Safra gym ad condoning sexual harrassment

From ‘Seeing red over Safra’s healthy distractions’, 10 March 2014, article by Lee Wan Sim, My Paper

AN ADVERTISEMENT aimed at attracting people to sign up with the Safra National Service Association’s clubs has ended up riling some online. The ad shows two men working out at a gym ogling an attractive woman behind her back, with the tagline: “A great workout, good friends and some healthy distractions.

Several netizens saw the ad as degrading to women. A woman named Cindy Ng posted a picture of the ad, which she said appeared at a bus stop in Upper Thomson Road, on the Safra Facebook page on Saturday.

She said this was “outright distasteful, completely disrespectful to women and borders on condoning sexual harassment”. Several other commenters – both men and women – agreed, with one user called Faith Toh claiming that “through this ad, Safra has endorsed the objectification of women”.

However, others disagreed, saying it was “harmless” and did not degrade women. In a Facebook comment, Safra said the ad was meant “to showcase some bonding moments among our NSmen while having a tongue-in-cheek approach to life experiences”.

“Be it in the gym or anywhere else, it is not uncommon for some women to be checked out by men or vice versa,” it said, adding that the ad was “not aimed to devalue women and neither does Safra condone it”.

Pumping iron never looked so good

Pumping iron never looked so good

AWARE, as expected, got into the thick of the ad controversy, saying that the poster encourages perverted leering and makes gyms dangerous for women. I’m not a fan of gym workouts, but I’d gather one reason why there are often mirrors there is not so you can sneak a glance at someone’s rack, but to ogle at your own bulging awesomeness like the narcissistic handsome devil that you are.

Ogling is universal for both sexes of course, but it’s only played to comedic effect in pop culture when men are the ones doing the eyeballing. Women complain about the sleazy attention to the point of calling it a precursor for gangrape, but few would realise that staring at a comely woman tends to depict men as the more IDIOTIC sex. Whether it’s having them fall into a manhole, walk face first in a pole or fall off a chair, the gag is always on the one nursing a ridiculous hard-on and drooling from the mouth. It happens in sex comedies and ads selling products from shampoo to low-fat yogurt. Why isn’t anyone complaining that the ad undermines our ability to think outside our genitals?

If anything, attractive women are usually the total opposite of HEALTHY distractions. They turn men into total morons, and no exception in a gym if in your attempt to impress the babe on the treadmill, you pump more iron than your body can take and end up with a torn triceps, injuring yourself before you can even think of doing any actual molesting of your own. Even if a woman does get any kind of unsavoury propositions from stinky men in a gym, there are plenty of defensive weapons at her disposal, like the little dumbbell the SAFRA model is carrying for example. The last thing we want to do is chat up a girl who’s all pumped up for her boxercise class, with a devastating 5 pounder in her grasp.

No one in the right mind would sign up for SAFRA just to check out the ‘healthy distractions’. You could do it tactically on the MRT, at work, the beach etc and it would be the perfectly normal thing to do since most men have control over their animal urges and have gotten away with daily ogling without turning into sex maniacs. When you take a staged snapshot and stamp a gym membership product on it on the other hand, it suddenly becomes a glaring endorsement of rape culture and sexploitation. AWARE sure knows how to flex a feminist muscle or too, what with the flag-waving and man-bashing and all. They may get an army song lyric banned, but I doubt their argument here holds much weight.

About these ads

NUS Malay Studies Prof calling lesbianism cancerous

From ‘NUS looking into complaints over prof’s views on homosexuality’, 28 Feb 2014, CNA

The National University of Singapore said it is looking into a complaint from two alumni and a student on a professor’s views on homosexuality. In their letter to university authorities, the three took issue with two Facebook posts by Professor Khairudin Aljunied from the school’s Malay Studies Department.

They claimed that Professor Khairudin had described “alternative modes of sexual orientation” as “wayward”, and as “cancers” and “social diseases” to be “cleansed”. One of the posts has been removed while the other has since been edited.

The FB post from Prof Khairudin ended with the fiery, call-to-arms salvo: ‘Make the pure message of Islam VIRAL to cleanse the IMPURITIES of liberal Islam and lesbianism. Together we will stop these CANCERS in their tracks!’ Ironically, there’s nothing more ‘viral’ than monotheistic faiths, which in the course of history have done its fair share of genocidal infidel ‘cleansing’ of its own. PERGAS (Singapore Islamic Scholars & Religious Teachers Association) were more subdued in their disapproval, calling the HPB FAQ’s merely ‘insensitive’. Fellow NUS staffer and Law Prof Thio Li-Ann thankfully has nothing further to add on the gay issue. YET.

Incidentally another zealot Lawrence Khong had this to say today in response to Minister Gan Kim Yong defending the same FAQs, in particular about the common level of ‘commitment’ required between two lovers regardless of their sexual orientation:

That is like telling our young they can pump themselves up with illegal and harmful drugs as long as they self protect by not sharing needles. (Pastor hits out at Health Minister’s reply on homosexuality FAQ, 28 Feb 13, ST)

So one Christian pastor compares homosexuality to crack, while a Muslim professor and scholar brands it, rather flippantly, as a debilitating disease that affects millions of people all over the world, including Christians, Muslims, atheists and yes even homosexuals. It appears that in religious texts ‘cancer’ is still synonymous with a vile scourge, but we’ve long left that medieval stigma of cancer as a biblical plague behind us. As someone who’ve seen good, perfectly kind people fight a losing battle against the dreaded disease, I find the Prof’s use of metaphor, given his position in academia,  unfortunate and dehumanising.

An inclusive society has no room for the Prof’s ultra-conservative ‘school of Islamic thought’. In Indonesia, we’re already seeing moderate Muslim scholars adopt a more compassionate stance towards homosexuals, that all beings are equal in the eyes of God. At the other extreme, a ‘Teachers Foundation’ in Malaysia has organised seminars and published handouts on how to spot a gay child so you can nip the homosexual ‘problem’ in the bud early. A gay boy would be wearing ‘tight, light coloured clothing’ while a lesbian has ‘no affection for men and like to hang out and sleep in the company of women’. You also can’t make a movie about gay people in Malaysia unless the gay protagonist converts into a ‘normal’ heterosexual. Meanwhile, in smack-in-the-middle Singapore, films about gay love among Muslims like ‘A Jihad for Love’ remain completely banned. You can, however, download the entire film off Youtube, and no you won’t get cancer after viewing it.

In a 2012 interview with kita.sg, Prof Khairudin divulged that he ‘always wanted to be a celebrity of some sort’. If his FB anti-gay post goes ‘viral’, he may very well become one. For all the wrong reasons.

More spouses straying within 5 years of marriage

From ‘Rise in couples who split within five years’, 16 Feb 2014, article by Janice Tai, Sunday Times

The first five years of marriage are proving a challenge for more Singapore couples – that is when partners stray, and a rising number of marriages break down. A study on straying couples by Touch Family Services found that slightly more than half the 164 respondents polled had affairs within five years of marriage. For one in three, the affairs happened in the first two years of married life.

…The Touch study, done over the past two years, invited individuals who had unfaithful spouses to complete questionnaires online. Close to 1,000 people responded, but only 164 met the criteria of having been married and of having an unfaithful spouse. The researchers found that nine in 10 of the troubled marriages involved dual-income couples and one in three cheating spouses earned more than $5,000 a month.

…Counsellors point to several reasons the crisis point of the modern marriage seemed to be arriving sooner, and especially among better-off working professionals. They say there is a diminishing social stigma attached to divorce and some couples are more willing to give up on a marriage in trouble.

…As to why adultery seems more prevalent among better-off couples, he (Dr Terence Yow, Reach Family Service director) said overseas studies have also established that people with a higher socio-economic status have a higher risk or propensity for infidelity. They tend to be more stressed, have the means to maintain an extramarital affair, have a bigger social network and are more attractive to others.

In a separate CNA report of the same study, 6 out of 10 people surveyed would remain married despite having a spouse cheat on them. CNA also revealed that Touch Family Services is an affiliate of Touch Community Services, whose chairman is renown as a staunch opponent of the ‘looming threat’ to family that is homosexuality. His name? Lawrence Khong.

Knowing who’s in charge behind Touch, it’s only natural to scrutinise this study for selection bias. A surprisingly high number of those 164 polled were spouses who were earning good money, a finding milked by the investigators to suggest that the higher your income, the more likely you’d stray. This simplistic assumption correlates status with sex but ignores other factors that contribute to infidelity. No details were given on how the researchers defined ‘unfaithful’ and how the subjects and investigators verified that cheating was even real, or whether they were delusional. Did the spouse go out on a ‘date’ alone? Did the subject stumble upon a naughty Whatsapp message? Did the spouse surf porn behind her back? Were ‘in-depth’ interviews conducted such as those in a 2012 study which concluded that half of about 500 married couples ‘considered’ divorce?

I’d be interested in the demographics of those polled, namely their race and religious inclination and whether it was representative of the general population. Are people who respond to Touch initiatives more likely to be Christian than Muslims, Buddhists or Hindus? Or the fact that they were looking for resources or help from the Touch website before even participating in the poll suggests that they’re already motivated to salvage the marriage (hence the 6/10 who want to remain married).  Given the complexity and diversity in attitudes towards marriage across cultures and social class, the Touch results appear skewed towards those ‘well-off’ and puts high income earners under an unnecessary spotlight. As for keeping marriage alive, whatever motivations you have in saving it may also depend on what your religion says about it, rich or poor.

The jury is still out on what causes spikes in early cheating and ultimately divorces given recent mixed results and anecdotes from elsewhere. One report last year cited wedding expenses as a reason for Muslim couples splitting. Another concluded that OLDER couples above 45 are breaking up because parents ‘don’t know what to do with each other’ once the children move out. In 2011, the top factors were ‘unreasonable behaviour’, ‘infidelity’ or ‘domestic violence’ depending on whether it’s a civil or Muslim marriage.  There’s also the issue of parenting troubles, dealing with crazy in-laws and in some cases, taking offence toward one’s cooking. Other counsellors have encountered relationships strained over simple household chores. Why not blame the rise of social media, online dating/chat apps, and sexting too?.

In short, a broken marriage can’t be explained by income alone without adjusting for all the little petty things unique to each couple that pave the way to destruction. Experts also talk of this ‘diminishing social stigma’ but don’t have any data to back up what appears to be a ‘still-hot divorcee’ theory. Even if the stigma is diminished, it doesn’t mean more people are taking divorce lightly. Divorce is emotionally and financially taxing, and the possibility of being back ‘on the market’ instead of branded as ‘used goods’ may not be worth the cost, time and effort of killing a marriage especially one with children involved. Unless you’re ‘born again single’ Allan Wu, of course.

Lim Biow Chuan utterly disappointed in HPB Sexuality FAQ

From ‘Disappointed MP criticises HPB for its FAQ on sexuality’, 7 Feb 2014, article by Siau Ming En, Today

Mountbatten MP Lim Biow Chuan yesterday hit out at one of the responses, which said homosexual and heterosexual relationships are not too different. Writing on his Facebook page, he said: “I cannot agree that ‘A same-sex relationship is not too different from a heterosexual relationship’. The two relationships are different and they go against the Government’s policy of promoting heterosexual married couples to have healthy relationships and to build stable nuclear and extended family units.

“I am utterly disappointed at the HPB’s stand in issuing such a statement,” said Mr Lim, who has also filed a question asking the Health Minister to clarify his ministry’s stand on the board’s online resource when Parliament next sits on Feb 17.

…Noting that the bulk of the FAQ seemed to suggest that a homosexual relationship “is quite normal”, he added: “If we say a homosexual relationship is quite normal, then people get confused because that’s not the state’s pro-family position”.

It would be nice for once to hear from someone expressing disapproval about homosexuality who isn’t also an active church member. According to Mr Lim’s Facebook intro, he serves as a church leader at Ang Mo Kio Methodist Church and occasionally preaches in it. Looks like he’s bringing the pulpit into the sphere of politics, and no less preachy either. In 2007, the same MP objected to PM Lee’s acknowledgement that there might be some evidence to show that the gay tendency is inborn. If Lee Hsien Loong’s father had been the one instead to suggest in Parliament that homosexuality is a genetic variation, not an ‘aberration’, I doubt Lim would have stood up to protest against the very idea of homosexuality being as normal as one having double eyelids.

Some readers have noted that the gay issue is no longer a private matter, but has been ‘politicised’ into a emotionally- charged national one, with MPs unleashing their personal views while shielding themselves behind the Government’s ‘pro-family’ position. The ‘nuclear family’ argument doesn’t account for heterosexual couples who, by choice or biology, do not have children themselves, compared to say same-sex couples who adopt children and take better care of them than broken, estranged families do. Lim Biow Chuan’s tirade against the sin of homosexuality is tame, however, compared to how one ex-NMP refers to it as a ‘gender identity disorder’, ‘immoral’ and that anal sex is like  ‘drinking a straw through one’s nose’. She’s none other than Law Professor Thio Li-Ann, and unlike our disapproving, silently cringing MPs today, she had no qualms about letting everyone know how she REALLY felt about homosexuality. None of this ‘family unit’ nonsense, and yes, she’s a Christian too.

We can’t help but ‘politicise’ homosexuality, because we have a law that specifically targets men who engage in it, and somewhere along the way when our fertility dipped, the government adopted a pro-family ‘position’ that opponents to homosexuality love to trumpet to their advantage because they don’t want to be accused of hate-crime and homophobia.  To individuals like Lim, it is really discomfort, aversion and the niggling, irrational feeling that ‘something’s not right’ with gayness and it shouldn’t be championed, and the more they try to express their views ‘scientifically’ or how gayness goes against a national ‘call of duty’, the more it sounds like a cow telling a tiger that eating other animals is wrong and that a life of abstinence from meat makes the world a better place.

Other politicians like to speak for the ‘majority’ of Singaporeans that we’re not ‘ready’ for open homosexuality, that Singapore is still a ‘conservative’ nation at heart, conveniently forgetting about the many sex corruption scandals that put perpetrators in our highest public office to shame, wild heterosexual behaviour which has done more harm to the reputation of government agencies than, in the vein of Thio Li-Ann’s vivid analogy, sucking things up your nose behind closed doors.

In 2012, Lim was whacked in the back of his head by a stray skipping rope thanks to Tin Pei Lin in a community event. He later went on to mention that the skipping campaign was ‘part of building an inclusive society’. Wonder if the knock on the head had anything to do with the blatant irony of that sentence.

HPB sexuality FAQs smacks of liberationist propaganda

From ‘HPB’s sexuality FAQs undermine family’, 6 Feb 2014, contribution by Lawrence Khong, Opinion, MyPaper

The FAQs On Sexuality page on the Health Promotion Board (HPB) website is shocking and deeply upsetting. The tone of the entire article gives the impression that HPB condones same-sex relationships and promotes homosexual practice as something normal. The author appears to have taken sides on a highly contentious and politicised subject. Here, I address five issues covered in the FAQs.

ISSUE 1

The FAQs draw a false equation between heterosexual and homosexual relationships in a manner that smacks of liberationist propaganda intended to mainstream homosexuality.

ISSUE 2

HPB adopted a biased and selective approach by naming only a pro-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) group to help those who are looking for support. We are disappointed that HPB’s original article referenced only one option for help, namely Oogachaga. Its hotline is run by specially trained LGBTs or LGBT-affirming counsellors.

To exclude other available avenues of care, such as Liberty League and Focus on the Family, is to discriminate in favour of LGBT-affirming organisations. This is both unjust and harmful.

Lawrence Khong is an avid supporter of the arcane 377A law that criminalises gay sex and believes that repealing it is a ‘looming threat’ to the family unit. His idea of ‘avenue of care’ is undoubtedly seeking a ‘cure’ for homosexuality. One of the support groups cited, Liberty League, aims to help people who want to ‘overcome same-sex attractions’. It is also partly financed by the Government. The ‘Focus on the Family‘ website is largely silent on LGBT issues, and pretty useless if you want to know more about sexual identity. What is ‘unjust and harmful’ is misdirecting gays who need counselling to what is secretly ‘sexual rehab’, the risks and consequences of which remain unknown.

Oogachaga, on the other hand, embraces LGBTQ individuals and ‘diversity’. The site itself has a wealth of resources for those interested, though it can be challenging telling your LGBTs from your GLBTI (gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, intersex). Then there are the bears, cubs and G-men from the ‘Bear Project’, which celebrates big gay men though it also sounds like a special interest group for ‘furries’.  HPB somehow deleted links to Oogachaga among other support groups after FAQ launch, and it remains to be seen if the conservative tyranny of Lawrence Khong, among other religious types, had anything to do with it.

ISSUE 3

…We disagree with the claim that moral objection to homosexual behaviour is based on “irrational fear, disgust, or hatred” of homosexuals or bisexuals because they “do not conform to traditional sexual roles and stereotypes”. Far from it. Moral objection is based on the intrinsic physiological nature of the male and female bodies.

I think what Khong meant is ‘human male and female bodies’. Anyone who reads beyond the Holy Bible would have heard about same-sex shenanigans going on even among our primate, God-created, cousins.  A pastor and magician, Khong is even claiming to be an expert in not just human biology, but ALL biology.

ISSUE 4

The FAQs fail to give an accurate picture and clear warnings of the health risks posed by alternative sex. According to medical research and mental-health studies, the threat is real and severe. Homosexuals have a shorter lifespan, more sexually transmitted infections and more health problems than the general population.

General population meaning compared to heterosexuals? What does Khong mean by ‘health problems’? If they do experience greater problems such as depression, could it be because of the rest of us – the ‘conservative majority’? A ridiculous, sweeping statement made with all fire and brimstone emotion and not an ounce of rational thinking or data to back it up, using annoyingly vague categories to disguise the fact that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

ISSUE 5

The FAQs make an unproven assertion that homosexuals can have long-lasting relationships and, in this way, the FAQs clearly promote a “mainstreaming homosexuality as normal” bias. We disagree because this claim is only theoretical. Some research findings show a different trend. Homosexuals register a higher incidence of short-lived relationships and sexual violence.

Looking at the rate of cheating, divorces and domestic violence among ‘normal’ couples, I find this assertion rather hard to swallow. We can, however, study the rates of divorce among same-sex couples eventually, since SEVENTEEN other countries in world have already legalised gay marriage. Lawrence would have none of that, obviously, and even if someone could convince him that gay marriages can work long term, he’ll pull some ‘research findings’ out of his magician’s hat to support his point that homosexuals are worse off than heterosexuals.

What I would like to see, however, is a live debate on national TV between pastor Khong and gay champions like Alex Au, though the entertainment of such a confrontation may be ruined by the likelihood of Khong making himself vanish into thin air when he’s on the verge of losing a critical argument.

Purple light army song promotes sexual violence against women

From AWARE Facebook page, 15 Nov 2013 and ‘Offensive verse of army song banned’, 16 Nov 2013, article by Jermyn Chow, ST

(AWARE) Ever wonder if speaking up about sexism really creates change? Here’s one case where it has! Earlier this year, AWARE learned of “Purple Light”, a marching song sung by many NSmen, which included the lines:

“Booking out, see my girlfriend
Saw her with another man
Kill the man, rape my girlfriend
With my rifle and my buddy and me.”

We were troubled that NSmen were bonding over misogynist lyrics about committing sexual violence against women. So we raised our concerns with MINDEF and SAF.

And now we have excellent news: MINDEF and SAF have confirmed that they took steps to investigate. They will “immediately halt” the singing of these lyrics, which they describe as “contrary to the values of [their] organisation”.

It’s really encouraging that MINDEF and SAF are prepared to listen to feedback, recognise this as an issue and take action on it. Thumbs up!

(ST)…Aware’s executive director Corinna Lim said in a statement yesterday that the group was alerted to the offensive lyrics by seven national servicemen during a workshop in July that was held as part of Aware’s ongoing campaign to stop violence against women.

Ms Lim said: “These misogynistic lyrics tolerate and normalise the violent sexual abuse of women, condoning gang- rape as a justified punishment for infidelity.”

She added: “Such lyrics may encourage young men at impressionable ages to objectify women, and contribute to an environment where violence against women is trivialised.”

If I had sung such a lyric during road marches or battalion runs I would have remembered it till now, but I don’t. I would also never think of participating in AWARE workshops to protest about army songs like these 7 NSmen did. In another version of the song, ‘rape’ is replaced by ‘beat’, which doesn’t make it any better by AWARE’s standards. Purple Light has devolved over the years, from a rousing ode to loyalty and patriotism to the extent of ‘burying yourself with your rifle and buddy when you die’, to one containing a tasteless, but more importantly, unfunny verse re-enacting some angry boy’s sick fantasy.

This is how the ‘clean’ version sounds like, with the violence and misogyny replaced by ‘broken heart, back to army’, where the recruit seeks solace in the Purple Light trinity that is ‘my rifle and my buddy and me’. No sir, nothing remotely kinky about that at all.


From the AWARE post, it seems that the Legion just wants SAF to stop singing those specific lyrics, but makes no mention of calling for the song’s BAN altogether, as interpreted by TRS. Maybe it’s time we standardise the song to the wimpy ‘broken heart’ version, but I doubt that anyone who continues to belt out the X-rated Purple Light would get any form of actual punishment beyond verbal abuse such as ‘KNNBCCB’ (next on the list of AWARE’s banned army words, perhaps?)

AWARE may nitpick on marketing bloopers like green eyeshadow for women and trophy boyfriend advertisements, but intruding into camp affairs like marching songs, swear-words or CB leaves is like a group of Girl Guides trying to infiltrate a Boys Only tree-house and telling them not to use ‘boobies’ as a secret password. We often use the phrase ‘fuck spider’ in camp but you don’t see the SPCA banging on our doors demanding to stop this gross bestiality. MOM are not taking NSmen to task for making their maids carry backpacks for them, and the Nature Society is not at all concerned about us messing with taxonomy when we name plants after female genitalia. For decades, NS has taken obscene liberties with sex equality, yet we haven’t become a nation of rapists and wife-beaters, as AWARE is terrified of us turning into after singing Purple Light while marching.

But it’s not just army songs that are too ‘rapey’ for their own good. What does AWARE think about Robin Thicke’s Blurred Lines then, a massively popular song that’s not confined to army grounds but blasted out there on the airwaves for little children to hear. Oh the humanity!

OK now he was close, tried to domesticate you
But you’re an animal, baby it’s in your nature
Just let me liberate you

Or God forbid, Sir Mix-a-Lot’s Baby’s Got Back.

That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung, wanna pull out your tough
‘Cause you notice that butt was stuffed

Why, we should also abolish the classic analogy, or rather ‘objectification’, of rifles as soldiers’ ‘wives’, since we do a lot of weapon ‘stripping’, chain them up in an armory once we’re done with them, ‘muzzle’ them and rest our cheeks against their butts. The frequent use of ‘Guniang’ as a taunt is also degrading to the women, depicting them as the ‘weaker’ sex. Or ban sexy SAF Drama and Dance performers after a victorious field exercise and have them replaced by Village People tribute bands instead, singing ‘Macho Macho Man’, with our rifles and our buddies and… well, you get my drift.

That is where, I wanna be

Ironically, there’s a Purple Light Walk held in the US which aims to raise awareness of domestic violence. Also, a Purple Light movie in the works, which I hope has none of that sexist, misogynistic content that made Ah Boys to Men such a disgrace to the SAF. One Ah Boy actor, Ridhwan Azman, made the news after slapping his girlfriend. Not sure if the ‘Purple Light’ verse was playing in his head then, like a Satanic rock song coaxing one into sacrificing a virgin at the altar. In fact, AWARE nominated Ah Boys to Men for the prestigious Alamak award for its unabashed sexist violence (with a 48% vote), instead of calling for its rating to be revised to R-21 or something. We should really have an award for AWARE’s complaints, called the ‘AWARE Insistently Yakking On Hombres’ award, or ‘AIYOH’ for short.

Maybe AWARE  should propose its own ‘You Go Girl!’ remix of  Purple Light, which would probably contain lyrics like:

Purple line, take to Sengkang
Lao Tiko, staring at me
Take my heels, stab his birdie
With my BFF and my Prada and MEEEE

Went shopping, got GSS
Saw my man, with another girl

Take my scissors, cut off his testes
With my BFF and my Prada and MEEEE

And we guys would just laugh it off, or cringe nervously, instead of complaining about graphic genital mutilation.

Postscript: Mindef later clarified that the song hasn’t been outright banned, but confirmed that the original version was indeed the ‘broken heart’ one. Despite the army having us ‘training to be soldier’ and ‘fight for our land’, there’s nothing a killing machine can do to confront his cheater girlfriend and her new guy except confide in his buddy and hug his rifle sobbing to sleep. I’d suggest removing the stanza altogether.

Ashley Madison banned in Singapore

From ‘MDA blocks access to Ashley Madison’, 8 Nov 2013, article by Mohd Azhar Aziz, Today

The Media Development Authority of Singapore (MDA) announced today (Nov 8) that it will not allow the Ashley Madison website to operate in Singapore and has blocked access to the site. In a press statement, the MDA said that the website was banned in Singapore as “it aggressively promotes and facilitates extramarital affairs”.

“It is against the public interest to allow Ashley Madison to promote its website in flagrant disregard of our family values and public morality,” MDA said.

Life is short. And so is Ashley Madison’s ill-fated attempt, as creator Noel Biderman explained, to ‘migrate infidelity to a platform wherein two like-minded (Singaporean) adults can explore what it is they are seeking in a discreet manner’.  One Today writer described such a move by the MDA as a ‘paper tiger’, only to raise the forbidden fruit status of AM, though there are various tricks to bypass the censors altogether, Go Away MDA being one of them.

Pressure from Minister Chan Chun Sing aside, the 27,000 strong petition community known as ‘Block Ashley Madison‘ on Facebook yesterday fired a bellowing tirade at MDA for allowing AM to tag ‘sg’ in their domain address and ignoring the threat of weak-minded Singaporeans succumbing to the moral cesspit that is adultery. The page owner, ‘Mr Tan‘, also issued a stern warning to AM that they’ll ‘not have the last laugh’, would get what’s coming to them ’10 times harder’, and that the ‘light will always overcome the darkness’, with all the evangelical fire-and-brimstone passion of a grandmaster exorcist coercing Satan out of His human vessel. Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone, I say. Or in this case, a boulder.

Well, now that the site is blocked for good, mission accomplished BAM! You all can rest easy knowing that your spouses are safe by your side, divorce rates won’t skyrocket, that our children can focus on their PSLE with a loving stable family behind them all the way, while the rest of us continue to watch Desperate Housewives reruns on cable, reliving torrid fantasies of Eva Longoria screwing her gardener in the kitchen while her hubby is at work. Without AM’s corrupting influence, we shall no longer have the urge to take our foul thoughts a step further, log in to find the perfect willing partner to come over wearing nothing except mud-streaked overalls and getting frisky right next to the sink. Hallejulah!

I believe BAM supporters are not THAT naive and generally acknowledge that infidelity will continue to happen anyway, with or without AM. A chance meeting with an old flame, a colleague in the office, a business partner, your own student, sometimes right under the nose of our Almighty lord God. The last thing they need is something to facilitate such taboo relationships further, especially one ‘aggressively marketed’ like the Facebook for Flings with a brand name that sounds like one of the Olsen Twins or a spinoff Victoria’s Secrets catalogue. Alas, like the 100 sites ‘symbolically’ banned by the MDA, AM too has become the ‘whipping girl’ among the many platforms available for people to fool around at the swipe and a click. Like adultfriendfinder.sg, for example, where you can choose to have a ‘discreet relationship’, which isn’t exactly mystery pen pals in this day and age. Is there going to be a BAFF petition now?

Not sure if this is a case of MDA caving in to high-horse orthodoxy, or they sought guidance from moral philosophers and religious leaders before dropping the axe on AM. They’re forgetting about other debauched sites though. On the same day that AM announced its launch here, 5 Singaporeans were caught in a sting op offering to pay ‘Sweetie’, a computer generated TEN YEAR OLD GIRL, to perform very naughty things. We’re so caught up with something that’s technically not ILLEGAL that we forget about portals that encourage men to defile girls young enough to be their daughters, some granddaughters even.

Temptation to commit sins of the flesh are everywhere, whether it’s an adultery app, online casinos, a sleazy spa or a 7 Eleven selling booze and cigarettes right around the corner. It’s like restricting sex shops or R21 movies from heartlanders, or a nanny stowing away a child’s favourite toy because he’s playing with it too much. Nobody’s doing anything about our gay spas either, which harbour death traps that kill you while you’re trying to strangle yourself for erotic kicks. MDA’s ‘light touch’ regulation is really an excuse for ‘we can’t do anything about it’. Yet when something like AM stands out and should be made an example of, they pound on it like Thor’s hammer on a protruding nail.

Bye, Ashley Madison. You could have been the flirty girl next door, but the neighbours are welcoming you with burning stakes, pitchforks and crucifixes instead of wine and roses. Now that you good folks have done Singaporeans all a proud and just service that we should be eternally grateful for – expelling this wicked temptress from our doorsteps – you can all take a much-deserved break from the complaining and go back to knitting sweaters and hunting eggnog recipes for Christmas, thank you very much.

Leonard ‘Santa Claus’ Francis defrauding the US Navy

From ‘SEX, ports and government contracts’, 6 Oct 2013, article by Walter Sim, Sunday Times

Singapore-based businessman Leonard Glenn Francis has been reported to own a sprawling 70,000 sq ft Nassim Road bungalow, which has become famous for its extravagant Christmas light-ups.

But his next home could be a jail in the United States, where the 58-year-old Malaysian father of five was charged last month with defrauding the US Navy in a case involving hundreds of millions of dollars in government contracts.

Part of the plot allegedly involved bribing a US Navy commander (Michael Misiewicz) and a special agent (John Beliveau) with luxury travel and women in exchange for classified information that allowed Francis to profit from his business dealings with the US Navy.

Leonard Francis has reportedly been living in Singapore for more than 30 years despite still being a Malaysian citizen. Last Christmas, the self-proclaimed ‘Santa Claus’ and Catholic adorned his Nassim bungalow with reindeers, a gigantic Xmas tree, even a nativity scene complete with manger. Who would have thought that this lavish spectacle (possibly costing at least $100,000) may have been made possible by ‘gifts’ of a totally different nature, among which include Lady Gaga concert tickets and what he called his ‘Elite Thai Seal team’, or prostitutes. When asked about the expenses, he replied ‘ You can’t put a value on happiness’. Not so for pleasure, it seems.

Francis started draping his residence in the Xmas spirit back in 2007, when he was at Cluny Road and already renown then as among Singapore’s ‘most ardent Christmas decorators’. An assistant was given a budget of $25K then to make Francis’ house shine as bright as Orchard Road, drawing complaints from those who saw the gesture as unnecessarily extravagant and felt that the money splurged on giant snowmen and Baby Jesuses should have gone into more charitable causes. The lighting even caused a minor traffic jam when cars slowed down just to gaze in awe at the audacious splendour of it all (Ironically, Francis himself has also complained to the Traffic Police about rows of parked heavy vehicles along Nassim Road). If he hadn’t been caught, this year’s light-up could have been bigger, better and brighter, maybe even with actual falling snow or a ship dressed up like Noah’s Ark sponsored by the US Navy, with Kai Kai and Jia Jia in it.

Francis’ arrest is a sigh of relief for Nassim neighbours who couldn’t sleep because of his annoying flashing extravaganza. In the video below taken of the house from a vehicle, someone quipped that he ‘basically baokaliao the sidewalk’ and questioned if decorating the place like it’s your grandfather’s road was even legal. Even if it were illegal, I doubt the authorities would go all Scrooge over it, especially on rich folks’ property.

In late 2012, just as Francis was getting ready to receive Father Christmas, his military contractor company Glenn Defence Marine Asia was charged for dumping hazardous waste in Subic Bay, Philippines, which dwarves the environmental burden of over-the-top Xmas lighting.  Of course that didn’t stop Singapore’s Mr Xmas himself from turning Nassim Road into a Winter Wonderland in a bid to out-Christmas Orchard Road, while at the same time sending ‘Not Safe For Xmas’ pics of Thai hookers to his partners in crime.  If found guilty of duping the US Navy and overcharging ‘pearl ports’, Francis may spend the next few Christmases decking prison bars with snow made out of wet toilet paper balls instead. No sheep in the manger for this conman in a slammer.

Aegyo Sal makes your eyes younger and friendlier

From ‘Look young with eyebags’, 8 Sept 2013, article by Lea Wee, Lifestyle, Sunday Times

Many people would do all they can to get rid of their eyebags. But some young Singaporeans are resorting to aesthetic procedures to make their undereye area more prominent because they think it makes them appear more youthful and friendly.

The trend, called “aegyo sal” (say a-gio-sal) in Korean, translates loosely as “cute skin”. It started in South Korea a few years ago and recently caught on here.

To make the areas under their lower eyelids “pop out”, people usually undergo a filler injection – a 30-minute procedure which costs about $1,000. The effect can also be created through make-up and tightening the lower eyelid muscle via surgery.

…A full-time blogger who goes by the screen name Yutaki James paid $1,000 for a filler injection to his lower eyelids last month. The 25-year-old, who blogs on current lifestyle trends, declines to give his real name. He saw advertisements on the procedure when he visited South Korea last year.

“When I knew it was available here, I decided to get it done because I wanted to keep up with trends. I also wanted to make my eyes look bigger.” During the procedure, he also had fillers to make his laugh lines and dark circles under his eyes less obvious.

He says he felt no pain but there was some swelling under his eyes on the first two days. This gradually disappeared after the first week. “I am happy with the effect. My friends say I look younger and more awake.”

Aegyo Sal surgery is basically a boob job done on the eyes. Pump some dermal filler to create a perky bulge just beneath the eye and it makes your blinkers ‘smile’ like a sexy beast. Unfortunately, it doesn’t mean that having swollen panda dark circles is considered attractive, so don’t think you can save money on Botox and SK-II just yet. You can work overnight and end up looking like you were punched in the face but you’re still not going to impress K-pop fanatics who would be able to tell the difference between a sad sack and an adorable bulge. When I look at my own peri-orbital musculature I see the Death Valley, not the ‘cute’ optic love handles that would make me look like I came from Neverland.

For more than 40 years, we have desired double eyelids to give that wide-eyed ‘European’ look, which together with eyebag removal in the 60′s, were among the first cosmetic procedures to be performed around the eyes. Makeup tricks aside, our obsession with bigger eyes and Japanese doll features have rejuvenated the contact lens business. For those with are born with naturally narrow peepers, Aegyo Sal seems to be the solution to all of life’s problems. You can face the world brimming with confidence knowing that there are people out there who are sexually attracted to eyes with puffy vulvae beneath them, so much so that some may even try to engage in oculolinctus with you.

Self-transformation and augmentation seems to be the bread and butter of full-time beauty bloggers, including the likes of Yutaki James, who’s a living Asian Ken doll and ambassador for these ‘Korean love bands’. This dude is a walking, pouting showcase of the $1000 face-craft of Prive clinic, one of the pioneers of this AS wave, advertised in their website as a ‘no-downtime’ procedure that would make you look ‘cuter’ and ‘sweeter’. I never knew I had ‘lash lines’ until I saw this. If AS surgery claims to make you look ‘friendlier’ after 30 mins, you could inject hyaluronic acid into Oscar the Grouch’s face and turn him into Sesame Street’s Sweetheart overnight. Imagine the wonders AS could do for Grumpy Cat.

Screen Shot 2013-09-08 at 11.27.53 AM

If the eyes are the windows to the soul, then aegyo sal are the fancy curtains. According to the ST article above, the AS effect is just temporary, but you can imagine how people who have benefited from it would be compelled to fork out $1K every 6 months to maintain that sweet sac of succulence that makes as much difference to one’s eyes as a cleavage to a chest. AS wearing off would be like watching a bosom slowly deflating to its hideous, pre-op ‘flatness’, except that you can’t use modern undergarment technology to cover it up. If you can’t afford biannual injections or tightening your orbicularis oculi muscles for a permanent AS, it may be better to settle for invisible tape. Don’t by any means try to buff up your eyelids by lifting buckets of water with them, (though a man with eyelids stronger than my biceps would have an Instagram far more interesting than that of a Chinese bloke who gives himself a Japanese name)

It’s also strange how people are queasy about seeing the dentist, donating blood or even taking a fingerprick test, but have totally no qualms about getting a needle pierced just millimetres away from their eyeballs for the sake of beauty, or rather, when it comes to AS, LOVE. Such a pity that our ‘love handles’ aren’t deemed as pretty as these love ‘bands’ in our undereye areas, because most men my age have plenty of ‘love’ to give when it comes to the former.

SAF ‘Shades of Green’ ad demeaning to women

From Aware Facebook page and omy.sg, 7 Sept 2013.

Women, interested in a career with the Army? Quick, get out your eye-shadow palettes and pick your favourite shade of green, because that’s what will land you the job!

These packages went out to women in Singapore, advertising the Army Women’s Seminar 2013. It comes complete with a fake mirror and eye-shadow palette.

We want to let the Army know that make-up doesn’t stir our patriotic sentiments. Can you help us think of a creative, effective way to send them a message? The seminar is on the 14th of September, so we’ve to put our strategy together soon. Leave a comment on this post if you have a good idea.

Shades of Sexism

Shades of Sexism

SAF needs women badly and they’re on a recruitment spree to meet their target of an additional 500 female officers by 2018. If not for AWARE complaining about their marketing blitz being sexist, I wouldn’t have known about this Army Women’s Seminar. By harping on the Army objectifying women through the gimmick of green eyeshadow, AWARE has inadvertently given ad agency Mandate an unlikely helping hand in promoting the event. Any AWARE AGM would make a military seminar for ladies look like a flower arrangement workshop in comparison.

I’m sure AWARE fully supports the idea of having more ‘Girl Power’ in our armed forces, but maybe they should be ‘sending a message’ to the Army about the lack of female generals (the highest ranking female today is still Colonel) rather than picking on an ad for favouring provocation over patriotism. Personally I thought this fake makeup kit isn’t half as bad as the ‘trophy boyfriend’ ad some years back which suggested that women ovulate in squealing ecstasy at the sight of men in uniform. It’s also a novel way of getting women interested, instead of using models that suggest that female soldiers are supposed to look in a certain way that combines grace, dignity and steely courage, as below:

I see a woman wearing makeup

Or that they would fare well in the army by looking downright intimidating, like a discipline mistress in school.

Your future boss, ladies

I think the intention of the ‘Shades of Green’ ad is to portray an army career just like any other worth pursuing which involves dolling up as most professional women do, be it a high-flying corporate executive, an OL or an SIA stewardess. It also busts the stereotype that you have to look like a women’s judo champion, or a GI Jane, in order to serve. If a lady CEO dresses like a slut in public, AWARE is unlikely to complain, but if a female SAF officer dabs on lipstick in front of her male colleagues, it’s sexual oppression, nevermind if she does it while in full battle order and a rifle in hand.

It would be very helpful if AWARE actually does constructive creative work of their own and run some gender-neutral campaigns to support such events themselves, or better still volunteer to secure the frontline in the event of a real war. Those talons would come in really handy then.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 279 other followers