joyful to base a relationship on pure hedonistic fun...

Comments please... I'm still divided over this issue...

I Hope You Dance...

There are times when a song really touches you, gives you a sense of revelation, and makes you want to live your life according to the lyrics. Some of the songs which touched me this way include Love Me by Collin Raye and Somebody by Depache Mode. One of my best friends, Eileen, always told me that the song Somebody ruined my chances to find a life mate, 'cos I'd be hankering after a person that doesn't exist. Haha. Oh well, anyway, here are the lyrics for another song which has touched me on a very metaphysical and visceral level. Presenting Lee Ann Womack's I Hope You Dance...

I hope you never lose your sense of wonder
You get your fill to eat, but always keep that hunger
May you never take one single breath for granted
God forbid love ever leave you empty handed

I hope you still feel small when you stand by the ocean
Whenever one door closes, I hope one more opens
Promise me that you'll give faith a fighting chance
And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance

I hope you dance, I hope you dance

I hope you never fear those mountains in the distance
Never settle for the path of least resistance
Living might mean taking chances, but they're worth taking
Lovin' might be a mistake, but it's worth making

Don't let some hell bent heart leave you bitter
When you come close to selling out, reconsider
Give the heavens above, more than just a passing glance
And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance

I hope you dance (Time is a real and constant motion always)
I hope you dance (Rolling us along)
I hope you dance (Tell me who)
I hope you dance (Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
I hope you dance (Where those years have gone)

I hope you still feel small when you stand by the ocean
Whenever one door closes, I hope one more opens
Promise me you'll give faith a fighting chance
And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance

Dance, I hope you dance
I hope you dance (Time is a real and constant motion always)
I hope you dance (Rolling us along)
I hope you dance (Tell me who)
I hope you dance (Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
I hope you dance (Where those years have gone)

(Tell me who) I hope you dance
(Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
(Where those years have gone)

I'm Not Sure I Want To Be Known As A Singaporean

There are times when I truly marvel at the sheer hypocrisy of the people living on the island nation of Singapore.

True, there are many things which we ought to be proud of. Our logistics service providers rank amongst the best in the world: both SIA Cargo and PSA are world leaders in the air and sea port industries. Our national telecommunications provider, Singtel, has already ventured overseas and is now well represented in the Asia-Pacific region. Neptune-Orient Lines, with the acquisition of American President Lines, is the 6th largest shipping line in the world. We supply over 80% of the world's oil rigs, 70% of the world's bunker and we have the 5th largest national monetary reserves in the world. Yes, Singaporeans have many things to be proud of.

So, since our achievements are so many and our accolades so varied, have we started taking success for granted? Are we so jaded and expectant of success that the moment someone takes a chance to start something new or does something different, we unsheath the claws and draw the parangs? Do we have to shoot down newbies who are simply trying to differentiate themselves?

I never truly realised how critical and unforgiving we Singaporeans were until two relatively recent events brought this attitude to light. And what was the main medium for the bombing? Blogs. Yes, blogs. Unlike printed media, which have centuries of tradition and precedents to fall back on, blogs are essentially unregulated. Deregulation is GOOD. I am all in favour of it. But it is through deregulated media such as blogs that the characters and personalities of the authors are bared for all to see. And looking at all the blog responses which have been lifted out and reported in Today newspaper and The New Paper and even the Life section of The Straits Times, I feel really sad. Sad that we Singaporeans are so unforgiving, so hard to please, and so ready to bring out the rotten eggs and tomatoes. Just take a read about the two events I was referring to...

Carol Cheong, voted and selected from a field of hopefuls, recently represented Singapore in the just-concluded 2006 edition of the Miss Universe pageant. She was representing Singapore for goodness sake! Not apparent to you? How can it not be apparent when she was wearing that satin sash with the words "Singapore" printed boldly in font-size 350? And instead of rallying behind her, showing her our full support as a member of our little red dot, what did bloggers in the blogosphere do? Criticize her evening gown! Grow up people! Here is a lady, barely out of her teens, hefting the super-high expectations of the population of a tiny red dot on her slender shoulders, trying to put on her best face on one of the biggest stages on earth. And what do some of my fellow bloggers do? Call her a slut for the evening gown she wore. Well, to whoever wrote that particular blog, if you think you can do better, why don't you go join Miss Universe? Geez, you might even escape being called a slut!

Then, with our National Day around the corner, our government took the bold step of getting a relative unknown to sing our latest National Day theme song. The newbie in question is another young lady who goes by the name of Kaira Gong. Heard of her? I haven't. But this shouldn't detract from the fact that she did a decent job of singing our latest National Day theme song. And what do my fellow bloggers do? Criticise her for not being a big name. Compare her to past illuminaries such as Tanya Chua et al who have also done their part for the nation. Snub her voice by saying she sounds raw and untrained. People, listen to yourselves! She is there, doing her part for the nation! When called upon, she put on a brave face and sang her heart out for us! You think she doesn't know that she isn't a big name? You think she wasn't assailed by doubts and anxiety when a government rep told her she was going to sing in front of tens of thousands of people? Once again, I throw down the gauntlet to all those bloggers and serial forum-senders: if you think you can do a better job, then go do it! Don't be a keyboard critic! If anything, it just turns the reader's stomachs.

If I sound irritated, it's because I AM! Our football team goes through hell from the media and the populace if they lose a match. Our national representatives go through hell whenever they make a wrong step on a world stage. Our opposition gets questioned by the police for not filling up a form properly. What kind of population, what kind of people are we turning to, when we unleash fire and brimstone on people who have made minor, honest, sincere, and most importantly, non-fatal mistakes?

Let me just para-phrase an oft-quoted line from the Bible, "Stop typing about the toothpick in your neighbour's eye when you're missing the bloody log in your own!"