Malaysians protesting at Merlion Park

Posted on May 12, 2013 by gdy2shoez

From ’21 Malaysians arrested at protest’, 12 May 2013, article by Amelia Tan, Sunday Times

Twenty-one Malaysians were arrested yesterday for staging a protest at the Merlion Park against the outcome of last Sunday’s Malaysian general election. The rare police action followed earlier warnings that such gatherings are illegal, and after nine Malaysians were warned for participating in a similar protest last Wednesday.

In a statement last night, the police said that “while foreigners are allowed to work or live here, they have to abide by our laws”. “They should not import their domestic issues from their countries into Singapore and conduct activities which can disturb public order, as there can be groups with opposing views. Those who break the law will be seriously dealt with.”

….Last week, the police warned nine Malaysians for “actively participating” in an illegal gathering at Merlion Park on Wednesday, when about 100 people went to protest against the Malaysian election results.

…Separately, the police also reminded migrant worker rights activist Jolovan Wham of his responsibilities as organiser of a Speakers’ Corner demonstration today, also related to the Malaysian general election. He has been told to take appropriate measures to ensure that the event complies with Singapore laws. The police said they were informed that Mr Wham had posted on Facebook that he was organising the demonstration to show solidarity with Malaysians calling for fair elections and that “he had invited foreigners to observe the event“.

“The Speakers’ Corner is a designated site for Singaporeans to freely speak on issues as long as they do not touch on matters which relate to religion or may cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different racial or religious groups in Singapore. Only Singaporeans and permanent residents of Singapore are allowed to participate in demonstrations held at the Speakers’ Corner,” the police spokesman said.

The terms and conditions of the use of Speakers’ Corner is ambiguous on what constitutes a ‘demonstration’, or if you may be just an ‘observer’ and not a ‘participant’ in the event. In 2001, when public demos were banned from Hong Lim Park, the police described such activities as coming together for a ‘specific cause’, ‘chanting slogans’, ‘displaying placards’ and showing gesticulations such as ‘CLENCHING OF FISTS’. I’m not sure if clapping furiously and going ‘Hear, hear’ in response to a rousing speech constitutes participation, but standing from a distance and folding your arms with an expressionless face may have protesters suspecting that you’re a plainclothes police officer instead of a supporter or observer. You may even get crowd-surfed involuntarily if things get out of hand.

The earlier Merlion Park protest had special appearances from two Mediacorp actors, namely Zhang Yaodong and Shaun Chen, who in the image below, are clearly seen ‘participating’ in an illegal activity. Not sure if it’s stated anywhere in their Mediacorp contract if celebrities (and role models to our ‘impressionable youth’) are allowed to engage in political protests. They may inadvertently get innocent bystanders into serious trouble if screaming fans at the scene who have no idea what ‘Ubah’ or ‘Bersih’ are all about get rounded up by the cops for disrupting public order. You may, however, be part of a campaign to ban shark’s fin soup, though that may upset more people than your political beliefs.

Careful, almost a clenched fist there!

It’s not the first time that our Merlion has seen gatherings of this sort. In 2011, a petition for an SMTown Kpop concert was held in the form of a flash mob. Not sure if a police permit was applied for in this case but amazingly (also unfortunately), it turned out to be successful. These kids with their sick dance moves and placards look dead menacing. Slogans on A4 paper? Amateurs. If you want to get something out of your protesting, choreograph a mass-dance, dammit!

Thanks a lot too, Singa the courtesy lion, for giving Malaysian activists ideas for a venue.

There are other ways to show solidarity for a political cause if you’re a foreigner. You could blackout your Facebook profile for a couple of days before reverting it to a pic of your baby. If you’re a Myanmese you could join fellow countrymen to book entire theatres and watch Rambo viciously gun down junta villains (with permission from the authorities of course). You could even have a sit-down dinner in a nice restaurant with face-paint, sing patriotic songs in unison and get nothing more than dirty looks from diners without having a ring of police surrounding you like a phalanx in a Roman army ready to charge a castle.

Screengrab From Martyn See's 'Speakers Cornered'

Screengrab From Martyn See’s ‘Speakers Cornered’

But if you insist on venting your frustrations on crappy governments outdoors, you could do it ‘picnic’ style, like the Bersih 2.0 get-together in 2011 at Speaker’s Corner, where instead of slogans you could hand out yellow roses as a nod to the days of ‘Flower Power’. Just make sure you keep your friendly neighbourhood Police in the loop so they can send their stakeout/riot police team to defuse an ugly situation in the event you start marching around with burning stakes, flipping cars over and then torching them. Singaporean protesters can do without such police permits having been cowed into submission over generations. It’s the foreigners with their campaigns and balls who’re viewed as potential threats (But our government welcomes them with open arms anyway). I mean just look at them, dressed in matching black garb and holding up what looks suspiciously like secret society code numbers.  My God, our riot police have their work cut out for them!

The 8 is upside down. Maybe that symbolises something. Hmm.

Maybe it’s time we drop the name ‘Speakers’ Corner’ and just call it Hong Lim Park instead, since nobody goes there just to ‘speak’ anymore without some fist-pumping or incitement going on. Maybe we should have a demo at Speaker’s Corner to protest against the name ‘Speaker’s corner’. We could sit in unwashed, loving huddles, have a feast of organic tofu and sway holding hands to a live ukelele rendition of ‘San Francisco (Be Sure to Wear some Flowers in your Hair)’.

Here’s a sample of events which render the title invalid and outdated:

- Pink dot (2009)

- Give Vuikong a Chance (a petition signing event, 2010)

- BRING BACK MY MCDONALDS PIG TOY (2010)

- Slutwalk  (2011)

- M Ravi dancing (for no one) (2012)

And of course, a recent May Day event about some white paper. Wonder what’s all that fuss about.

About these ads

Filed under: 2013, Campaigns/Elections, Complaining, Justice system/Lawsuits, Local actors, Merlion, Violence | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Singapore as a location for blockbuster movies

Posted on May 1, 2013 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Lights, camera, action – in S’pore’, 25 April 2013, ST Forum

(Matthew Varughese): THE Singapore Tourism Board (STB) is constantly striving to come up with creative ways to promote Singapore as a tourist destination…A lot of resources have been spent on advertising and organising events such as the Formula One Singapore Grand Prix. Perhaps it is time for the STB to consider another form of marketing that targets an international audience and creates a lasting legacy – that is, entice big-name international film studios to use Singapore as a location for blockbuster movies.

In this way, the STB can achieve its target of showcasing Singapore to the world and marketing it as a vibrant place to visit. Already, Indian film studios have shot movies in Singapore, and some Korean and Japanese bands have used our landmarks for location shoots in their music videos.

The next step would be to get leading Hollywood studios to shoot on location in Singapore. Our country has already been referenced in a number of films and, as a global city with multiple attractions and an iconic skyline, there should be little difficulty in incorporating a Singapore sequence into a modern blockbuster.

Regional cities such as Bangkok, Manila, Kuala Lumpur and Hong Kong have already made their mark in Hollywood, and it could be time for Singapore to take to the silver screen. Movies in the James Bond and Godfather series have become staples that will be watched and re-watched for generations to come. Should Singapore be featured in such a film in future, the effects of marketing and publicity would endure for far longer than any print, radio or television advertising campaign.

Singapore’s skyline will never match the scale and pomp of China or Dubai, where you have impressive monoliths like the Burj Khalifa as a phallic set-piece for Tom Cruise in Mission Impossible:Ghost Protocol. Hong Kong gets to be featured in Batman and was among the first Asian countries to headline the globetrotting James Bond franchise (You Only Live Twice, 1967). Even Petronas Towers in KL has been immortalised in the spy-caper Entrapment starring ex-James Bond himself Sean Connery. The last time someone attempted to pull off an action flick in our high-rise metropolitian setting was in the Hong Kong film 2000AD, which starred heartthrob Aaron Kwok and local actors like the now obscure James Lye and Phyllis Quek, though the HK superstar served more as product placement for RSAF in the trailer than a skyscraper-crawling daredevil.

Meanwhile, we await Hollywood magnates to take notice of the only candidate to star a blockbuster so far, the Marina Bay Sands. Fast and Furious star and rapper Ludacris gave us a boost by soaking in the Infinity Pool during the F1 season and tweeting about it in 2011, though since then we haven’t heard from Tom Cruise, James Bond or even the guys from the Hangover (with its sequel shot in hot and sultry Bangkok). We have, however, been featured in a Japanese porn film. MBS, chicken rice and all.

Even Julia Roberts’ character in Eat Pray Love would rather head to Bali for some spiritual me-time. So, if our buildings aren’t glitzy or gigantic enough and we’ve lost out on that Oriental lustre and LUST to fellow ASEAN nations, where does that leave us? Bollywood and its song-and-dance with national icon backdrops I suppose. Interestingly, the first ever Indian move to be shot here was titled ‘Singapore’ (1960), and featured Haw Par Villa in its prime. The ‘strange garden’ exists till this day, though more of a curiosity than a tourist attraction that it once was.

Screen Shot 2013-05-01 at 10.07.39 AM

There was hope in the late 60s/early 70′s. Homegrown action starlet Marrie Lee (real name Doris Young) was featured in several foreign films including the iconic, Quentin Tarantino-endorsed, CLEOPATRA WONG, which had our campy heroine kicking butt in Chinese Garden (Trivia: Cleopatra also starred a dashing BRIAN RICHMOND, now veteran DJ with Gold 90 FM). Then America took notice with the softcore thriller Wit’s End, aka The GI EXECUTIONER (1971), which featured ‘sultry Singapore’ and sleazy sex in the Raffles Hotel. One version of the trailer started with an old local smoking an OPIUM PIPE. Singapore would have been perfect for the Hangover movies then. I’m surprised even master of the C-grade action movie Steven Seagal gave us a miss.

Screen Shot 2013-05-01 at 10.18.10 AM

Then the Government happened. Local martial arts film The Ring of Fury(1973), featuring real-life kungfu master Peter Chong, was BANNED for its ‘portrayal of crime’ and depictions of gangsterism. Still, that didn’t stop Saint Jack (1978) from being filmed here, another American flick banking on what was left of our sleazy exoticism in Bugis Street. That means two American films in a decade, both with one thing in common. Barenaked BOOBIES. And nothing from Hollywood thereafter except for totally misleading references like the Singapore of Pirates of the Caribbean, a low-life haven that crosses evil Chinese temple with Old World kampong chic. Even our attempts to market the country through local film without foreign money have been stifled for being too seditious or racist for our own good. Jet Li, martial arts superstar and erstwhile Singaporean, has done absolutely NOTHING for our flagging entertainment industry. US chart-topping Singaporean diva-pastor Sun Ho would also rather sing about China than Singapore Wine.

‘Singapore’ has since been featured a 80′s MASK cartoon episode, the occasional foodie documentary with Anthony Bourdian and an Australian mini-series about the Japanese Occupation called Tanamera: The Lion of Singapore. Which ALSO FEATURES BOOBIES. Need I mention Sex: The Annabel Chong Story? Forget Batman, James Bond or Amitabh Bachchan. STB, you should know what to do to make Singapore more ‘Shiok’ now. How about an erotic courtroom drama about an underage prostitute and a high-flying politician, eh?

Filed under: 2013, Advertisements, Casino/gambling, Film, Local actors, Sex, Tourists | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sex Violence and Family Values NOT allowed for All Rating

Posted on October 9, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘S’pore film yanked from release over offensive racial remarks’, 9 Oct 2012, article by John Lui, ST

A LOCAL comedy that had originally been given an M18 film classification has had its release pulled by the Media Development Authority (MDA) over offensive racial remarks, just days before it is due to open in cinemas. Sex.Violence.FamilyValues, a compendium of three short films by first-time director Ken Kwek, was handed a Not Allowed For All Rating last evening, a rarely used classification. A film given such a rating is not allowed to be screened.

…Of the three shorts in Sex.Violence.FamilyValues, Porn Masala is the most controversial, revolving around the making of Singapore’s first “arthouse porno”. In a trailer released on the film’s website a few weeks ago, a boorish film director played by Adrian Pang and an Indian porn actor played by Vadi PVSS are seen trading racial insults, based on gross stereotypes.

…The MDA statement said: “An overwhelming majority of the panel members have expressed that the film should not be allowed for public exhibition in view of its overt racial references, which are demeaning and offensive to Indians.”

In the ‘dirty’ version of the movie trailer, Adrian Pang’s porn director makes reference to sex and alcohol in relation to  Vasantham actor Vadi PVSS’s race. This ‘unkindest cut of all’ comes fresh after Amy Cheong got sacked for posting remarks about Malay weddings on Facebook, except this time it’s another minority race bearing the insult. Lionel De Souza is probably drafting a police report against the cast and crew as we speak.

At this rate of heavy censures being handed out for any form of stereotyping, where you could fire an NTUC assistant director or pull someone’s movie off local cinemas, you wouldn’t expect anything less than sacking radio DJs for mocking Indian accents, dismissing ST writers referring to ‘often- drunk Sikh priests’, or closing down Breadtalk for selling bread named ‘Naan the Nay’. You might as well clamp down on Kumar’s comedy routine, or ban all Bollywood DnD theme parties. Now, even being ‘politically incorrect’ is hazardous to your mental health not to mention career. But as if losing your bread and butter isn’t enough, your former employers use blame-shifting phrases like ‘I DID what WE had to do’(Lim Swee Say), and then ask people to ‘spare a thought’ for you after what they did to you. That’s like pushing you off a cliff and then throwing a pillow down in the hope that it would somehow cushion your fall.

The ‘Not Allowed for All Rating’, or NAR, is slapped on films which MDA describes as follows according to their Film Classification Guidelines:

  • Themes that promote issues that denigrate any race or religion, or undermine national interest will not be allowed.
  • Themes that glorify undesirable fetishes or behaviour (e.g. paedophilia and bestiality) are not allowed.
  • Promotion or glamorisation of homosexual lifestyle.

Which puts Sex Violence in the same league as donkey porno. How did Sacha Baron Cohen’s films like Borat, Bruno and The Dictator get past the censors then? Did anyone miss the screaming Chinaman stereotype in films like the Hangover and Ted? Why wasn’t Mike Myers’ THE GURU banned? How about the discriminatory banter between Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker in the Rush Hour trilogy? Did MDA ignore all these elements because these were blockbusters and Ken Kwek’s film is a small indie movie, or did they all assume that some races are better at taking potshots than the others?

But it’s not just Hollywood movies that have the potential to fall into NAR territory. Even our local productions are full of disguised ‘racism’, with Chinese being overrepresented in dramatic roles. In National Day videos, you’ll invariably have singing Indian prata men, and nobody said anything about Alaric Tay’s portrayal of a ‘Mat Rocker’ in the Noose. The only reason why nobody considers making the latter into a full-length feature is because MDA may NAR it too, on the grounds of ‘overt racial references’. Hence the I Not Stupid sequels. I suppose it’s better to have horrible English than being, you know, RACIST.

Moving along. Under ‘Language’, you have:

  • Language that denigrates religion or is religiously profane (e.g. Jesus F**king Christ).

Fair enough. Except that in Ted, I believe there was a scene where the exact same wording as above was used, but the middle profanity was muted out. In the 25th hour, a good few minutes were sliced off Edward Norton’s ‘fuck the world’ rampage against the various ethnicities in New York City (for a R21 rating). Isn’t the NAR rating in this case like decapitating a patient who has a stye in the eye, firing a bazooka into a mouse hole, or using a samurai sword to peel a banana? Did someone lose the censors’ chopper and decided it was easier to ban it altogether? How about delaying Sex Violence’s slated release to talk to the producers about possible re-shoots? You know, a CONVERSATION perhaps? Maybe there could be two versions of the movie, an internationally acclaimed one called Sex Violence Family Values, and an edited PG 13 one for the domestic market that is ‘community-friendly’ called, well, FAMILY VALUES. Instead of Porn Masala, you could replace it with an episode of Jacintha’s ‘Mum’s not Cooking’.

Whether Sex Violence is considered satirical art is irrelevant. As with all banned videos, thousands of curious Singaporeans will be googling Porn Masala as we speak (Don’t do it at work, you’ll get ACTUAL PORN as the top search hit instead), but it’s unlikely that we’ll see the original version on Youtube, what used to be a trusted treasure trove of stuff that MDA’s censor panel can’t deal with after a century of co-mingling with other races (Well THANKS A LOT Innocence of Muslims!). At the expense of being annoyingly cordial to each other where any suggestion of discrimination has to be repressed, we’ve sadly lost the ability to laugh at ourselves, which is the way most developed countries deal with the idiosyncrasies of their racial melting pots. Forget the National Conversation. I want our national Humour back.

Yet, ironically, some good may come out of this. If Ken Kwek continues the run on the international circuit and ride on the publicity of the ban, Sex Violence will garner more attention than Sex:The Annabel Chong Story. And nothing will put the MDA to shame more than this movie picking up festival awards, or better still a selection for the Oscars Foreign Film nominations. By then, the best thing that could happen to local film is not that MDA passes it UNCUT, but that it BANS it altogether, like a Chinese film about the Nanjing massacre or tainted milk powder, covering up for ‘fault lines’ that exist no matter how you preach otherwise.

Postscript: While the producers are appealing the ban, MDA responded that they left the decision to a Films Consultative Panel, which consists of ‘volunteers of various professions, age groups, religions and races’. Of 24 members, 20 gave a thumbs down to the release, while 4 opted for the strictest rating possible R21. There have also been complaints of the depiction of a schoolgirl in a CHIJ uniform in Porn Masala, which could have been a cynical reference to convent girls being branded as sluts in need of a ‘one night stand’.

So, who’s in the FCP? My first impression was that this is a secret Oracle of know-it-alls who wear white hoods brandishing sceptres or a council of hologram Elders like those you see in the Superman movies, but they’re actually mortal human beings, according to details in the MDA website.

The Council of Elders says no to Porn Masala

Let’s look the kind of people you need to speak about morals and ethics on behalf of 5.3 million people. For starters, the CHAIRPERSON Vijay Chandran is INDIAN, and ironically belongs to a company called ELASTICITY Pte Ltd. Another striking feature is how a majority of these members hold high positions in society, directors, doctors, CEOs, lawyers and a couple of obligatory housemakers, entrepreneurs, artists and students. Would a panel vote objectively if the chair belongs to a race that is picked on in the movie? How representative is such a panel anyway, and why is it there’s not a single moral philosopher or sociologist in the team? Why on earth do you need a POLICEMAN on the panel (Steven Moorthi)? How ELSE would you expect a cop to vote on race issues?

It’s obvious by glancing at the composition of the panel that the FCP is not a one size fits all arbiter of moral values, whether it’s gratuitous sex and violence, religious, race or gay issues. The very presence of an Indian leading the team already suggests bias in decision-making. Sex Violence deserves a second opinion, and whatever the final outcome, I for one, will be begging to watch it.

Postscript 2: The film eventually got passed with cuts under a R(21) rating. Don’t rush to book your tics yet, though, you’d never know if the MDA may decide to pull the film again days before screening.

Filed under: 2012, Censors, Film, Foul language, Local actors, Racism, Religion, Sex | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Our Singapore Conversation not about slaying sacred cows

Posted on September 9, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Not out to look for sacred cows to slay’, 9 Sept 2012, article by Goh Chin Lian, Sunday Times

While the committee will take a fresh look at all policies, Education Minister Heng Swee Keat stressed that it will not set out to slaughter sacred cows. “It’s not a culling session,” he quipped yesterday when asked how he would manage expectations that more longstanding policies will come under the knife.

“I don’t think we should start our Singapore conversation on the basis of looking for sacred cows to slay… I don’t think that would be a constructive exercise,” he said.

Instead, he told reporters, he would rather focus on the kind of Singapore that citizens want to create in the coming years, including values and ideals, “and then look at where we are today and how we get there”. Policies and programmes will be examined, but varying conclusions could be drawn in each case, he said.

“We may reaffirm that what is being done today is good and still relevant. We may recalibrate what we do. We may refresh and innovate into something very different.”

After Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced plans to start the national conversation, many have been calling on the Government to make bold changes and spare no sacred cows.

Knights of the Heng Table

Earlier in Aug, Senior Minister of State and Foreign Affairs Masagos Zulkifli remarked that ‘EVERYTHING” should be reviewed and that ‘NONE of them are sacred cows’. Lawrence Wong also felt there should not be any ‘OB markers or sacred cows’. Here we have a rather conflicting message that there may be some topics that Minister Heng wouldn’t be so comfortable talking about after all. It’s like those parental advisory stickers we used to see on CDs, except that instead of warning listeners on explicit lyrics, it’s exactly the reverse: Thou shall not be TOO explicit when it comes to talking about sensitive issues that would make the Minister shift nervously in his seat, like say, ministerial pay, CPF cuts or the defence budget. It’s like asking a friend you barely knew about his thoughts on circumcision. You will get nothing in return other than a shift of topic to the weather.

So will there be any sacred cows or not? With the PAP themselves not even on the same page about the agenda of this glamourised consultation exercise, how open will this ‘moo-ve’ be without giving critics further reason to slam it as a play-acting ‘pseudo participation’ to show that the government is friendly and compassionate? Will participants be ‘cowed’ into refraining from making radical suggestions, in which it’ll be a case of going back to the Remaking Singapore drawing board again? How do you talk to someone ‘informally’ when you’re given a verbal disclaimer on the taboos that you’re NOT supposed to even think of shattering? By setting rules and standards in public discourse, it appears that you can’t kill sacred cows without first killing the conversation. It’s like sending someone a wedding invite telling guests about the minimum amount of ang-pow to give. It totally ruins your mood to be a part of it.

MP Baey Yam Keng mentioned that Minister Heng shouldn’t just engage ‘heads of associations’, so let’s look at this 26-member committee strategically chosen to kickstart the Conversation and whether they’re representative of Singaporeans coming from ‘all walks of life’ as so claimed. The one that most Singaporeans can relate to is the inclusion of veteran actress and getai host Lin Ru Ping, someone to speak for the ‘heartlanders’ in our midst. OK, so we’ve got a celebrity auntie. With luck, our future rallies will have opening acts by comedians, retired actors talking to phantom presidents, rock bands and skits just like in the US Presidential Race. I wonder what Young PAP affiliate and actor Tay Ping Hui must be thinking right now for being passed over for this role. I’m not in a position to judge if Ru Ping is qualified to speak on national issues or not, but it appears she was chosen for mass HDB appeal. It’s cringingly obvious. She was even seated right next to Minister Heng, like having a baby nearby so you can kiss it for everyone to see.

Other than a couple of students, the rest of the team are pretty high-calibre thought-leaders and professionals. We have managing directors, association presidents, professors, head banking honchos and former MPs making up the ‘non-government representatives’. Even the taxi driver is a secretary of the Trans Cab Operator’s Association. Although it would seem logical to have experienced, outspoken individuals to represent the population, one can’t help getting the feeling that something’s missing here, and that referring to this as coming from ‘all walks of life’ is pushing it. Being someone with a reputation to uphold and a high-paying job to maintain also suggests that you’re not going to ‘lay all your cards on the table’ in fear of being ridiculed, or shunned as member of this Round Table i.e You can’t afford to shoot your mouth off, though sometimes, as in real life, that is EXACTLY what you need for a creative, meaningful discussion. A ‘conversation’ just sounds too genial to be taken seriously. It’s like talking about butterflies when what matters is dealing with grubby caterpillars.  In order for some serious changes to be made, some violence is in order, be it breaking eggs for omelettes, frying some fish or sending cows to the slaughter, not skirting around the things that matter over breakfast tea and scones. If I wanted to tell someone what kind of Singapore I’m wishing, hoping and praying for I’d consult a genie, not some Committee’s Facebook page.

Where’s the grumbling kopitiam uncle that we keep hearing about? The double-degree holder having trouble finding a stable job? Or the housewife who had to give up her job to look after 3 kids and a gambling addict husband? Where’s the NSman, single parent, grocer, naturalised ang mor, footballer, Ferrari driver, pastor, transsexual, gay, Eurasian, Ms Universe, guy with terminal cancer, teacher, environmentalist, bar hostess, cleaner or char-kuay-teow hawker? The last thing we need from a committee that’s already from similar ‘walks of life’ (a good handful of PAP MPs, no pressure then) is that they end up marching to the beat of the same drum and sing kumbaya when something gets done as a result of groupthink.

So nice try to be ‘inclusive’, but I think you missed a spot, sir. Still, it’s interesting to see how our conversation pans out, though it runs contrary to everything we know about social science, teamwork and people dynamics when you involve THOUSANDS of often irrational, highly emotional human beings in decision making. You would expect some awkward silences but hopefully, in spite of raising the old spectre of OB markers and sacred cows, not a kind of hush that can be heard all over the world. Time to bring your buckets, folks. Looks like we have some serious cows to milk dry before making steaks out of them.

Filed under: 2012, Local actors, Politicians | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Vernetta Lopez and Mark Richmond playing masak-masak (with bonus review!)

Posted on August 26, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Illicit affair off air’, 26 August 2012, article by Akshita Nanda, Sunday Times Lifestyle

…In Memoirs Of A DJ, published by Marshall Cavendish, Lopez reveals that Richmond had wanted to call the wedding off days before the ceremony, and she had refused, fearing public embarrassment. She wrote in the book: “Because little 26-year-old me was worried about the public fallout. What would they say? How could I possibly walk around after that? How would I ever buy nasi lemak in a food court again?”

According to her, she could not see or did not want to admit that there was no connection with Richmond, that they were two kids who were merely playing masak masak. Their relationship dissolved not long after the honeymoon and the book described how she became suspicious of his relationship with another woman, identified only as B in the book,and found an illicit love note in his car when Richmond was away filming.

The note was filled with sweet nothings that only an intimate partner would say, she recalled in the book, including the words “…I can still smell you on my pillow…”

…She later followed Richmond secretly and saw him on a date with the other woman. Even then, she could not make herself ask for a clean break. Instead, she cried in solitude or in front of her make-up assistants.

…Lopez stresses that her autobiography is not intended to lash out at her former husband, even though she is aware that many readers will flip immediately to the pages about her first marriage.

“It’s definitely not revenge. It’s just what happened. If I’m going to do my memoirs, it would be silly not to mention it…..People know who I am, but they don’t really know about my personal life. I thought, let people get to know me a little bit more and let them see if they’ve known me at all.” She says she was initially hesitant to write about her first marriage and its breakdown, but then decided “people are expecting to read it. If you’re going to write about your life, write about your life.”

“My mistake throughout that time was to keep it to myself, I was totally isolated,” she adds, as her sister silently takes her hand.

“But I don’t want to hurt people’s feelings. I’m not about to take a dagger and stab it in someone’s back and destroy a family. All I’m saying is, this is what I went through.

“At the end of the day, I’m very happy for him, he has a wife and a kid and his career’s doing okay.“

The only other Singaporean public figure I could think of to write ‘MEMOIRS’ is Lee Kuan Yew. Despite being a veteran in the media business, you’d need to be of a certain calibre, maybe age, before you may even qualify to describe what’s essentially a tatter tale’s gimmick as a collection of ‘memoirs’.  It’s not like she desperately needed the money to sell books, and although she insists that this isn’t about ‘revenge’, Vernetta seems to have forgotten that both of them are already happily married, herself to a British IT guy and Mark to a pro-gay NMP hopeful with a 5 year old kid Sol . Beatrice and Mark presumably met on the set of Triple 9 in 1998, playing LOVERS, when Richmond’s marriage was already ‘on the rocks’.

What started out as a concerned friend turned into ugly ‘the other woman’ finger-pointing. No surprises that they got together so soon (married in 2004) after the divorce, a celebrity script uncannily similar to Hollywood’s most famous love triangle (Brad and Angelina were LOVERS in Mr and Mrs Smith, Beatrice even behaves like an Angelina Jolie in some aspects). Interestingly, Mark himself previously played Denise’s boyfriend in ‘Under one Roof’, while both Vernetta and Beatrice were co-actors in the 2001 flop ‘Now Boarding’.

In a 2009 interview, she had this to say about her previous marriage:

Any lessons you’re carrying over from your previous marriage (Her seven-year marriage to Mark Richmond ended in 2004)?

Don’t be the stereotypical needy chick. You just chill and enjoy the relationship. Hold it back a little, man! Not that I was needy before, but I think I became needy after that. I’ve never been in such a tolerant, understanding, fun, relaxed sort of relationship, where you feel comfortable to say anything.

We take it that the chapter of life with Mark is closed?

People always ask. It’s so closed. You do your own thing, I do my own thing. There are no hard feelings or anything anymore. I’ve definitely closed the book on that one.

Er, no Vernetta. You literally WROTE a whole needy BOOK to remind everyone about it. Someday even little Sol is going to get his hands on your book and uncover dirty secrets about Daddy.

Whether it’s a sly publicity stunt or some form of self-victimising ‘autobiography-therapy’, she appears to have refused to let bygones be bygones, and you could feel the searing heat of the dagger in Beatrice Chia’s back when Vernetta used the painfully obvious ‘B’ in her account of the affair. The divorce was already swirling with rumours of the involvement of a ‘third party’, which both denied at the time. But perhaps the way the article was framed says a lot about ST’s lust for gossip as well. Little effort was made in pitching the actual BOOK itself, but rather spilling the beans on a celebrity marriage gone wrong and putting everyone involved in a bad light, despite the ex-couple still being annoyingly cordial to each other, maybe even exchanging gifts and buddy-hugs every Christmas.

In 2007, she was cast as an ‘unhappy woman stuck in a dysfunctional marriage’ in a Channel 5 anthology called Stories of Love. Maybe that didn’t help her deal with her ex because her reel-life groom then was comedian Gurmit Singh. Earlier in 2003, 2 years after the break-up, she was cast in ‘Ceciliation’ as a mother struggling with her husband’s INFIDELITY. She won an Asian Television award for ‘BEST DRAMA PERFORMANCE by an actress’, which suits the DRAMA queen manner in which she’s handling her divorce. Maybe all this vicarious acting has whetted her appetite for finally telling the truth, even if it’s only one person’s side of the story.

Maybe the Richmonds are consulting their own publisher as we speak. They could sneak in a response to Vernetta’s bawling expose amid their Grandfather stories, and call it MEMOIRS of a DJ/ACTOR/PRESENTER/COMMENTATOR. I just hope serial DJ-husband Glenn Ong doesn’t get any ideas. Maybe Vernetta’s ex-husband was indeed a total scoundrel and philanderer but there’s no reason to call him out, dig up the past and package it as a sob-story for money. Instead of calling her book ‘Memoirs of a DJ’ and ripping off a Geisha epic, I think ‘V for Vernetta’ would be more appropriate.

Postscript: Following some nasty feedback about how unfair I have been to Vernetta since the post was based on her media interview and not on the actual pages off her book, I decided to head down to Kinokuniya to check it out myself. Surprisingly, Memoirs wasn’t front entrance promo stock, and I took at least 15 minutes just to locate it inconspicuously stacked along one of the quieter info counters (I couldn’t find a ‘Local series’ section. The only local author on display was LKY). Skimming through the chapters, I found them more like essays than a linear timeline of her life from childhood to second marriage. Her tone was exactly like what you would expect from her character on air, sharp, bitchy, even witty. Yes, Vernetta is funny. I said it. Case in point, she excused Mark’s habit of ‘bringing his phone into the toilet with him’ on the basis that ‘reception is better when the toilet flushes’. LOL.

The chapter on everyone’s mind was titled ‘The dark years’ and it started off bleak, about how V was unsure about the relationship and had to consult her mom, who told her that she could still change her mind before wedding day. Then came the rumours of Mark and Beatrice getting too close for comfort in their scenes together as actors, followed by a self-destructive spell of loathing, niggling doubt (felt like ‘strangers on their honeymoon’) and picking up SMOKING. She even had a table of excuses and lies that Mark had presumably told her, of note one about his filming a movie with a ‘famous director’ that either never existed or bombed so bad it just disappeared. The only mention of ‘B’ came when she was snooping around her husband’s stuff, and found the love note, which, as V wrote, ‘was signed off as ‘B’. It was a piercingly shrewd way of pointing fingers, while ‘telling it like it is’. When confronted, ‘B’ came over to ‘explain’ that the pillow story was taken off some literature to ‘console’ her husband who needed to feel loved again. V thought it was priceless. I call it Occupational Hazard.

I had to flip to the last few chapters on the ‘revelation’, when V, with the help of some friends (or relatives, I can’t remember) ‘staked out’ Mark after work, spotting him and B in each other arms, heads nudged together, and him peeking into her car window supposedly ‘kissing her goodnight’. Game over then, with V going ‘I want a divorce’ at the end of it. Interestingly, other than the ‘B’ reference, no names were mentioned in her account. It wasn’t sleazy at all, and although it did seem a little whiny, was over-CAPPED and tends to overplay female empowerment (V worships Oprah), it was actually entertaining enough for me to finish the chapter in one piece. It was snappy, effortless prose and to pay the compliment further, actually worthy of a second flip, though I skipped those BFF moments with Gurmit Singh.

It’s still one side of the story, but for you all know it could have been a restrained narrative when far worse things could have happened in the affair. I would give V credit for her writing style, for putting a witty spin on something gone horribly wrong, but for making public something that happened years ago, for not letting go, even if she had every damn right to spit on her ex’s new family, I still think it isn’t exactly a discerning thing to do. I also think her new Brit husband better watch his back. Memoirs is both a jibe at her ex and love rival, and a stern warning to her current hubby. I bet he keeps it in the office bookcase to remind himself not to mess with his tenacious wife every single day.

So V isn’t going to win the ‘Revenge Sleaze Book Prize’, but someone thinks she’ll get a Pulitzer. When hell freezes over, that is.

Filed under: 2000s, 2012, Local actors, Local radio DJs, Sex | Tagged: , , | 28 Comments »

Girl-on-girl kissing at Star Awards

Posted on May 4, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Girl on girl kiss to be censored in re-run of awards show’, 4 May 2012, article in asiaone.com

A kiss between female actresses Vivian Lai and Kate Pang has sparked a furore among Singaporeans. Actress-host Lai, 36, kissed actress Kate Pang, 29, on the lips for one second when she was announced as one of the Top 10 Most Popular Female Artistes during Sunday’s live telecast of the Star Awards Show 2.

Chinese daily Lianhe Wanbao reported that many viewers called its hotline to say they were offended by the kiss. They said that while some women may find kissing each other to be “trendy”, they were not used to it.

Some also said that it was strange to see female artistes dressed sexily and kissing each other. The Media Development Authority (MDA) said it will probe the incident to ascertain whether it has breached content guidelines of the free-to-air TV programme code.

A spokesperson for broadcaster MediaCorp told The New Paper that the “kiss” will be censored for this Sunday’s repeat telecast as some viewers may not be comfortable.

They should have won Most Favourite Couple

This will probably be the most useless snip in the history of television, regardless of what people think of two women kissing. Even if there were erotic undertones here beyond a ‘sisterly’ peck, it would have went unnoticed if the people obsessed with ‘lesbianism’ hadn’t cried foul over it. Perhaps cleavage just fails to shock anymore,  that there’s only a few ways to display one’s assets,  to the point that even the underboob has been milked dry. This Western glam concept of celebrity lip smooching has taken the attention away from boring speculations of boob jobs or waiting for wardrobe malfunctions to occur. The awards  have become secondary and our Mediacorp artistes are being ravaged on the red carpet for tasteless frocks, if not accused of aping the decadent West and turning viewers gay with their antics. People who’ve never seen a single Mediacorp drama the entire year would have at least heard of this event, but only for the wrong reasons. Soon no one will even remember or care about who won the Best Drama or Actress, nor male artistes who dress like hobos, and the Star Awards will be known just for two things: Ann Kok’s ample bosom and a hot girly kiss. Pity the former wasn’t involved in the latter, or you would have the prudes getting cardiac arrests before even writing in to complain about too much sex on TV.

This spontaneous couple seem to have taken a cue off Britney and Madonna, who locked lips on stage at the 2003 MTV awards, with a hint of tongue too. Nobody’s calling either a lesbian.

Our authorities have also banned the first hit single from Katy Perry titled ‘I Kissed a Girl’, which anyone can download off Youtube below, although no girls were actually kissing in the video. Katy went on to marry comedian Russell Brand in a rather short-lived romance, proof that she too wasn’t a lesbian.

Our censors also deleted scenes off critically acclaimed films like The Hours, and banned films like Shame altogether because of threesome scenes which I presume, would have some girly action as well. Kissing used to be a fun thing; experimental, playful and affectionate, and celebrities have the privilege of playing fast and loose with their PDA as they deem fit. Because they ARE celebrities.  Better that they engage in same-sex kissing than snort cocaine. These complainants are treating the act as if someone dropped a box full of forceps in the middle of a life-saving surgery.

Football players smooch each other all the time after scoring goals, yet no one talks about censoring matches because these contain ‘harmful’ scenes of sweaty men kissing, that boys who watch them may end up spending more time in the locker room than necessary. If two men kiss, it’s awkward or a prank, especially when presidents do it. If two ‘sexily dressed’ ladies kiss, however,  a ‘guideline’ has been breached and the innocent need to be protected.

One thing’s certain though; the kissing video would garner more hits than the  combined viewership of both live and rerun shows, even among people who have no idea who Joanne Peh is. Kate Pang may even score the Top 10 favourite artist list every year from now on, even if nobody has seen her act. Going near topless to boost a lacklustre career doesn’t work anymore, and it’s no longer peek-a-boo but ‘peck-a-(chio)bu’ that makes the Star Awards worth saving.

Filed under: 2012, Censors, Gay stuff, Local actors, Local TV shows, Sex | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Facebook pictures photojacked onto porn sites

Posted on April 30, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Facebook photo ends up on porn, dating site’, 30 April 2012, article by Irene Tham, ST

HOUSEWIFE Jules Rahim was shocked when a friend tipped her off last Wednesday that her photo was featured on a pornographic website. That was not the only unauthorised use of the picture of her in a bikini, which she had posted on her Facebook account three years ago.

Last Tuesday, another friend told her that the photo had also popped up on a dating site called sgGirls.com. It was accompanied by a caption which listed a telephone number to call and how much it cost to chat.

‘It’s embarrassing,’ said the mother of four children, aged one to 10. ‘People I know may think wrongly of me.’ Ms Rahim, 32, has filed two police reports – one about the porn site and the other about the dating site.

The Straits Times understands that at least two other Singaporean women have also discovered that their Facebook pictures have surfaced on these two websites. The three are victims of what is known as ‘photo-jacking’ – the act of stealing pictures from social media like Facebook and Twitter and exploiting them for use on, say, porn sites.

Tipping off a friend that her photo is being used in a porn site is an awkward admission of guilt that one surfs porn. If I were the victim, I wouldn’t know if I should thank him or give him a funny look. Worse things could happen if you’re a celebrity though; your pic may be photoshopped and superimposed over actual porn actors. Or you could be used as bait for ‘click-jacking’ pranks such as the Facebook ‘Fiona Xie sex video’ link which doesn’t lead you anywhere other than spreading the message to all your friends that you want to see Fiona Xie naked. Disappointment AND embarrassment.

Internet privacy has been a problem since the late nineties, when a similar site to Sggirls known as JCGirls  featured candid shots of girls in public (Harmless or has it invaded privacy?19 Oct 1999, ST) . Though there wasn’t any intention to shame or outrage the modesty of schoolgirls,  nor did the creators sell soiled panties on the side, it was an unspoken fact that this site was drawing a specific audience, mainly men in the ‘old enough to be your father’ demographic. When you let ‘netizens’ take over, it’s like giving a psychotic clown an lifetime’s supply of pies. I would rather have my face on a porn ad than being caught by some busybody Stomper in an embarrassing situation taken out of context. Getting Face-Stomped (tagged and linked in both sites) is the worst fate that could befall decent human beings. It’s like getting gang-raped by Alien and Predator, with the resultant offspring gnawing its way slowly out of your insides with the aid of a laser-guided cannon throughout the  incubation. But then again, males in general don’t have much of an issue being ‘photojacked’ in sex ads. In fact, if you tag our faces with a ‘I GREW 2 INCHES in a WEEK’, it may even be taken as a compliment.

You don’t have to be in a sultry bikini pose to get spotted by porn marketeers. Even wearing a seemingly innocent Minnie Mouse hat could have you mistaken by paedophiles for a Lolita prostitute in an online sex ring. If you’re not cute, nor have the body to flaunt, you could also get targeted if someone has a bone to pick with you; an ex-lover, a jealous colleague, or a complete stranger who simply doesn’t like what you put on your Facebook wall. Or you end up as a random target for someone who needed a convenient scapegoat.

You may also misuse photos as fronts for bad behaviour. In 2007, a couple of brats created wearemean.blogspot.com, a now defunct site that mocked people caught unawares in public. Interestingly, it’s not so much their snapping of random passers-by and commenting on their ugliness or dress sense that’s illegal (people currently do that all the time on STOMP), but impersonating other people on their blog using  their photographs without permission. If you’re cowardly enough, you could troll Facebook discussions logged in as somebody else. Sometimes, even your own spouse can’t be trusted when it comes to online misrepresentation.

Vicious rumours could also get you recognised for all the wrong reasons, as what the ‘mystery woman’ angle created by the media led to, with wild guesses and snapshots of innocent parties being tossed about in forums. Ironically, in the attempt to protect a key player in a scandalous tryst,  this has resulted in  several other people, minding their own business and having absolutely nothing to do with the case, becoming unnecessarily involved and suspect. Putting our reputations on the line online is the price we have to pay for the benefits of social networking, and privacy controls alone may not be guarantee that you’re safe from harm. Even people not on Facebook get caught in ‘friendly fire’, as long as people snap, post and comment, without even having to tag you in the process. Facebook narcissists are free to exhibit and pose in whatever they want, but if you decide to wear a Playboy bunny suit, intimate lingerie or lie on the beach nude for your FB profile pic, then you should expect to draw the wrong kind of attention.  I’m not sure whether it’s a good idea provoking the culprits and going public as what Ms Rahim has done here though. It has already sparked plenty of interest in the lady herself, no thanks to ST releasing a ‘porn-worthy’ image of her with face digitally masked, and in this climate of scandal, a censored face means instant fame/notoriety as one the top 10 search hits on Google trends Singapore.

No 8 on the charts 30 April 2012, same day as article

Filed under: 1990s, 2012, Advertisements, Bloggers, Justice system/Lawsuits, Kids, Local actors, Nudity, Sex | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Singapore Day an expensive exercise in futility

Posted on April 14, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Thanks, but spending $4m for S’pore Day is too much’, 14 April 2012, ST Forum

(Liang Kaicheng): I AM one of thousands of happy Singaporeans based in the United States who will be making their way by plane, car or bus to New York City today for Singapore Day. But I am also embarrassed to discover that the event will cost $4 million (‘New York to draw 4,000 on S’pore Day’; last Saturday).

Much as I am looking forward to stuffing my face with chicken rice at Prospect Park in Brooklyn, I find it bewildering that the Government is prepared to spend such a considerable sum to woo overseas Singaporeans home and boost the local talent pool.

There may be far better ways to spend $4 million of taxpayers’ money than on a bunch of Singaporeans living abroad, many of whom have their eye on lucrative, prestigious opportunities in their adopted countries and have no plans to return to Singapore in the foreseeable future.

No amount of fried carrot cake, 1980s music or (local TV show character) Barbarella’s preening can pull people away from Wall Street, Silicon Valley, top university professorships, or the myriad other reasons why some Singaporeans choose to live abroad.

If the aim of the event is merely to remind overseas Singaporeans of their home, it may be even more overpriced. I am grateful that the Government has me in its thoughts, but I am also uncomfortable that Singapore Day may inevitably be an expensive exercise in futility.

A similar piece was written on Singapore Day being more of a showcase of local gluttony by Siew Kum Hong in 2007. According to the ex-NMP, National Day Songs were played at the inaugural event in New York, with a ‘singular emphasis on food’, although another Overseas Singaporean (OS) Colin Goh commented that the local fare flown over could already be sampled in New York except for ‘chwee kueh’. With more than a million PRCs living here, I’m surprised no one has thought of a ‘China Day’ in Singapore yet, though it would probably feel just like   ‘Any Other Day’ to most of us.

This year, Zouk’s ‘Mambo night’ is being marketed as something of a uniquely Singaporean past-time, though synchronised gesturing to cheesy 80′s retro music is not that far off from sending in a Great Singapore Workout contingent. It’s like reminding the Spanish about Macarena, though one must admit it’s at least better than launching a mobile National Day Parade at Singapore Day like we used to.

In 2011′s event, Kit Chan was flown to Shanghai to sing ‘Home’ (truly, where know I MUST be). It also featured kampong games like chapteh and five stones, which comes across as an propagandist exercise in inaccuracy rather than ‘futility’ since our kids are too busy swiping iPads or attending weekend enrichment classes to play pick up sticks anymore. In 2008, Melbourne, a NATIONAL SERVICE showcase was presented, featuring ‘various simulators and high-tech training equipment to display the prowess of the armed forces’. Reminding our boys of what they moved overseas to escape from, or what some may be forced to face if they ever return, is a terrible idea regardless of how advanced our laser weaponry is, painting the event with the sour, parasitic tone of a ‘recruitment drive’ rather than a nostalgic funfair. Covert enlistment aside, perhaps the festival is also an annual million-dollar, grovelling, elaborate apology for Goh Chok Tong’s  ‘quitter’ label some years back.

You don’t need to fly the Noose team or Phua Chu Kang to major cities to help Singaporeans ‘RE-CONNECT’ with the local scene. Thanks to the Internet and social media, if I want to see Kit Chan sing ‘Home’ I’ll just Youtube it. If I want to preserve my Singlish I’ll view Mrbrown podcasts or Dr Jia Jia. If I’m the sort who can’t wait to serve NS, I’ll Google Mindef. If I want to keep in touch with friends back home, I’ll Skype, Facebook or Tweet.    Still, the fact that tens of thousands of OS have flocked to Singapore Days suggests that there’ s more to it than just hawker food or multimedia history lessons plucked out of recycled NDP montage video clips. Maybe it’s simply hanging out with people who speak your lingo, with whom you’re guaranteed something common to talk about (lah punctuated no less), nevermind if you’ve never Mambo-Jamboed in your life, or haven’t the faintest inclination to pack your bags. If anything, this annual diaspora bonding may even deter OS from ever returning, given that Singapore Day always seems to oversell itself as a fun, vibrant, dare I say more ‘Singaporean’ , jamboree than the actual Singapore itself.

In my opinion, the OSU should keep it subtle and simple, ditch the NDP songs and ridiculous dancing, the vain attempts to make Singapore or its SAF attractive again, and just rename the awful sounding Singapore Day to ‘Shiok (Food) Festival’. Don’t even attempt to sell Merlion keychains.

Filed under: 2000s, 2011, 2012, Festivals, Hawkers, Local actors, Local food, Money | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Parent volunteers doing ridiculous things for Phase 2B registration

Posted on February 26, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Parents slam MOE scheme’, 25 Feb 2012, article in insing.com

Parents feel that the volunteer scheme in the primary one registration process should go. In a radio survey carried out by Lianhe Wanbao on radio FM100.3, most listeners feel that the government should scrap the parent volunteer scheme.

…The scheme has so far drawn a multitude of complaints, with parents criticising that those with connections to the school get too much priority. According to The Straits Times, many also complained that there are often more applicants than available places in later stages of the registration.

…According to the (MOE) website, those who put in at least 40 hours of voluntary work for the school in the Parent Volunteer Scheme can join phase 2B of the registration, a phase with priority over those with no connections. However, there is no guarantee that the child of the parent volunteer will get a place in the school after putting in the hours of voluntary work.

…Some (parent volunteers) have been asked to direct traffic or to be ushers at school events. They will also be asked to take part in the school’s fund raising activities by manning booths, helping to sell items, or to sponsor items and food for these activities. If parent volunteers have special skills, such as in performing arts or sports, they may also be asked to take on student groups to coach them in these skills.

According to Frontier Primary School’s application form for parents to join their Parent Volunteer Scheme:

Selection of parent volunteers is not on a first come first served basis. The school reserves the rights to short-list applicants whom it deems fit to meet the need of the school and our pupils. In view of the 5-day work week, voluntary services that could be performed during weekdays and would be most beneficial to the school and our pupils will be considered first. Only successful applicants will be notified to commence their services.

Maris Stella High will even subject parents to an INTERVIEW if required.

The number of applications received usually exceeds the number of parent volunteers the school wishes to engage. As such, an interview will be held for shortlisted applicants only.

This isn’t a ‘volunteer’ scheme; it’s a second job, one that may be harder to get than a real job even with impressive paper qualifications, a job that requires the skills that you don’t usually apply in your actual profession. Hell, you may even hate doing some of these things but don’t have a choice. It also doesn’t guarantee placement if the school you want to enroll your kid in is just at your doorstep, or even if you exceed the 40 hours doing the janitor’s work unchoking the toilet in the principal’s office. If you’re someone without a specific skill set related to children or school facilities, you’re unlikely to be shortlisted. Even if you have a musical talent like being a master recorder player, you would have to compete with other parents with similar skills. If it’s any consolation to parents who think they’ve been outdone by people with ‘connections’, Zoe Tay herself was snubbed by Nanyang Primary School despite clocking over 80 hours of ‘voluntary work’. You probably won’t see her playing a teacher on TV soon.

If you have the means to pull strings or your child is a prodigy, you can bypass the volunteer scheme altogether by attaching recommendation letters from your MP, or a report from a psychologist declaring your child a genius. You may even do the dirty work indirectly by serving your RC, who’ll reward your service with the MP’s letter above, along with a given that you would vote in the same MP in the next GE out of gratitude. It would also help if you belong to an affiliated church if you’re targetting a Presbyterian school, a member of the Singapore Buddhist Federation for Maha Bodhi, or if you’re a grassroots leader. Even MM Lee has acknowledged that the selection basis is unfair, that it’s not ‘meritocratic’ and based on the social class of parents, yet this epidemic paper chase and its side effect of parent ‘volunteerism’ can’t be helped.

Here’s a sample of the kind of odd-jobs, some rather embarrassing ones, that company directors, atheists, celebrities, scientists, doctors and lawyers may have to swallow (on WEEKDAYS) for the sake of their children. As far as my grasp of the definition of ‘volunteer’ is concerned, one doesn’t go about doing it with a moody sulk on his/her face. Unless you’ve always wanted to be a teacher all your life, these volunteer roles are utterly joyless, and possibly futile endeavours.

A cock and bull story

 If you’ve ever for the dear life of me resorted to acting as a cock in a school skit just to clock 40 hours of voluntary work, remember to film the entire episode and show it to your child just before PSLE exam, using your harrowing sacrifice as motivation, maybe guilt, to do well. Some parents may find such mind-numbing tasks a pleasant break from their terminally boring jobs, until they release they need to ballot with other disgruntled parents when it comes to the crunch. The grouchy father who tells the kids to shut up on the excursion bus may still end up victorious over the bubbly, patient mother who teaches kids enriching activities like wrapping bazhang during the Dragon Boat Festival.

It would be interesting to have some data of what skills or tasks  are correlated to registration success, but I’m guessing you need to be good with kids, have excellent communication and coaching skills, good project management and event organising i.e a teacher. Anyone else will just have to try their luck  with blowing balloons,  stacking books on shelves, pointing cars in the right direction or pulling weeds.

Filed under: 2000s, 2012, Kids, Local actors, Parenting, Politicians | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Slapping on TV does not reflect reality

Posted on January 28, 2012 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Love the show but not the slapping’, 28 Jan 2012, ST Forum

(Esther Wong): MY FAMILY and I enjoy watching Double Bonus on Channel 8 at 9pm from Monday to Friday.

However, the frequent slapping scenes are uncalled for and are very disturbing.

I hope the Channel 8 drama team can cut down on these scenes because they do not reflect reality and are likely to teach wrong family values, especially to young children who watch the drama serial.

Zoe gets it

If everyone were to disapprove of Channel 8 dramas ‘not reflecting reality’, the station would go bankrupt from lack of entertainment value, not that I’m a fan myself. Just look at the gung-ho action setpieces and bomb-in-a-dustbin hijinks in C.L.I.F. In fact, the trailer of Double Bonus itself (click pic above), with its cheesy recycled from the 80′s special effects,  dry-ice masquerading as celestial clouds, and the presence of two gorgeous Pan-Asian hunks, already says a lot about the gratuitous fantasy  in this serial without you having to watch a single episode. Like its name suggests, Double Bonus is your obligatory Chinese New Year drama special designed to promote family togetherness, with plenty of images of people eating at a table and doomed to climax to fever pitch with the entire cast breaking the third wall and wishing viewers long life and prosperity ahead and making you feel like hugging your Ah Gong right away. Long-time fans of local drama would remember CNY clones like ‘Prosperity‘, ‘Happy Family’, ‘Reunion Dinner’ and ‘Uncle, Where’s My Ang Pow?’. OK the last one was made up.

Times like these you can’t just bank on veterans like Zoe Tay or foreign eye candy anymore, which explains why scriptwriters, already running short of ideas other than cashing in on rape scenes, need to woo viewers with some good old fashioned family violence, something which Taiwanese family-spat marathon melodrama like ‘Ai’ is famous for. The Pan-Asians, the goofy costumes, the supernatural angle, are light-hearted elements just to suit the occasion and getting in the way  of what the folks at Channel 8 really aspire to produce: An all-out domestic slap-happy scandal-a-minute Armageddon. If you look at the trailer closely you’ll notice friendlier acts of violence like the ‘forehead push’, which could inadvertently cause as much harm as a whiplash in a car accident. Hugs and kisses just don’t do it for viewers anymore. We are instinctively attracted to domestic abuse like we rubberneck at car crashes, which is why slapping works. We like to see people ‘lose it’ as a vicarious, sadistic pleasure, and nothing serves up the tension like an impending slap to the face, especially after random objects like vases, plates and windows have been destroyed.

Slapping is probably unheard of in the writer’s sanitised window of the world, but to say slapping doesn’t reflect reality is like denying the existence of masturbation. Perhaps she should go out more often, chances are she may even catch a rare public slapping act in action. Teachers and supervisors of orphanages are known to punish by slapping, and I’m pretty sure some passionate couples still abuse each other in the heat of argument (and still make love after, perhaps with different forms of ‘slapping’). Ordinary citizens have been known to slap policemen, and so too women clashing over male lovers.  Google the definition ‘catfight’ and you’ll find ‘slapping’. Even today’s kids reverse the domestic order of discipline by giving a tight one to their mothers and boast online about it, like Adelyn Ho Seh Bo.

So, slapping, despite most people restraining themselves from delivering one to their spouses, bosses, MPs , other people’s annoying children or a kinky lover, is very REAL indeed. It’s the only bloodless physical act where one can feel so good after unleashing one, but wracked with guilt just a second later. How often do we vent ‘I feel like giving him a tight slap’ or ‘He deserves to be slapped’? In a way, the act of slapping is like learning what sex is. You have to see it with your own eyes or experience one yourself, and since slapping has been in existence since God knows when, it’s unfair to blame the media for taking the drama one slap too far, though one should deduct points for lack of imagination. The alternative to insulting a character in a show is to flame his Facebook account, but you don’t need TV for that do we.

Filed under: 2000s, 2011, 2012, Chinese New Year, Foreign workers, Kids, Local actors, Local TV shows, Parenting, Violence | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Next Page »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 171 other followers