What Do You Choose To Feel On Your Deathbed?

I watched House again a couple of nights back. Amazing how many of life’s lessons you can sometimes learn from a TV series.

In this episode, Amber was admitted into the hospital in critical condition after a serious road accident, suffering from kidney damage and overdosing on flu medication. In case you didn’t know, the character Amber was a shortlisted candidate for House’s new team of doctors, and then became Wilson’s (House’s best friend) girlfriend. This episode contained “firsts” of many kinds: it was the first time House was treating someone dear to him (or at least someone dear to his best friend); it was the first time House actually put his own life at risk in order to treat a patient; and it was the first time (that I know of) that House’s patient died. But that’s not what I’m writing about. I am writing about one particular line which stuck in my mind after watching the show.

In the deathbed scene, Wilson was lying beside Amber comforting her in her final moments. With tears in his eyes and a voice choked with emotion, Wilson asked Amber, “Why aren’t you angry?” (After all, Amber was in this situation because she went to pick up an inebriated House who was drinking in a seedy pub). Amber’s reply? “I don’t want it to be the last feeling I have before I die...”

Amber’s words, uttered on her deathbed, shows a maturity and a desire to be a better person, even on the brink of death. More than that, it shows the futility of harbouring anger to the exclusion of all other things. Would you want to die angry, resentful and bitter against all that life and fate threw at you? Or, despite life’s random throw of dice, you choose to accept your karma with equilibrium, serenity and yea, even love? I hope I am man enough, mature enough to do the latter.

All emotions out there have a bearing on how we choose to see our circumstances. Many emotions in turn also have a bearing on how we actually run our lives; how much bearing those emotions bring to our actions, boil down to individual willpower and objectivity. When you are happy, the world takes on a rosy tinge. When you are optimistic, the world seems to be your oyster. However, when you are sad, bitter and resentful, it can seem as if the world is forsaking you, and that life is not worth living. My take on this is both exhilarating and depressing... Frankly, the world doesn’t give a shit, and it doesn’t revolve around any one person.

Depressing isn’t it? You aren’t at the centre of the universe after all. But why is it exhilarating? Because it is also liberating: the world may not give a shit about you, but you can change how you see and interact with the world, just by embracing the emotions which can aid you in life. If it were up to me, I would want to go to my deathbed dying with a smile on my face: happy, loving, positive and accepting. I don’t want to die looking ugly by feeling anger, hatred, despair and bitterness. That is not to say I reject anger; like all emotions, the negative emotions (the Jedis call it the Dark Side) all have their place. But to me, they are acquaintances. Just look at them, accept that they are there, and then release them. Negative emotions will never be my bosom buddies and constant companions.

That is what I am striving for...

Oh, Ye Of Little Faith...

Was having my daily cuppa at Coffee Bean when this article in the Straits Times, Home section caught my eye: "Clergy 'wary of inter-faith talks' ", along with its sub-header "Nearly half of Christian leaders fear that such dialogues will compromise their beliefs: Poll". Along with other findings, the poll also showed that Christian leaders feared to collaborate with leaders from other religions due to an "exclusivist" stance.

I'm not a church-goer. In many ways, I am not even what you would call a typical God-fearing Protestant. However, the results of the poll simply reinforces my belief that my conscious decision not to go to church was the right one. How can our religious leaders, supposedly people of high enlightenment and staunch faith, be so wary and reluctant to engage people from other faiths?

Far from compromising their beliefs, constructive dialogue with leaders from other religions ought to have a reinforcing effect on one's faith. To be able to understand in-depth, the beliefs and traditions of other faiths is one very good way to reinforce one's own stance towards his religion. To adopt an exclusivist stance towards other religions is akin to an ostrich hiding its head in the sand: ignoring another religion will not make the religion go away.

Far from reinforcing one's own beliefs, exclusionist attitudes leads to ignorance, division, and eventually strife; consequences which are fundamentally opposing to the tenets of Christianity itself. In the same article, a poll of 2,700 youths, three-quarters of whom held religious beliefs of some sort, found that while they were overall highly tolerant of people of other faiths, this stemmed more from a "let's not talk about it" stance rather than from genuine understanding.

Isn't this the same as just ignoring the issue?

I am proud to say that I have friends from all major religions found in Singapore: Christian, Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim and Hindu, amongst others. In the same breath, I am also ashamed to say that I probably do not know as much about their respective religions as I ought to. However, I will not adopt a "Holier Than Thou" attitude, which the newspaper article is alluding to. This would be the surest way to deepen inter-religious divisions.

To our religious leaders, who have been anointed by divine providence to lead the flock: we need you to be enlightened and understanding, to clear our doubts and to reinforce our beliefs. How are we going to do that if you are going to be ostriches with heads hidden in the sand?

Lee Bee Wah vs Jade Seah

In the context of the Beijing Olympics 2008, Singapore's newspapers were abuzz with the two controversies connected by two main similarities: 1) Both resulted in such uproars that terabytes of information were published on them, both online and in mainstream media, and 2) both had to do with inadequate control over tongues.

When after 48 years, Singapore citizens (never mind if they are born here or not, personally I subscribe to the tenet that Home is where the Heart is...) pull together to bring home the silver medal for the country, this momentous event is unfortunately overshadowed by two personalities who possessed "shoot from the hips" tongues. I am referring of course, to Lee Bee Wah, President of the Singapore Table-Tennis Association (STTA) and Jade Seah, erstwhile main presenter for the highlights for the Beijing Olympics Games Highlights televised live during the two-week period the Olympics was on.

The faux pas which Jade committed was an expletive inadvertently uttered and broadcast to thousands live, when she thought she was offline. The bomb which Lee Ban Wah inadvertently committed was when she shot from the hip and lambasted every STTA official from coach to manager for not having a coach at Gao Ning's side during his third-round match. My grouse is not that these two things happened; rather it is in the media's and Singaporean's reactions to both these controversies.

Don't you find the post-event circus amusing and rather bewildering? I do. But more than that, I find disturbing similarities to how Singaporeans have responded to both these events. Numerous articles for and against, innumerable interviews and countless forum posts, are all taking sides, but disturbingly, passing judgement without due recognition of the context in which these two situations occurred.

Jade Seah's single expletive was born out of frustration, uttered in an environment which she believed was offline, and away from public view. It was an emotional response, only meant to let off personal exasperation, and never meant for public consumption. Most importantly, use of that expletive was never meant to hurt, insult or threaten anyone else. It was muttered "off-stage" as it were, and done without any intent for malice.

Lee Bee Wah's comments however, most notoriously her "heads will roll" comment, was said on-stage, in full view of the public eye, and most importantly, with full knowledge that her statement will be quoted and published. Granted, she was at the Olympics as President of the STTA, and she must be passionate and love the sport she heads. However, let's not forget that also as a Member of Parliament, of all people, she ought to know the ramifications and consequences of shooting her mouth off without due thought for the fallout from the media, the public, and most importantly the morale of the players in her own association. Her comments were personally-directed, and to any person with an iota of intelligence, carried the intent to hurt and to threaten.

The New Paper ran a double-bill pictorial on our table-tennis heroes and heroines returning to Singapore. To know the impact of Lee Bee Wah's words to the public, just look at their expressions caught on camera.

As the discerning public, which would actually be more deserving of our forgiveness? My personal opinion would be Jade Seah, taking into account the context of the situation as well as her personal intent. I would be less forgiving towards our current President of the STTA, for exactly the same reasons.

The comments and observations in this post are strictly of my own opinion, but I also firmly stand by what I said. Our politicians, our Presidents of Sports Associations, ought to know better.

The Resurrection of To Freedom WIth Love

I'm back again. For how long, I know not. Truth be said, if it wasn't for this largely irrational need to post my next post, I probably wouldn't have come back till God knows when... Well, the prodigal son has returned, however temporary that may be...

Pessimism and Misery

Just finished watching the tail end of another episode of House. In case you have no idea what programme that is, just scroll down. Nope, further down; yep, go on; yeah, that's the entry. Amazing what you can learn from TV these days huh?

Anyway, what happened this time around was that Dr House finally managed to win over the woman he loves. And then what does he do? He tells her to stay with her current husband. I mean, DUH??? And it takes the angel doctor of the series to tell House that basically, House loves being miserable. Yes, House doesn't love himself. He respects himself, admires himself, but he doesn't love himself. And so, he also drives away the woman whom he professes to love.

I've never really thought about it that way before; but I have to admit, I see it all around me. Couples in happy relationships and marriages, suddenly breaking apart or divorcing for no rhyme or reason. And why? Simply because one of them doesn't think the relationship is going to last. I mean, of COURSE it ain't gonna last. How can a relationship or a marriage last if one party isn't even going to give it a chance?!

Most of my friends undergoing this extremely painful process have told me their stories. And one of the main issues which starts this whole process off is when one half of the pair undergoes a traumatic episode. It could be the death of a loved one, a lost job, an accident, even the lost of goals in life. That person (doesn't matter if it is the male half or the female half of the relationship), tends to withdraw into himself or herself. Feelings don't seem to matter anymore, and the person begins to question his or her self-worth. And that is when the trouble starts.

Nothing in life seems worth experiencing or working for anymore. The person is directionless, and doesn't know what he or she wants. Nothing seems to excite that person anymore. It is important to realise that this "feeling shut-out" effect is an attempt at self-preservation. If you can't feel anything, you can't be hurt. And coupled with the impression that there is no more direction in life, you have a person who thinks nothing in life is worth working for, and that no one cares for him or her anymore.

What does this mean for the poor partner caught in such a relationship? Helplessness. Since the reason for such trauma obviously has nothing to do with the partner, the other half of the relationship is going to be helpless to drag the afflicted out of such depression. The only way to help is to just be there, not to budge, and be as selfless and supportive as possible. This is obviously very tough to do, because the "living-dead" will do everything in his or her power to push the partner away. The most oft-heard excuse the miserable one will say is that "nothing good ever lasts. I don't believe in good things anymore. Let's just call this marriage/relationship off". Tough.

What has it got to do with House? Well, to all those people who might be reading this post and suffering from the symptoms I've just described, I've got a couple of things I'd like to say, some of which may be hard to read:

1) No one owes you a living, least of all the one who loves and cherishes you the most. So don't go looking for other people to pull you out of your own rut. You gotta do it yourself with your own brute strength.
2) Your partner did nothing wrong. It is not fair to blame your partner for things/events/situations which they had absolutely nothing to do with. So don't go pushing your partner away.
3) Now the good stuff. You've lived this long, you will continue to live longer. True you've just experienced something bad and traumatic. It doesn't mean YOU are bad or useless. You're not. And what doesn't break you will make you stronger. So make sure you don't break.
4) Just because something bad has happened to you, doesn't mean EVERYTHING is bad. There are always silver linings. Go find something else to do. And make sure you drag your partner to do it with you. If your partner truly loves you, he or she will gladly join you.
5) Remember this, "Just because your partner doesn't love you the way you want them to, doesn't mean they doesn't love you with all their heart."

Give those things which aren't broke a chance to succeed. If you give up before the process is over, you will never know how the process will turn out...

Slowdown Culture - An Interesting Reflection

This article has been floating around the net for awhile now. Thank you to Renee who forwarded the article to me...

It's been 18 years since I joined Volvo, a Swedish company.

Working for them has proven to be an interesting experience. Any project here takes 2 years to be finalized, even if the idea is simple and brilliant. It's a rule. Globalised processes have caused in us (all over the world) a general sense of searching for immediate results. Therefore, we have come to possess a need to see immediate results.

This contrasts greatly with the slow movements of the Swedish. They, on the other hand, debate, debate, debate, hold x quantity of meetings and work with a slowdown scheme. At the end, this always yields better results. Said in other words:

1. Sweden is about the size of San Pablo, a state in Brazil.
2. Sweden has 2 million inhabitants.
3. Stockholm, has 500,000 people.
4. Volvo, Escania, Ericsson, Electrolux, Nokia are some of its renowned companies. Volvo supplies the NASA.

The first time I was in Sweden, one of my colleagues picked me up at the hotel every morning. It was September, a bit cold and snowy. We would arrive early at the company and he would park far away from the entrance (2000 employees drive their car to work). The first day, I didn't say anything, nor the second or third. One morning I asked, "Do you have a fixed parking space? I've noticed we park far from the entrance even when there are no other cars in the lot." To which he replied, "Since we're here early we'll have time to walk, and whoever gets in late will be late and need a place closer to the door. Don't you think?" Imagine my face.

Nowadays, there's a movement in Europe name Slow Food. This movement establishes that people should eat and drink slowly, with enough time to taste their food, spend time with the family, friends, without rushing. Slow Food is against its counterpart: the spirit of Fast Food and what it stands for as a lifestyle. Slow Food is the basis for a bigger movement called Slow Europe, as mentioned by Business Week. Basically, the movement questions the sense of "hurry" and "craziness" generated by globalisation, fueled by the desire of "having in quantity" (life status) versus "having with quality", "life quality" or the "quality of being".

French people, even though they work 35 hours per week, are more productive than Americans or British. Germans have established 28.8 hour workweeks and have seen their productivity driven up by 20%. This slow attitude has brought forth the US's attention, pupils of the fast and the "do it now!". This no-rush attitude doesn't represent doing less or having a lower productivity. It means working and doing things with greater quality, productivity, perfection, with attention to detail and less stress. It means reestablishing family values, friends, free and leisure time. Taking the "now", present and concrete, versus the "global", undefined and anonymous. It means taking humans' essential values, the simplicity of living. It stands for a less coercive work environment, more happy, lighter and more productive time where humans enjoy doing what they know best how to do.

It's time to stop and think on how companies need to develop serious quality with no-rush that will increase productivity and the quality of products and services, without losing the essence of spirit.

In the movie, Scent of a Woman, there's a scene where Al Pacino asks a girl to dance and she replies, "I can't, my boyfriend will be here any minute now". To which Al responds, "A life is lived in an instant". Then they dance to a tango.

Many of us live our lives running behind time, but we only reach it when we die of a heart attack or in a car accident rushing to be on time. Others are so anxious of living the future that they forget to live the present, which is the only time that truly exists. We all have equal time throughout the world. No one has more or less. The difference lies in how each one of us does with our time. We need to live each moment. As John Lennon said, "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans".

Congratulations for reading till the end of this message. There are many who will have stopped in the middle so as not to waste time in this globalised world.

Football? Hmmm

I ain't no fan of soccer usually, but for some reason or other, I stayed up to watch Manchester United take on Middlesborough tonight... and after the game, I only have three things to say:

1) Christiano Ronaldo deserves an Oscar.

2) Wayne Rooney is over-hyped.

3) I've fallen in love with Charlotte (Charlie) Webster.

To all my bosses who have spent the last month pestering non-stop about what kind of girl I like, go watch football... LOL...

She Judges Me, She Judges Me Not

To all the girls who judge me before they know me:

At work or at play, I ran into you
You smiled at me, my life started anew
We started chatting, we shared ourselves
We got along, like sleighs and bells

Then we delved deeper, habits came out
What I thought was victory, became a rout
I was open, but you became closed
You saw right through me, like I was a ghost

Yes I like to smoke, and I like to drink
But that doesn't mean, I don't really think
Your habits don't affect, what I think of you
Like when you pick your nose, when you go Ah-choo!

I may live in poverty, I may be short
I may be stocky but, I chose these not
I live the life I choose, that's my way
But before you walk off, please let me say

My habits don't affect, what I feel for you
My face like lorry langar, but my heart is true
Things on my surface, like habits and looks
Are part yet apart, like covers to books

I'll make the effort, to know you well
To know your needs, before you tell
To make you smile, to make you laugh
To share with you, all my stuff

So see my actions, and hear my speech
Feel the truth in me, this I beseech
And when I know, I have your love
I'll release to the heavens, a single dove

If you ask me now, my habits to quit
If you frown and pout, when my ciggie is lit
Then maybe just maybe, you're not the one
To journey with me, from two to become one

But if you can look, beyond the pale
Into my deepest soul, and see wind from sail
Then for you, only you, I will change
All that you dislike, in depth and in range

Unreserved acceptance, that's all I ask
Is that really such, an enormous task?
When I see you I feel, I've unearthed a gem
I am yours if, you accept me as I am...

When Heartbreak Cannot Be Shared

A fictitious entry from a fictitious blog kept by a fictitious person:

It was not too long ago when I attended the wedding of one of my dearest colleagues and truest friends. It was a small wedding as weddings in our country go. No more than 130 people attended, mostly extended family members and close friends of the newlyweds. Like most other weddings in our fair country, the wedding was held at a swanky hotel complete with all the suitable accoutrements.

I was with the groom since the beginning of the day. I was to be the band of brothers who would help to barge into the bride's patriarchal house, ably defended by the bride's gaggle of sisters. The day proceeded smoothly and with much hilarity. Amongst the sisters was one whom I had once professed my love to, but who had eventually walked out of my life. That was a time long ago, in a place not so far away. Through the proceedings though, I was able to keep a smile on my face, be jovial and moreover be determined that this be the best day of my buddy's life.

Throughout the afternoon and into the early evening, prior to the banquet, the band of brothers were kept busy helping to tie up loose ends, and make final arrangements for the big dinner. Nonetheless, I had to admit, it was one of the best times of my life, and one which I would not easily forget. Someone whom I counted as a bosom friend and treasured comrade was finally getting married, and if I could play but a tiny part in making his day all the more memorable, then I would pull out all the stops in making it happen.

And so it was, tired, bedraggled, but more than a little ecstatic, that all the outstanding arrangements were finally made, and the wedding could proceed. A wave of weariness washed over me momentarily, and it was all I could do to stagger to my designated table and take the first empty seat I came to. Coincidentally (or perhaps it was my sub-conscious mind at work), it was also the seat beside the "sister" I once gave my heart to so long ago. And that was when I could only pause in shock when eight voices around that same table chorused that the seat I was about to plonk myself into was reserved for a special someone; a someone purported to be the current partner of the lady I used to love.

Except that I wasn't sure if even now, I was not in love with her.

It was all I could do to smile in what I hoped was a suitably sheepish smile, and then shift to the only other available seat at the table. And after that, for the next ten minutes, it was all I could do not to walk out of the banquet hall. For at the moment, I felt that I wanted nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the people seated around the table. With that one chorused teasing statement, the gashes in my heart, the scars which never truly healed, were once again torn asunder, like so many rice-paper tatamis caught in a gale. I wanted to lash out at something, anything. I wanted to bawl my lungs out. I wanted to scream and yell. And I wanted to cry.

I did none of those things of course. It was my buddy's wedding.

It took me a while to recover my equilibrium. Those people seated at that table, I counted some of them as my dearest friends and colleagues too. And they did not know the story I shared with the lady I was about to sit beside. They were never at fault. It was a happy occasion for all, and they were indulging in good-natured teasing. It was just my fevered imagination, inferring meaning and undertones when there was none. So why the fuck did it hurt so bad?

I took refuge by running around like a mad dog. Did not want to stay at the table for a moment more than was necessary. It helped that I was helping to coordinate both the sequence of the wedding and the beverage aspect. It gave me ready-made reasons not to stay at my seat. It took until almost the fifth dish of the nine-course dinner before I was able to compose myself sufficiently to make small-talk with the rest of my table companions.

Now, a couple of days after the event, I've realised a few things. For one, I do not harbour any ill-will towards any of my dinner companions; I count most of them as my close friends and the rest as treasured colleagues at the very least. They did not know any part of that portion of my history. They did not say what they said out of malice. Even the guy whom the seat was supposedly reserved for, I cannot dislike, for he is an upright and responsible man, who, I have to say, would make a competent life-partner for my past paramour.

But then, I've also realised that I still harbour deep feelings for that lady seated three places away from me that night. Is it love? I have no idea, for it has been such a long time since I've dusted off those feelings and brought them out into the sunlight. That night thought, it was driven into me like a silver stake, that I have those feelings still, and may yet have those feelings for her for long long time.

I can only wish her the same thing I've sincerely wished my two newlywed friends: Live a long, fruitful and happy life, and may your special someone, present or future, give you the happiness you deserve.

Ed: This is one of the rare posts from someone else whom I've been able to really identify with. I hope the writer of the post above can soon recover from his hurt, and find happiness whether with the girl he wrote about in his blog, or with someone new.

What I Want In A Mate...

I'm going to bare my soul. I mean it! I really am! And don't you dare laugh! 'Cos if you do, I... I... I... I won't friend you anymore! Nyah Nyah Nyah! So there!

Geez... I rue the day I ever decided to write on this topic. But having thought about the topic, I really couldn't get it out of my mind... couldn't get it off my chest. So, die die must write lah! Tamade.

Why this all started is because within the space of 96 hours (4 days, for the mathematically-challenged people out there), I had 6 people say that the prime reason why I'm as near to getting married now as the day I was born is because *gasp* I'm picky. No, I'm not! Not picky at all! Well, ok... maybe just a little. But hey, better to be picky now than to regret for the rest of my life right? And that of course got me thinking, what am I picky about? So, *gulp* here goes. The wish list for my (Edwin Seah Ek Chuan's) ideal mate...

1. Must be a female. (duh!). I am not gay, never was, never will be. I revel in my heterosexuality. So there!

2. Must not have been a male before being a female. Not as funny as it sounds ok?. While I am totally not prejudiced against transexuals, I DO want to have kids in future. If for no other reason than to ruin their future.

Ok... Now that I got the above two points out of the way, guess I've gotta go to slightly more serious stuff about what I'd like in my future mate... *very deep breath* Well, here goes...

3. I must be able to wake up every day beside her, and not tire of seeing her. She doesn't need to be some great beauty. In mandarin, kan de shun yan can already.

4. Since we're on the subject of an ideal mate though, I'm a sucker for straight hair, round eyes, heart-shaped faces, and dimples. Just thought you'd like to know...

5. Caveat, this point is about what I don't mind. I don't mind anyone of any height. Really. I also don't mind her being underweight or in the healthy BMI. I don't even mind if her BMI is between 25-28. But anything more than that is a no-no. I do maintain my weight. So should she.

'Nuff about looks then... Let's get to the inside stuff...

6. She must be all woman. And by that I mean she ought not to be a tomboy. Of course I don't want a lady who screams and leaps for the nearest chair at the sight of a spider, but I'd like a lady who is totally in touch with her femininity.

7. Comfortable with herself. She must be able to look straight in the mirror and like what she sees, both on the inside and the outside. This translates to confidence in herself, in her abilities, in her future. No wallflowers for me please.

8. Intelligent and erudite. She must be able to express herself well, and not be afraid of telling me what she wants out of me and out of life. I do not want to be married to a cave-woman. If I just wanted a rut in the hay, I might as well pay for it. I don't care if she is more highly-educated than I am. I think I can keep up. *puffs chest up*

9. Sense of humour. Need I say more? This I think is on the wish list of practically every unattached person, male or female. But most importantly, the sense of humour ought to gel with mine. No jokes which fall flatter than yesterday's bubble-gum please...

10. Courtesy and consideration. If a person is naturally courteous, it says a lot about her consideration for others. I will not stop treating her like the lady she is, and I hope she will not stop treating me like the gent I hope to be.

11. Open and liberal. I have my own views on how the world works, and quite a fair bit can be a little at odds with society at large. I don't expect her to pander to my every opinion, but she ought to be open-minded enough to accept things which are unfamiliar to her.

12. Self-control. Don't get me wrong. I like being whimsical at times. And I like it in a lady too. But this ought not detract that as individuals and as a couple, we should comport ourselves as the situation demands. And that boils down to self-control: comporting ourselves suitably at the right time for the right occasion.

And on to the final segment... How we will treat each other...

13. She'll be my partner. I can't stand being led, and I don't intend to marry a groupie. I want a life partner... Someone who will stand by my side through thick and thin.

14. We'll share. We'll both take responsibility of our household. I don't want to spend my life quibbling about money or parents or other responsibilities. Both of us must be able to step up to the base in good times and in bad.

15. We will grow together. I don't want to be caught in a stagnant relationship. We can go for courses together, renew our vows every 5 years, whatever. Just don't let us be stagnant.

16. Don't try to change me. Because I won't try to change her. Check the sidebar on the right. I drink and smoke. I may give both up for the woman I love, but I will never do so if she is going to nag me to death about it.

Yeah I know 16 is a very funny number to stop at, but I think I've just about covered everything. Reading back, I guess I am a little picky hor? But... yeah... oh well... Sheesh, load of my chest! *silly grinz* Oh and if you are going to leave a comment about my criteria being a tad too unrealistic (ok ok, out-of-this-world unrealistic), well, I did say "ideal" right? Haha. Maybe my next entry will be on what I am willing to compromise on... Hmmm...

The Practicality of Altruism

I went to watch a play a couple of weeks ago. It was a play in Mandarin entitled Trash. Yeah. Mandarin. Haha. For all of you who think I only eat potatoes (I happen to like rice and noodles too), nyah nyah nyah. Ahem. Sorry. Anyway, the play (like most locally written plays) is a parody making a statement about the three sociological circles of Singapore society vis-a-vis: the civic circle, the civil circle and the commercial circle (how's that for alliteration!). The play talks about a fictitious country (they always are fictitious aren't they?) in the future, where the country aims to be the first in everything, and where everything is so regulated you'd need a permit to get pregnant (I kid you not!).

The play of course makes a very strong statement against over-regulation. And yes, I do have to agree with its basic premise. However, within the play, there was also a superhero character, who wanted to bring utopia to earth, where everyone was considered equal and everyone would receive his fair share.

Which begs the question: how fair is fair?

Is the amount Bill Gates earns every hour fair? Or must Bill, despite his absolute genius in computers, share his immense wealth with everyone around the world? Should our ministers, whose salaries are currently pegged at the top 5% of the CEOs in the country, tithe 95% of their pay to us poor church mice? Should the archbishop of Singapore, who earns almost as much as our ministers, do the same? I guess the answer, tempting as it may be to say the opposite, is no.

No matter how much we say we are all equal, there is and always will exist inequality amongst humans. We used to be differentiated by race. Now we are differentiated by religion. My ideal is when we are differentiated by ability, and only ability. It is the ability to adapt, to survive and to rise to the top of the heap that will garner us our rewards. If we were to be socialist or communist in nature, have equal distribution, steal from the justly rich to give to the justly poor, then a spirit of disillusionment and listlessness will set in.

It is for that reason that discrimination and elitism must survive. Not in terms of race, or religion, or nationality or accident of birth, or language or region or any other surface characteristic. Discrimination and elitism must arise from one's abilities, and the desire and wherewithal to rise to the top of the heap in as honourable and as honest a manner as possible. We must rise on the shoulders of talent which we recognise and bring with us. And yes, we must discriminate and be biased against those who refuse to stand on their own two feet.

When you see a beggar, before giving him your twenty cents, observe him. Is he able? Is he willing and has a desire to improve his lot? If he is, then let him be part of your enterprise. But if he begs as a choice, because he believes in free handouts, then deride him; for society has no place for garbage such as he.

Such is the practicality of altrusim. Help only those who are willing to rise above their lot.

Is Marriage Necessary?

I have a couple of friends on the verge of getting a divorce. Mutual friends are horrified. They say, shouldn't marriage be forever? If you find that you aren't suitable for each other, why get married in the first place? Isn't marriage a commitment to each other? To stay by each other's side, through thick and thin, the bad and the good, and love each other, till death do they part?

My reply to those friends have always been: yes and no.

Blame it on the sociological training I've had. But I firmly stand by the opinion that marriage is an institution. It is a social construct. In other words, it was invented by mankind and is now so intrinsically embedded in almost every society in the world, it becomes a necessity to many people. Sort of like the concept of money.

When I say this, people who are listening look at me in pure horror as if I were a square egg or The Rock wearing a tutu. I tell them they have mixed up the concept of marriage with the concept of love. They tell me the two ought to go hand in hand. I tell them two things which go hand in hand means they are inter-dependent. However, for love and marriage, they are NOT inter-dependent, no matter how much we idealists wish it to be.

Let me explain.

Love between two people is a wonderful thing. You care for each other, show concern for each other, look out for one another, think about the future with each other... Basically both lives are intertwined. In the immortal words from Moulin Rouge, love is a many-splendoured thing, love lifts us up where we belong, all we need is love. Romantic that I am, I agree! Marriage on the other hand... People have many reasons for getting married: to get permanent residency, to get money, to get a flat, and of course sometimes, because they are actually in love.

When two people stand at the altar and recite their vows of marriage, it can sometimes be difficult to tell if they are meaning what they say. For society, marriage as a social construct serves many functions, not the least of which pertains to individual social responsibility. Should you marry, and then divorce, (both of which coincidentally has to do with signing reams and reams of paper), the richer party is legally held responsible for the upkeep of the poor ex-partner. When two people get married and have offspring, the parents are legally held responsible for the upkeep and upbringing of their scions. In Singapore, you cannot buy a flat for yourself before the age of 35 unless you're married (one of my favourite grouses).

But look at all the above: do any of those social and legal restrictions have got to do with two individual's heartfelt commitment to spend the rest of their lives together? I think not. Some of my friends view marriage as the commitment to spending their lives together. I say that the true commitment is in the heart, and there is no need for marriage to be the affirmation of that commitment. Some of my friends say that two people cannot be seen as truly together unless they are married. I say this only shows too much faith in the symbolism of a piece of paper. My friends who are thinking of getting a divorce say that the marriage has broken down. I say it is the love between the couple which has broken down.

I am willing to fall in love and be with a woman who can do the same to me. If she is marriage-phobic, then so be it; as long as there is the heartfelt and sincere commitment to make a relationship work, marriage is superfluous.

Then again... It'll be nice to have a flat...

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!"

Screw Those Long Hours!

Have to thank one of my colleagues for sending me this. Wish I could send it to my bosses on behalf of all those non-shift dudes and dudettes who seem to always work 12-hour day shifts every weekday. You think you're being productive? THINK AGAIN!

Why We Should Go Home On Time.....

Mr. Narayana Murthy is undoubtedly one of the most famous persons from Karnataka. He is known not just for building the biggest IT Empire in India but also for his simplicity. Almost every important dignitary visits InfoSys campus. He delivered an interesting speech during an employee session with another IT company in India. He is incidentally, one of the top 50 influential people of Asia according to an Asiaweek publication and also the new IT Advisor to the Thailand Prime Minister.

Extract of Mr. Narayana Murthy's Speech during Mentor Session:

I know people who work 12 hours a day, six days a week, or more. Some people do so because of a work emergency where the long hours are only temporary. Other people I know have put in these hours for years. I do not know if they are working all these hours, but I do know they are in the office this long. Others put in long office hours because they are addicted to the workplace.

Whatever the reason for putting in overtime, working long hours over the long term is harmful to the person and to the organization. There are things managers can do to change this for everyone's benefit. Being in the office long hours, over long periods of time, makes way for potential errors.

My colleagues who are in the office long hours frequently make mistakes caused by fatigue. Correcting these mistakes requires their time as well as the time and energy of others. I have seen people work Tuesday through Friday to correct mistakes made after 5 PM on Monday.

Another problem is that people who are in the office long hours are not pleasant company. They often complain about other people (who are not working as hard); they are irritable, or cranky, or even angry. Other people avoid them. Such behaviour poses problems, where work goes much better when people work together instead of avoiding one another.

As Managers, there are things we can do to help people leave the office. First and foremost is to set the example and go home ourselves. I work with a manager who chides people for working long hours. His words quickly lose their meaning when he sends these chiding group e-mails with a time-stamp of 2 AM, Sunday.

Second is to encourage people to put some balance in their lives. For instance, here is a guideline I find helpful:
1) Wake up, eat a good breakfast, and go to work.
2) Work hard and smart for eight or nine hours.
3) Go home.
4) Read the books/comics, watch a funny movie, dig in the dirt, play with your kids, etc.
5) Eat well and sleep well. This is called recreating.

Doing steps 1, 3, 4, and 5 enable step 2. Working regular hours and recreating daily are simple concepts. They are hard for some of us because that requires 'personal change'. They are possible since we all have the power to choose to do them.

In considering the issue of overtime, I am reminded of my oldest son. When he was a toddler, if people were visiting the apartment, he would not fall asleep no matter how long the visit was, and no matter what time of day it was. He would fight off sleep until the visitors left. It was as if he was afraid that he would miss some thing. Once our visitors' left, he would go to sleep. By this time, however, he was over-tired and would scream through half the night with nightmares. He, my wife, and I, all paid the price for his fear of missing out.

Perhaps some people put in such long hours because they do not want to miss anything when they leave the office. The trouble with this is that events will never stop happening. That is life! Things happen 24 hours a day. Allowing for little rest is not ultimately practical. So, take a nap. Things will happen while you are asleep, but you will have the energy to catch up when you wake. Hence,

"LOVE YOUR JOB, BUT NEVER FALL IN LOVE WITH YOUR COMPANY BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN THE COMPANY STOPS LOVING YOU" - Narayana Murthy -

Integrity versus Honour

As it so often does, writing the previous post prompted me to think about other aspects of integrity. By and large, when I was writing the previous post, I must have at some point confused the concept of integrity with the concept of honour. Then again, I never really did think about the difference until I wrote that last post. Ahem . Anyway, really thinking about it made me realise that, to me at least, there is a difference between integrity and honour.

Growing up on a steady diet of novels about King Arthur's court, old HKTVB's wuxia drama serials and movies like Star Wars taught me a lot about what it means to be an honourable person. Under no circumstances do you betray a person you care about, or a cause you deeply believe in, or break a promise. In the age-old formula of good versus bad, the good guys are always ready to make a last stand for what they believe in, or for someone they love, while the bad guys will always backstab their comrades or turn tail and run. To be honourable was also to fulfil one's duty, no matter how onerous, to remain loyal and to stand firm for the group. Most times, to be honourable was to reflect integrity of spirit and personality.

As I grew a little older, and my morals (what ever little I currently have...) began to take shape, I began to learn also about integrity. To me, integrity was to stay true to one's principles, and to maintain a clear conscience. To have integrity in effect is to have honour to oneself, to be loyal and not betray one's conscience. Sounds very high-sounding, but we all do it everyday. We make choices based on one's principles, and when we have to compromise, we do not feel good inside. The extent and frequency with which we are willing to betray our principles (and yes, most of us do betray our principles at least a couple of times a day) is the inverse of the level of our integrity.

Integrity and honour therefore, while extremely inter-related, must be viewed as two separate and distinct entities. And most of the time, while the two go hand in hand, there are occasions where satisfying the one involves sacrificing the other. I was reminded again of this just recently, when I was called upon to explain the actions of one of my subordinates. He wasn't in the wrong. He did what was usually accepted at my workplace. But recently our upper management has been clamping down on certain internal practices which may reflect dirty spots instead of a pristine white, and therefore I was called to task to explain his actions. And in order to explain his actions, it necessitated me to shoulder part of the blame, although it was a) none of my business because the instruction to do what he did never came from me, and b) whatever he did was originally long accepted and never questioned before.

While my sense of integrity (what's left of it anyway) rebelled at what I needed to do, I knew the choice for me was clear. I had to take care of my man. And so I cooked up some cock-and-bull story about the current circumstances necessitating his actions and that I gave him the go-ahead. Throughout the entire explanation, bile was rising up my throat, and I really didn't like myself for what I was doing. But I was also imagining the look my subordinate would have given me should I not lift a finger in his defence.

I learnt something fundamental about myself that day. If I had to make a choice between integrity and honour, I would in all likelihood choose honour, unless of course I feel that whoever or whatever I'm defending deserved what they're getting. If there was ever a gray area, I would stand beside honour over integrity anytime.

Let's just hope the times when I have to make such choices are few and far between...

When Prejudice Overides Integrity

When I was studying psychology and sociology in university, there were a couple of modules on both stereotyping and deviancy. The premise for stereotyping is that these days, there are so many specialisations in terms of occupations, culture and religious beliefs that the average human brain is unable to assimilate all aspects of every individual one meets. The solution is to accord to each new acquaintance characteristics of a particular stereotype that one perceives that new acquaintance to belong to. The most common by far is that of race and nationality. Just for example, if one is perceived to belong to Arab-Middle Eastern descent, a whole host of associated perceived steoreotypes of that person may flood the perception of an average Caucasian. In fact, the statement I just made is in itself an exercise in stereotyping. In actuality, the only fair way is to perceive every new person we meet as a complete and unique individual in his or her own right.

The problem with stereotyping is that by definition, it breeds prejudice. Even before actually knowing a new acquaintance for who he or she is, by stereotyping that individual, we are already building a base of biasness against that individual. And when that biasness is translated into action, prejudice is the result. Here in Singapore, we tend to view many workers from other countries as being of a lower social status than we are: Chinese nationals, Indian nationals and even Thai and Filipino nationals are looked upon as not being of equal status as Singaporeans; which makes for a rather sad state of affairs.

The recent case on the murder of a Chinese female national in a heartland massage parlour brought my thoughts sharply into focus. Whispers and common gossip on the ground agreed that she had it coming to her. Working in a lower-end massage parlour (not spa, mind you) denotes the presence of certain sleazy and dodgy activities which concludes the average massage session. In effect, there is a perception that many massage parlours in Singapore are just fronts for places which offer sexual services.

To put things sharply into perspective, we need only think deeply into the motives which drive young women to uproot themselves away from their families to travel thousands of kilometres to a little red dot in South East Asia. It is so easy to say that they are doing it for money. But think further. What drives them to sever family ties? To travel alone and without the security of friends? To stake their future in a career as uncertain as a masseuse? To risk being ridiculed and stared at? To leave everything they hold dear for the hope, not the promise, just the hope, of something better? Bar none, every one of those young women are protagonists in a life story which can break even the stoniest of hearts.

And yet, as a nation, as a people, we stare and point fingers and walk pass them with our noses in the air and even in extremes, commit bodily harm on them. They don't deserve such treatment from us. If it weren't for circumstances, they would not even have ventured so far abroad to seek their fortune. They are also here to eke out a living the best they can, and all because the Singaporean currency is, for the present, stronger than the Chinese yuan. At least they eke out their living with quiet dignity and integrity.

What dignity and integrity is there in being a masseuse, you ask? Or for that matter, what dignity and integrity is there in being a bar-top dancer, or a prostitute, or a social escort? All these are occupations which are perceived by the public to be depraved and without morals. But I would like to ask this question: Wherein lies the dignity and integrity of being born with a golden spoon in one's mouth? In marrying rich and becoming a socialite? In sponging off the work of others? I believe the average hooker in Geylang possesses more integrity of spirit than any woman whose overiding aim in life is to marry rich and idle for the rest of her days.

Walk into a bar in Orchard Towers. You get approached by a girl. She is beautiful, and her intentions are obvious. She wants you to take her out for a short time. And she will charge a fee for that time. And she promises to make you happy. Therein likes the dignity and integrity of behaviour. She is willing to serve if you are willing to pay. It is the honouring and fulfillment of a verbal contract to the best of both parties' abilities. On the other hand, walk into a posh establishment. A girl comes up to you. She smiles at you, and asks you for a drink. Dazzled by her, you buy her a drink. She starts making small-talk and then eventually asks for another drink. And another, and another. As the night wears on, your hopes raise. But at the end of the night, she waves goodbye and leaves without a backward glance.

If you say the second girl has more dignity and integrity than the first, then I implore you to look closely at the principles which compelled you to that view. If the behaviour of those girls were translated into business practices, you would know what I meant. Which would you rather do business with? The business which is upfront and honest with you? Or the business which leads you on, siphons your money, and then leaves you high and dry?

Please, don't let prejudice cloud how you see someone. You may not approve of their actions, but behind many pretty faces, lies stories that may break your heart, and a character which may possess more dignity and integrity than many of us...

The religion of rationality

Let me say this upfront and at the start of this entry. I am reproducing the following passage from Angels & Demons by Dan Brown. Despite it being a speech by the arch-villain of the novel, the speech itself and the implications and ramifications it contains struck a deep chord in me. It is for this reason that I am faithfully reproducing the passage. It is a tribute, as it were, to Dan Brown. So many critics of popular fiction forget that, appealing to the masses requires good writing too...

"To the Illuminati, and to those of science, let me say this. You have won the war.

"The wheels have been in motion for a long time. Your victory has been inevitable. Never before has it been as obvious as it is at this moment. Science is the new God.

"Medicine, electronic communications, space travel, genetic manipulation... these are the miracles about which we now tell our children. These are the miracles we herald as proof that science will bring us the answers. The ancient stories of immaculate conceptions, burning bushes, and parting seas are no longer relevant. God has become obsolete. Science has won the battle. We concede.

"But science's victory has cost every one of us. And it has cost us deeply.

"Science may have alleviated the miseries of disease and drudgery and provided an array of gadgetry for our entertainment and convenience, but it has left us in a world without wonder. Our sunsets have been reduced to wavelengths and frequencies. The complexities of the universe have been shredded into mathematical equations. Even our self-worth as human beings has been destroyed. Science proclaims that Planet Earth and its inhabitants are a meaningless speck in the grand scheme. A cosmic accident. Even the technology that promises to unite us, divides us. Each of us is now electronically connected to the globe, and yet we feel utterly alone. We are bombarded with violence, division, fracture, and betrayal. Skepticism has become a virtue. Cynicism and demand for proof has become enlightened thought. Is it any wonder that humans now feel more depressed and defeated than they have at any point in human history? Does science hold anything sacred? Science looks for answers by probing our unborn foetuses. Science even presumes to rearrange our own DNA. It shatters God's world into smaller and smaller pieces in quest of meaning... and all it finds is more questions.

"The ancient war between science and religion is over. You have won. But you have not won fairly. You have not won by providing answers. You have won by so radically reorienting our society that the truths we once saw as signposts now seem inapplicable. Religion cannot keep up. Scientific growth is exponential. It feeds on itself like a virus. Every new breakthrough opens doors for new breakthroughs. Mankind took thousands of years to progress from the wheel to the car. Yet only decades from the car into space. Now we measure scientific progress in weeks. We are spinning out of control. The rift between us grows deeper and deeper, and as religion is left behind, people find themselves in a spiritual void. We cry out for meaning. And believe me, we do cry out. We see UFOs, engage in channeling, spirit contact, out-of-body experiences, mindquests - all these eccentric ideas have a scientific veneer, but they are unashamedly irrational. They are the desperate cry of the modern soul, lonely and tormented, crippled by its own enlightenment and its inability to accept meaning in anything removed from technology.

"Science, you say, will save us. Science, I say, has destroyed us. Since the days of Galileo, the church has tried to slow the relentless march of science, sometimes with misguided means, but always with benevolent intention. Even so, the temptations are too great for man to resist. I warn you, look around yourselves. The promises of science have not been kept. Promises of efficiency and simplicity have bred nothing but pollution and chaos. We are a fractured and frantic species... moving down a path of destruction.

"Who is this God science? Who is the God who offers his people power but no moral framework to tell you how to use that power? What kind of God gives a child fire but does not warn the child of its dangers? The language of science comes with no signposts about good and bad. Science textbooks tell us how to create a nuclear reaction, and yet they contain no chapter asking us if it is a good or a bad idea.

"To science, I say this. The church is tired. We are exhausted from trying to be your signposts. Our resources are drying up from our campaign to be the voice of balance as you plow blindly on in your quest for smaller chips and larger profits. We ask not why you will not govern yourselves, but how can you? Your world moves so fast that if you stop even for an instant to consider the implications of your actions, someone more efficient will whip past you in a blur. So you move on. You proliferate weapons of mass destruction, but it is the Pope who travels the world beseeching leaders to use restraint. You clone living creatures, but it is the church reminding us to consider the moral implications of our actions. You encourage people to interact on phones, video screens, and computers, but it is the church who opens its doors and reminds us to commune in person as we were meant to do. You even murder unborn babies in the name of research that will save lives. Again, it is the church who points out the fallacy of this reasoning.

"And all the while, you proclaim the church is ignorant. But who is more ignorant? The man who cannot define lightning, or the man who does not respect its awesome power? This church is reaching out to you. Reaching out to everyone. And yet the more we reach, the more you push us away. Show me proof there is a God, you say. I say use your telescopes to look to the heavens, and tell me how there could not be a God! You ask what does God look like. I say, where did that question come from? The answers are one and the same. Do you not see God in your science? How can you miss Him! You proclaim that even the slightest change in the force of gravity or the weight of an atom would have rendered our universe a lifeless mist rather than our magnificent sea of heavenly bodies, and yet you fail to see God's hand in this? Is it really so much easier to believe that we simply chose the right card from a deck of billions? Have we become so spiritually bankrupt that we would rather believe in mathematical impossibility than in a power greater than us?

"Whether or not you believe in God, you must believe this. When we as a species abandon our trust in the power greater than us, we abandon our sense of accountability. Faith... all faiths... are admonitions that there is something we cannot understand, something to which we are accountable... With faith we are accountable to each other, to ourselves, and to a higher truth. Religion is flawed, but only because man is flawed. If the outside world could see this church as I do... looking beyond the ritual of these walls... they would see a modern miracle... a brotherhood of imperfect, simple souls wanting only to be a voice of compassion in a world spinning out of control.

"Are we obsolete? Are these men dinosaurs? Am I? Does the world really need a voice for the poor, the weak, the oppressed, the unborn child? Do we really need souls like these who, though imperfect, spend their lives imploring each of us to read the signposts of morality and not lose our way?

"Tonight we are perched on a precipice. None of us can afford to be apathetic. Whether you see this evil as Satan, corruption, or immorality... the dark force is alive and growing every day. Do not ignore it. The force, though mighty, is not invincible. Goodness can prevail. Listen to your hearts. Listen to God. Together we can step back from this abyss.

"Pray with me."

Respect, or the lack thereof...

Respect is a funny thing. The people who have it the most are usually also the ones who ask for it the least. Conversely of course, the ones who demand it the most are usually the ones who least deserve it. As far as I can see, there are 3 main types of respect. There is respect for a person whom you feel respect for as a person (wow, what a tongue-twister), then there is respect for a person due to his appointment, and finally, there is the respect for a person due to his reputation. More often than not, the respect we feel for a person consists of a mixture of some or all of the above.

Let's elaborate a little more. I have respect for some of my peers because I have seen them at work or at play. I see how they think, how they respond to various conundrums and situations, and I admire them for their thought processes and paradigms. It becomes a learning experience for me to be able to follow how they think, or failing that, to at least emulate their actions and then think through their motivations for their actions. The more I feel their thought processes and actions make sense, or reflects integrity, or results in desirable consequences, the more I respect them. This is respect for a person for his sake.

Then there is respect for a person due to his appointment. This is an increasing phenomenon in today's increasingly capitalistic world *wry grinz*. So you have all those high and mighty managers in huge mega-corporations expecting that you'd afford them the necessary ass-kissing respect just because they are high and mighty managers in huge mega-corporations. Deja vu, no? Don't get me wrong, I do have respect for a lot of my managers where I work, but that's because I respect them as people of integrity who are knowledgeable go-getters. But, there are also managers who expect respect without even lifting their pudgy arses out of their oversized chairs. Those, I won't even bother giving the time of the day to.

Then there is the third type of respect we usually reserve for pop idols, the Pope and Lee Kwan Yew. These people are given respect by us because of their achievements and their public behaviour. Indirectly, there is also respect by proxy: if a friend you vastly respect has a mentor he speaks glowingly of, then even though you may not have met this mentor, you'd already have some modicum of respect for him. Or, say you really like my blog and totally agree with my views, and are totally enamoured by the clear and concise way I put my thoughts across. You'd respect me because of my blog even though you've never met me before! (LOL, is that total self-promotion or WHAT! hahaha)

What is the point of this long and rambling discourse on respect? Well, I happen to think that the respect least deserving of being given is the type of respect that is expected from me just because that person happens to be my superior. Now there are two managers in my work place who happen to fall into that category, and let me tell you, the feeling sucks big time. To these two managers, all I can say is, don't presume to tell me how to do my work, especially when you are unwilling, or unable, to provide me with the necessary guidance in order to demonstrate to me how to do my work. You want my respect? Earn it. Don't tell me to accord you respect just because of your position.

And to any other person who happen to stumble onto my humble blog, remember that you don't get respect just by expecting it. It doesn't matter if you want respect with regards to your position, or in a relationship, or in the workplace, or as head of the family, or as a leader of a group or organisation. Respect, true respect from the heart, can only be earned and freely given. It cannot be demanded from, or expected. Staying true to yourself is laudable and a virtue, but to go one step further, stay true to the people who are close to you, who depend on you, or who look up to you.

I'm back...

It's been nine long months since I wrote something... I must be the laziest blogger around... sigh... oh well...

Anyway, I'm back :)

The Mystery of W.C.

When I was in Shanghai recently, I (and all my touring friends) realised that in China, they called their toilets W.C. It is a common enough acronym that is even used in Singapore occasionally. We were stumped though when an eleven year-old girl who was also on the tour asked us innocently: what does W.C. stand for? I was stumped too. So back here in Singapore, I decided to do a search on the web, and voila! It stands for... well, read the following hilarious anecdote found freely on the web...

A British lady, while visiting Switzerland was looking for a room and she asked the local post master if he could recommend any. He helped her to see several rooms and when everything was settled the lady returned to England to make final preparation for the move.

When she arrived home, the thought suddenly occurred to her that she had seen no W.C (which is short for Water Closet, or a toilet) around the place. So she immediately wrote to the post master asking him if there was a "W.C" over there. The postmaster was very weak in English, so he asked the local priest if he could help in the matter. Together they tried to discover the meaning of the letters "W.C" and the only solution they could find for the letters was "Wayside Chapel", the local church. The post master then wrote the following note to the English lady seeking a W.C with her room.

Dear Madam:
I take great comfort in informing you that the "W.C" is situated nine miles from the house in the center of a lovely grove of trees, surrounded by lonely grounds. It is capable of holding 229 people and is open on Sunday and Thursday only. As there are a great many people expected during the summer months, I would suggest you come early, although there is usually plenty of standing room. This is an unfortunate situation especially if you are in the habit of going regularly. You will no doubt be glad to learn that a good number bring their lunch and make a day of it, while others who can afford to come by car, arrive just in time. I specially advise your ladyship to go on Thursday, when there is also an organ playing. The acoustics and sound effects are excellent and even the most delicate sound can be heard by all.
It may interest you to know that my daughter was married in the "W.C" and it was there that she met her husband. I can remember the rush there was for seats, there were ten people to a seat, usually occupied by one and it was wonderful to see the expressions on their faces. The newest attraction is a bell, donated by a wealthy resident of the district. It rings everytime a person enters.
A bazaar is to be held to provide plush seats for all since the people believe that it is a long felt need. My wife is rather delicate, so she cannot go regularly. It is almost a month since she went last. Naturally it pains her very much not to be able to go more often. I shall be delighted to reserve the best seat for you if you wish, where you may be seen by all. Of course the children go at a separate time, so as not to disturb their elders.

Hoping to be of service to you, I remain.
Yours Truly.
The Post Master.

An Ordinary Break-up (1995)

I was clearing my room yesterday of a decade of accumulated debris, when I chanced across one of my articles written in 1995 for Teens Magazine. I felt that it was one of the better pieces I wrote, especially since I was only 19 when wrote it. So, feeling all narcissistic, I've decided to reproduce it here. After ten years, it still applies to my life. Sigh. LOL.

Thoughts
I find myself thinking of her once in a while, pretty often actually. Odd things, little things, like how she would sit in the bus, I see in the girl sitting across the aisle. How she would draw designs in the chilli sauce with her fries, I would see in the child at the next table. Sometimes, it doesn’t even take such reminders. Thoughts of her would surface unbidden in my mind. It doesn’t take too much to get them to go away, but like a buzzing bumblebee they come back unbidden during my most unguarded times.
I tell my friends how I feel and what I can’t seem to stop from thinking, and they cluck consolingly and say I have not recovered from the break-up. They introduce me to new friends and try to spend time with me. I am grateful, but I still wish I was back with here. It is hard not to think of her when almost everything reminds me of her. I won’t pretend that I’ve cried buckets over her. I haven’t. I’m not even sure whether I’d loved her or not, or whether I still love her. But I cannot deny that I still miss her.
I cannot say that she is always on my mind, often would be a better word. I am sure that had we remained together for a longer period of time, the memories would be more and the loss, greater. As it is, it is bad enough. I make it a habit not to regret anything I have done. But if I knew what I did wrong to drive her away from her, I am sure I would regret it.

Before
We were once happy, and I had always placed her first on my list of priorities. I would do everything for her, if only she said the word and she knew it. I was happy that way, so long as she did not take me for granted. And oftentimes, she did not. I liked placing her on a pedestal; she was everything I’d ever wanted for a girlfriend. To others, she may have been nondescript and unexciting, but to me she was as special as anybody could get in my life. Call it love, infatuation, obsession, crush or plain besotted with her, it was great just having her around.
I was never quite sure that she was happy; all I know was that I was happy when she was around, and now that she is not, I find it very hard to be as joyful again. She never told me how she really felt, but I must have meant something for her to blow almost two years of her life on me. And we enjoyed each other’s company, if nothing else. Every shared activity, be it active or passive, from careening wildly around on rented bikes to simply vegetating in a nearby park, held special meaning to me.
She never did say those three words to me, and it took me a long time to say it to her too. Perhaps we were just overly cautious, and I just wanted to make sure that what I was feeling wasn’t some flash in the pan thing. Then again I wasn’t too worried that she never said, “I love you” to me. I put it down to her usual reserve of character, and was content that someone like her could enjoy the time we’ve had together.
I was never too sure of what changed her the way she did. I only know that it happened.

During
I trust her enough to say that she did not leave me for a third party. She is not the sort. And I suppose that it was through no fault of either one of us that she chose to leave. She told me that she needed time for schoolwork, family and hostel activities and I understood. I truly did. It was simply a matter of a difference in priorities and a person cannot be faulted for having different priorities from me, can she? Yes, that was how I rationalised everything, but still it did not make it any easier that she was not with me anymore. It is a variation of the fact that the ends do not justify the means, I suppose. In this case, justifying the end result does not make the process of breaking up any easier.
I tried to be the boyfriend that she could be proud of. That she could never want for more in any other person. I tried to do everything I thought she would like, that most girls would like. Perhaps I did wrong. But God knows I tried. And yet it still happened. And till now I still do not know what I did wrong. I am not one to believe in retribution, although I’ve done many a callous thing in my life. Yet when she requested for an end to the relationship, she did it without malice and (I believe) after a significant amount of soul-searching. And yet already, it hurts so much on my side. How much more so would it hurt somebody on the receiving end of an impulsive and arbitrary decision to break a long-standing relationship.
It didn’t really sink in until now that she was no longer with me. I was thinking that perhaps now that I am single again, I could rebuild my social life. But all the multitudes of new friends and acquaintances cannot make up for the loss of one precious person. And so, I feel lonely. I am not alone, not by a long shot; every day brings new people into my life. But I feel lonely, because there is emptiness, a void replacing the space where she once held.
Perhaps I became too dependent n her. She was my best friend, girlfriend, escort, lover, all rolled into one. I am sure many out there know the risk of having your better half and your best friend in the same person. If one loses a best friend, he can always turn to his steady; if he goes through a break-up, there is always his best friend. I? I have neither now. When she left, I became lost. Now I have to try to rebuild a social life that has been dormant or non-existent for the past two years.
I tried to save it. I tried everything I could. Discussions, arguments, pleas, begging, threats, tears, tantrums, cold treatment, go-betweens, jealousy. But her perspective has changes since she entered university, and like it or not, I could not change it back. I asked for advice from so many others, others whose advice I held in high regard. I looked through magazines, peering for advice from anonymous writers professing to know a great deal about such matters. But the answers were always the same: Talk to her, talk to her, talk to her! How could I talk to her if she refused to answer? And so I meandered along.

Now
And now? Now I am lonely. I tried to date again, but friends warned me of “rebounds”. Was I trying to find a substitution? Yes, I was. I still am. I feely admit it. There would come a period of pure bliss with someone new, and then the novelty would wear off, leaving a realisation that she was still here, still in my heart. And till now it seems, nothing or no one can dislodge her from my heart. It seems that nothing short of a whack on my head to induce amnesia would do.
Sometimes, in a fit of male-bonding, a group of us all males would go for a drink or two along the riverside, feasting our gullets on good spirit and our eyes on the flesh of the fairer sex. And once in a while, a particularly attractive specimen would be appreciated with watchful glances and a low whistle or two. Like all the other wolves, I stare also. But sometimes I wonder: what are they like underneath all that surface beauty? Are they like her? Only heaven will know.
I look normal: I haven’t lost any weight, nor lost (much) sleep, nor started rending my clothes. I act normal: I haven’t been admitted into the psychiatric wards yet, nor gone on eating/drinking/drug binges. Half the time I feel okay, no outwardly depressive state, no compulsion to slit my wrists. It is just a nagging feeling that something is wrong, and something is afoot tat I can’t put right. How I wish I can tear my cloths, pt n sackcloth and mourn the passing of something wonderful. But the rational part of me tells me that such behaviour is absurd and childish and most of all, self-destructive. Twenty years of civilised upbringing and school=room veneers refuse to be stripped away so easily. And so the tears remain in my heart.
And so only the memories, and a few mementos remain. Someday perhaps the hurt will pass, but the memories will stay. They are all I have left.

Parting
This is a quiet break-up, not much drama and definitely no vase-throwing exploits. The proceedings were all conducted in a calm and dignified manner: she put forth the proposition and I accepted without preamble. But although feelings were not shown, they were there, just below the surface. Small things, the trembling of my hands, and the glistening in here eyes as we embraced and said goodbye for the start of what was to be an everlasting parting. Yes, the feelings were there, and in me, they are still there. And if I had the choice, yes I would still want her back.
There are probably so many other couples out there who are going through the same quiet agony as I am. I am sure they know too, that the choices made are never entirely theirs alone. And someday (hopefully someday soon) we might recover to love again, but for now, let there also be a time to mourn.

I Believe, Therefore I Am

In many times, and in many places, enlightened minds have often pondered about what makes a human special, distinct, instantly different from the rest of the living creatures that populate the world around us. Is it our vastly superior intellect? (Although the way we treat our environment and each other often belies that "superior intellect" we are supposed to possess.) Is it our creativity, although seldom exercised? Is it our compassion, now seldom demonstrated? Of course there are some who will also argue that it is all of the above that demonstrates our distinction from other species.

I believe though that there is yet another factor which differentiates us from other animals: the ability to believe. Some may call it faith, others may call it delusion. But there is no doubt that the power to believe, and the power of belief, both, are intrinsic to humanity. And intricately intertwined in these, are the emotions of hope, despair, optimism, pessimism and perhaps, even love.

To underscore exactly how powerful the ability to believe can be, we can look at the history of the world. Through faith, the structured belief in a religion, men have fought wars. Through customs, the belief in the traditions of one’s society, atrocities have been committed. Think of the crusades, where Christians and Moslems fought for the Holy Land. Think of culture, where female babies have been ditched for the hope of the conception of a future male. I think you get the idea.

The intrinsic ability to believe is therefore fundamental to human existence, Yet nowhere else is it demonstrated in the animal kingdom. Perhaps in some small way, a dog demonstrates it, by waiting at the door for the owner to come back. But that is a belief borne of routine and demonstration. Only humans have the ability (some might call it folly) to believe in something that they may have never experienced in their lifetime.

Belief can sustain a human through the leanest and most evil of times, and yet may drive a person to suicide even though that person may seem to be the luckiest individual alive. And like any other emotion (well belief is not an emotion, one colleague calls it emotion, another calls it a frame of mind… I am inclined to agree with the latter) belief can be both debilitating and enlightening.

I know that while we have to be very careful about what we believe in, and how we apply our beliefs, our beliefs can and should be controlled and carefully monitored. Because, like so many other things, the act of believing, can define a person. I believe, therefore I am.