Holland V not for heartlanders

Posted on March 24, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Heartlanders not cultured enough for Holland Village’, 24 March 2011, article in Yahoo! News Singapore

…(Samantha, caller on 91.3 FM’s The Married Men show): “I live in Holland Village, and I just can’t understand why people from the heartlands want to come here. We people are cultured, and you heartlanders are definitely not cultured,” she said.

She defines heartlanders as being “people from Ang Mo Kio, Yishun, Toa Payoh and the nearby Bukit Batok” who “have no manners”, “talk loudly” and wear “cheap clothes from Bugis Street”.

“People who come here are cultured. So if you want to come here, you know, when you’re in Rome, behave like a Roman. When you’re in Holland, behave like us — cultured people. “

Er no, when in Rome, you do as the Romans do, you eat in their coffee houses, you drink their water, but you don’t start talking or acting like a Caesar. And to compare Holland V, with hardly an historical artifact remaining worthy of notice, to an ancient European metropolis can only be the kind of lazy analogy someone who hasn’t the faintest idea about culture would come up with. Holland Village is not even a ‘sleepy’ enclave anymore,  now fueled by the cheap buzz of pub crawlers, school kids, expats and horrible parking. There’s no atrium to facilitate intellectual discourse, no eccentric gypsy shops, not even cobblestoned walkways, and the hawker centre is as ‘heartland’-ish as all the others in the country, meaning foreign workers plying their trade, lunchtime workers drinking chin chow, people choping seats with tissue paper, and stinky public toilets with entrance fees 10 cents more expensive than the ones in ‘Ang Mo Kio, Yishun or Bukit Batok’. And they have a shop selling fake Crocs as well as a Sasa too.  Real classy, Samantha.

Of course, this could very well be a radio scam or premature April Fool’s joke to boost ratings because the snobbishness comes across as rather far-fetched, and we’re too small and dense a nation to accommodate the likes of elitist snobs like Samantha, who, despite sounding like a rich man’s daughter whose face you can’t resist thwacking with the most heartland weapon you may think of (a tie between a Sinha beer bottle and an auntie’s wet market trolley)   is highly unlikely to get away with such a comment without losing some inevitable heartland friends. A good time to revisit old Holland V though, which emerged in the late eighties as a haunt for an extinct species of Singaporeans known, rather unflatteringly,  as ‘yuppies’ (Holland Avenue comes alive with a different charm for a mixed crowd, 13 Oct 1989). Who remembers ‘Shakey’s Pizza’?

Holland V even has a long running Mediacorp drama serial filmed about it, and it’s not exactly Singapore’s version of Melrose Place, judging from its lowest denominator melon jokes that even kopitiam uncles would refrain from using to impress their beer ladies (see clip below). Which adds to my suspicion that this ‘Samantha’ jig is really a ploy to get people excited about radio talk shows again, maybe even rev up some much needed solidarity among Singaporeans by creating an irrational fear of  social divide. All at the expense of stereotyping heartlanders as country bumpkin folk who speak mangled Singlish, can’t pronounce macchiato when facing a ‘barista’, can’t handle R21 movies in their hometowns, or take sleazy videos of Miss Worlds parading around their malls in bikinis.

 

The heartlanders won't get it

 

About these ads

Filed under: 1980s, 2011, Dress sense, Local radio DJs, Nightspots | Tagged: , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Snatching MyPaper is unchivalrous

Posted on February 27, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Where’s the chivalry, men?’ 27 Feb 2011, Your Letters, Sunday Times

(Queenie Campbell): …During my four week stay here, I noticed how unchivalrous some Singaporean men were.

…I was with my older sister at an information counter in Sim Lim Square to pick up some street maps and a free copy of mypaper. Just as I was about to pick up a copy of the paper, a smartly dressed man came from behind and snatched it.

I was shocked that someone would do that. I calmly told him that I was about to take that copy. He answered rudely:’I thought you didn’t want it’.

Yet when I said I wanted it, he flatly refused to hand it to me. A man from behind the counter eventually handed me another copy.

Now, I am beginning to understand why some Singaporean women are happier to remain single. Where is the chivalry?

I could probably ignore the sweeping statements about Singaporean men and why our women refuse to marry them, if this accusation were made under the following circumstances: 1. This was the last mypaper in the history of its circulation in the whole of Singapore 2. The complainant was in some sort of a fix i.e lost, sprained her ankle, or struggling with a door too heavy for her to pull open. 3. The complainant was pregnant, old or incapacitated in both arms that she needed to hold mypaper between her teeth.

But alas, the narrative suggests neither, coming across as a rather trivial, even petty, tussle over free stuff in contrast to the elements of sacrifice and flexing of muscle which we normally associate with ‘chivalry’ , as dated as that concept is in this age of women’s equality. In fact, the culprit’s behaviour is indicative of general Ugly Singaporean kiasu-ness rather than a reluctance to render aid to a woman in some sort of trouble. So not only is the extrapolation to all men unfair, but the choice of words to describe a me-first symptom endemic in any modern bustling city is utterly fallacious.

The modern woman, with her independent steely resolve and occasional connivances, typically doesn’t expect random acts of kindness from men if there’s anything she can accomplish herself with the slightest exertions. And men, upon encountering a situation where a young lass requires the gallant assistance of a hot blooded stallion, make quick calculations in their chronic rush for time to determine the worth and risks of their consequent actions. The woman is a stranger after all, and she could be a con artist hoping to make a quick buck, or end up suing you for sexual harassment if you do so much as invert her brastrap whilst helping her up from the floor. We’ve come so far from the age of damsels in distress, and as far as chivalry goes, we men are already kind enough to obey our women bosses, allow our spouses to earn higher wages, or let our girlfriends beat us in games which pit our physical prowess against each other. Such graciousness, I believe, weighs more than simply allowing random strangers to have the last MyPaper in the universe, sometimes even getting nary a smile not to mention a ‘thank you’ while at it.

So it’s strange how the writer still bears such antediluvian expectations of what a man should do in her situation, so much as letting her having anything she desires just because she’s a woman, whether it’s an umbrella in the rain, a tuxedo jacket over a puddle or other heroic cliches that involve a man sacrificing his time or piece of  clothing and parting with a graceful bow whilst tipping his hat once the deed is done. Granted, we have light years to go in terms of common courtesy, but to brand Singaporean men as unchivalrous pigs when you’re not in any significant duress is not doing justice to either sex at all. On the flipside, how would you like it if our locals called foreigners like you weak, petty, spoilt and lacking the stomach or wit to survive the harsh hustle that is our culture? Similar sentiments on how unhelpful our local men are, especially when they give  ‘so called funny remarks’, below (When the lady’s car had a puncture, 15April 1971, ST).

Filed under: 1970s, 2011, Singaporean men, Singaporean women, Tourists | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

MM Lee is Singapore’s coolest icon

Posted on February 13, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Red Hot and Cool’, 13 Feb 2011, article by Ng Kai Ling in Sunday Times

..Most recently, CNNGo, a lifestyle and travel companion to CNN, ranked Singaporeans ahead of the siesta-loving Spainiards and the dreadlocks-donning Jamaicans as the second-coolest people in the world. At No 1 were the samba-dancing Brazilians.

…(Tay Kheng Soon, architect): It (Marina Bay Sands, no. 3 coolest icon in Singapore) is one of the finer buildings of Singapore. My regret is that it is a  strong design and because of that, unfortunately, it is the de facto icon of Singapore. Which self-respecting nation wants to have a casino as its icon?

…(Jamilah Abdul Rashid): The lovely beautiful smiles on elderly folks’ faces when you walk past them are cool, and pushing and shoving in crowded places is so uncool

…(Steph Kim): Singaporeans spend way too much time studying. That’s so uncool.

Ranked behind ‘Can’t Think of one’ at second place of Coolest Icon In Singapore is MM, which essentially makes him  by default the coolest icon in Singapore. The problem with such polls, other than the fact that by sheer chance that only uncool Singaporeans partake in them,  is that there is no placeholder for the definition of cool, which ends up with people mistaking other more appropriate adjectives like ‘safe’, ‘smart’, ‘funny’, ‘blunt’, and ‘nice’ for ‘cool’. It could also mean that Singaporeans are so cooped up in what the media feeds them everyday that the only important person they could think of other than the very dead Sir Stamford Raffles is our very own MM. Or perhaps they were just trying to be funny.

The list is also  hopelessly vague. For example, there’s nothing ‘cool’ about a good transport system, but sneaking in to spray paint graffiti on a MRT train undeniably is. Safety isn’t cool, but rock climbing and Universal Studios’ Battlestar Galactica is. Gurmit Singh of PCK fame may be ranked cool, but drunk-driving Christopher Lee is the one gracing ‘cool’ fashion magazines. An old man’s smile isn’t cool, but if he also races in his pasttime instead of doing taiji or gardening, he is. ‘Shopping’ per se isn’t cool at all, but ‘shopping’ for components to build your own computer is. ‘Studying’ isn’t cool, but ‘studying the history of social media tools ‘ is. ‘Coolness’ then, has and always will be defined by a certain level of mischief, risk-taking and trailblazing. MM Lee may be a pioneer, but compare him to the likes of Steve Jobs, or Barrack Obama and you have an idea of what’s missing. The fact that you can’t pinpoint what that is just proves how ambiguous and fuzzy the definition of ‘cool’ is.

Secondly, there’s only cool personalities or activities. An author, a book, a movie, robot-designing, skydiving, elephant-training can all be cool, but not something as massively diverse as a country, because then it becomes meaningless when there’s nothing specific to a nation’s activity, or style that allows one to form any kind of rational blanket description whatsoever. The entire process of only selecting bits and pieces of seemingly ‘cool’ elements and missing the whole picture is itself flawed. Even the ‘uncool’ list, though easier to construct, looks ridiculous. Our ‘weather’ is uncool? Seriously, this whole survey is either full of deceitful puns or tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, which really isn’t very  helpful, or cool, at all. It’s only fair to say that we, like all countries, have our share of cool and uncool. Even the country that invented cool (USA) is the same one that came up with cheesy soap operas, charismatic churches, Starbucks and the Scary movie franchise.

So allow me to give my take on what’s really cool, and uncool, about Singapore/Singaporeans, in no particular order.

Cool

  1. Ye Olde Railway Station at Tanjong Pagar
  2. Battlestar Galactica
  3. Mr Brown/Mr Miyagi
  4. 881
  5. Park Connectors

SO Uncool

  1. Camwhore blogs
  2. Chope-ing seats with tissue paper
  3. Backpacks on the train
  4. Flipped up collars on polo T shirts with sunglasses
  5. Going to a local football match wearing Manchester United jerseys

 

Filed under: 2011, Architecture, Casino/gambling, Fun and games, Local actors, Local food, MRT, Politicians, Shopping malls, Weather | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

Rowdy children make parents happy

Posted on January 9, 2011 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Only way to signal civil consideration’, 8 Jan 2010, St Forum

(Pat  Gan): Before alleging intolerance and discrimination against children, parents must realise that the ban (on children from casual eateries)  is largely a consequence of rowdy behaviour by some children and their inconsiderate parents.

… I have seen inconsiderate parents who blithely stay put in the restaurant, content with letting their babies cry and disrupt the mood of other diners. Increasingly too, I have noticed more acts of misbehaviour and rowdiness by children that are unchecked by parents.

Are children spoilt or are more parents becoming overindulgent, and assume that because their world revolves around their children, other diners should accept the misbehaviour.

I agree with the ban because it sends a clear message to such parents to ensure their children behave in public.

What is unfortunate is that considerate parents with properly mannered children are the innocent victims.

But the logic is irrefutably sound: One rowdy child makes a pair of parents happy while the absence of a noisy brat makes a roomful of diners happy.

I’m not sure about the ‘irrefutable’ logic of rowdy children making parents happy, but there’s really nothing much we can do about misbehaving children, kids being kids and some parents, well, being completely hapless in instilling discipline and would rather neutralise their hyperactive children with mummy’s iPhone instead of imparting actual social skills. We have to deal with such social conveniences all the time, whether it’s kids stepping all over our MRT seats, giving running commentaries at Harry Potter films or doing nothing but just blocking our paths in prams, but the real question here is whether the business decision of banning kids from eateries is really necessary. What exactly went into the calculations of the probability of encountering little hooligans correlating with loss of clientele? If I were a regular patron of a diner, service and food excellent otherwise, having the misfortune of being in the vicinity of a noisy family resembling more like trailer-park menagerie who just can’t be bothered won’t deter me from coming back, unless by sheer arse luck I’m there with the offensive family at the same time and day EVERY single time.

One possible danger of wielding this short-term blunt instrument of blanket banning is the overspill of nuisance kids to other eateries, which would then encourage owners to follow suit in fear of patrons being terrorised, and eventually the only places where we’ll see kids eating in public is at McDonalds, stuffing their faces with Happy Meals and contributing to the obesity epidemic just because some hoity-toity people like their fine ambience child-proofed. All it takes really, is a little patience, some stern glancing, a silent prayer that rowdy children are an anomaly and if you’re a couple trying for a kid, the benefit of free life lessons in the importance of not ‘sparing the rod’. That’s if you don’t change your mind about even having any kids at all.

 

 

Filed under: 2011, Babies, Customer service, Kids, Local food, Noise, Parenting | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Joggers should run in an anti-clockwise direction

Posted on December 28, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Observe track etiquette at stadiums, please’, 28 Dec 2010, Today

(Maureen Foo): IN RECENT years, my brother and I have observed a few disturbing trends at Serangoon stadium.

A track is neither a park nor a marketplace or a mall. Many of its users lack knowledge of basic track etiquette; however, their lack of consideration for others’ safety and right to exercise is even more frustrating.

These users are mostly middle-aged women who arrive at the stadium before 7am when it is already very crowded. They walk on the track while others stand in the middle of it to talk.

Some who are part of the mass exercise groups beside the field sometimes suddenly dash across the track, again completely oblivious to others. A jogger might be able to give way but less so a sprinting runner.

…Typically, the track is meant to be run in an anti-clockwise direction, but there are those who desire to run in the opposite direction. This is acceptable if it is done in the outer lanes to avoid obstructing those running anti-clockwise, which is the official designated direction for running on standard 400m tracks.

This is practised in countries with established athletics cultures. However, there is a shocking ignorance of such etiquette among many local track users and not just those at Serangoon stadium.

We hope that the relevant authorities will do something about this situation as it is worsening.

As much as we would like to bring our obesity rates down and have our seniors engaging in an active lifestyle that’s not only beneficial for their hearts but minds as well, people are still deterred from conducting forms of social exercise which they enjoy because fitness freaks like Maureen here are advocating turning a public recreational facility in a neighbourhood stadium into a scary replica of some East German Olympic boot camp. Camps where you have to run in a designated direction, where you’re supposed to sprint your lungs out, where walking is for wussies, where straying into a runner’s lane is as dangerous as jaywalking into the path of a monster truck, where swerving to avoid old people talking in the middle of the track takes seconds off your personal best, where one’s mindless obsession with building stamina overrides all respect for one’s seniors or the basic freedom of people to do whatever the hell they want  in a public arena for that matter.

Treadmills, with their clinical precision and customised regimes, but more importantly their lack of any kind of fun whatsoever, are tailor-made for fitness Nazis like these, and perhaps instead of dictating how people should behave on a public track, whether they’re skipping, rolling around, or walking backwards wearing flashy headbands, the complainant should hit the gym instead. Because really, in the grand scheme of things, having our elder population working out, even if it means breaching your ‘official designated direction for running’,  hence reducing hospitalisation costs, far outweighs your petty, selfish quest for ultimate fitness. What would you expect the ‘relevant authorities’ to do anyway? Put up minimum speed limit signs? Have arrows indicating the right direction to run? No qigong after 6 am? Similar sentiments below, and uncannily also about Serangoon stadium, in this Today letter dated 16 Jan 2009.

 

Filed under: 2000s, 2010, Public works, Sports | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

They had all bought a beverage from Starbucks

Posted on December 27, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Courtesy and the Starbucks syndrome’, 27 Dec 2010, ST Forum

(Virdi Bhupinder): AFTER watching a movie at the The Cathay Cineplex recently, my family and I wanted to grab a quick coffee at Starbucks.

However, the tables were occupied by teenagers with open laptops, chatting away loudly; some had their feet settled on the sofas and had literally ‘dug in’ for long sessions of free surfing.

After I had waited for about 10 minutes, I asked the manager if she could request a few teenagers to make way for other customers.

Her reply was that she could not because they had all bought a beverage from Starbucks.

It was a strange reply to me as I do not think that buying a single drink entitles a customer to park himself at an outlet for hours and deprive others of a seat.

…Food and beverage outlets like Starbucks should stop this system, where a customer need buy only one drink and he can stay as long as he likes, and adopt a policy that is reasonable and shows consideration to all customers.

Perhaps limit free wi-fi to half an hour of surfing by issuing a time-limit coupon when customers buy drinks. Or install a sign stating that those studying or hogging tables should show consideration to other customers.

Such behaviour also suggests an innate lack of graciousness, which as a society we should try to change.

If the writer intended to have a ‘quick coffee’, perhaps instead of hanging around for 10 minutes urging the management to chase regular customers away (even if they only bought 1 drink), there’s another system in place which he/she may consider commonly known as the ‘take-away’. Coffeehouses are not hawker centres. The whole marketing concept, the air-con comfort, the interior decor, the piped music, are all designed specifically to sustain long periods of not just studying over a freshly brewed cuppa but also idle chatter, first dates and informal business meetings, and it applies not just here but anywhere else in the world where people are conned into buying coffee that costs as much as  a McDonald’s Value Meal. The success of Starbucks strives on it, and either this writer is new to the whole coffeehouse concept, or is the sort who looms over occupied tables at kopitiams watch-gazing and foot-tapping patrons into submission.

Surely it’s unfair to blame students for hogging seats when others are doing likewise, be it playing with their iPhones, reading a thick novel from start to finish, or trying to sell insurance plans whilst doping clients with caffeine, which the writer does not notice simply because they make less noise than the kids. It’s also unfair to extrapolate such behaviour to society in general, and as an advocate for a gracious society, one should also exercise the virtues of patience and tolerance, but more importantly the economy of common sense to get around the ‘system’ and go somewhere else (perhaps another Starbucks 100m away) if you don’t like what you see instead of telling a giant coffee conglomerate how to run a business just because you can’t have things your way. Other than Starbucks, studying, even in the early 70′s,  has never been well received in libraries as well,  as seen in this 16 October 1973 article ‘Students occupy all the seats in the library’ below. Which suggests, that for close to 40 years, study rooms in Singaporean homes have been used for every other purpose than actual studying.

 

Filed under: 1970s, 2010, Customer service, Kids, Local food | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Singaporeans plugged into headphones all the time

Posted on November 30, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Being friendly will help foreigners feel more at home’, 30 Nov 2010, My Paper

(Tian Guiqing): …There are people from all over the world living and working in Singapore, and this is helpful in fostering cultural exchanges.

However, there has not been enough sharing between cultures. People here need to communicate with one another, and learn to understand the social customs and habits of people from different backgrounds.

If we understand and respect people from different countries, it is easier to be friendly with one another.

Perhaps we should start from the basics – with commuters practising courtesy on public transport.

A friendly smile or a hello will be a nice gesture to fellow commuters, instead of being plugged into headphones all the time.

This takes only a few seconds but will go a long way in making the atmosphere in trains and buses friendly and will help foreigners feel more at ease.

Good intentions to be admired no doubt, but Ms Tian comes across as an urban Luddite from a land with prairies, milkmen and hay-loaded horsewagons who has probably little experience travelling to modern, bustling cities like ours, cities which suffer from characteristic disdain for our fellow man, not to mention foreigners. What the writer proposes is the kind of bloated rhetoric a New World foreign invader would deliver before a miscellany of tribes who have worked and lived together for more than a century with the occasional scuffle over defaced totem poles . Like any effort to harmonise ethnicities anywhere in the world, it’s obviously easier said than done. In the first place, there has to be some evidence that we don’t intermingle enough, and unless Ms Tian can cite some concrete examples of near-riots occurring because people celebrate Christmas during Deepavali, such a letter probably boils down to a bad personal experience lazily extrapolated to Singaporeans in general.

Technically, before one even begins to understand another’s culture, not to mention initiate a conversation, it would probably be useful to also speak the same language, and if our foreign friends don’t make the effort to assimilate into the local lingo, the natural assumption by most Singaporeans is that they prefer to be left to themselves. It also doesn’t help that we Singaporeans are generally a cold lot too, whether towards a foreigner or a long-time next door neighbour. The general resistance to playing host thus perpetuates a social vicious cycle in most situations with the classic exception of uncles at the kopitiam cavorting with PRC beer ladies, a tip-of-iceberg example of how such relationships can probably exist only with sexual undertones, where the context of ‘fostering cultural exchange’ would be nothing more than an underwhelming euphemism for a more primitive sort of interaction.

Smiling randomly at strangers on trains may work in a little hamlet where everybody knows which fishmonger you patronise, but any overt friendliness here will be viewed with nervous suspicion. Allow me to ‘share’ a common term that Singaporeans will toss around for good measure in the event that a stranger greets them with a warm and bubbly ‘Good morning!’ on the train. They will wonder if you are ‘Siao!’ or are hiding a clipboard with a survey ‘that will only take 2 minutes’ to fill. So, instead of blaming Singaporeans for being unfriendly, perhaps one should look at this from a ‘it takes two hands to clap’ perspective, and remind yourself that this is Singapore, not the Shire from Lord of the Rings. Even if one made immigration officers smile lovingly at foreigners, locals will complain about preferential treatment, as seen in this 3 Jan 2003 letter, Today.

 

Filed under: 2000s, 2010, Bureaucrats, Changi airport, Foreign workers, MRT, PRCs, SBS Buses, Tourists | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dim Sum Follies

Posted on October 7, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Hello, Dollies who?’, 7 Oct 2010, ST Forum

(Belinda Fong): …The (Dim Sum) Dollies may be a beloved local stage favourite but they are not well- known to the public at large, compared with the wacky and memorable Phua Chu Kang – the television character fronting the council’s previous campaign.

Commuters include immigrants, blue-collar workers, students, housewives and retirees.

Would these public transport users who do not know the Dollies grasp the theme behind the graciousness campaign?

Phua Chu Kang, by contrast, is much better known – having been a public television hit for several years.

Rather than wasting resources to commission the Dim Sum Dollies and produce a new campaign, much of the funds could have been used to buy more media time and air the previous campaign more frequently.

Just because PCK is more recognisable to the blue collar minions who take public transport (and that’s an assumption), it doesn’t mean that commuters will ‘grasp the theme’ and listen to a worn and jaded ah beng uncle rapping, bling, boots and all, on graciousness. Courtesy is not a product that would sell with celebrity endorsement, in fact, I do wonder if this accusation of our general lack of graces and subsequent, hapless attempts to correct it is even warranted at all. Perhaps this is a case of confirmation bias, that we only notice the bad eggs since these are the ones that land in the forum complaints while we happily ignore all the small, good deeds being done on an everyday basis. It’s like saying how air travel is unsafe based on a few horrific crashes and ignoring all the smooth, successful landings in aviation history. Even if our society is indeed largely spoilt and ill-mannered, so what? Is the lack of courtesy on the trains such an unforgivable social malady that one needs  to raise jingle hell for it? I say people need to rise up against the tyranny of bad behaviour and tell inconsiderate people off if they deserve it, only then will courtesy naturally become a way of life, through the deterrent of public humiliation. After all, courtesy may be ‘for free’, but it’ll only work if there are heavy costs to deviating from a self-regulating equilibrium of socially acceptable behaviour.

Still, the over-reliance on the likes of PCK which the writer suggests reeks of laziness and lack of originality. The Dim Sum Dollies, on the other hand, are taking considerable risk using the courtesy vehicle to market their product, braving ‘sell-out’ accusations, and deserve merit for even trying. It’s really not their fault that they’re overplayed to ear-grating proportions. Besides, it’s about time we get new celebrity icons anyway. We can save PCK for active aging campaigns or Beijing 101 hair tonic advertisements instead.

Filed under: 2010, Campaigns/Elections, Local actors, MRT | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Pedestrians are kings of the road

Posted on September 20, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Kings of the road?’, 20 Sept 2010, Voices, Today online

(Yvonne Tan): …As a motorist, I frequently see pedestrians taking their own sweet time to cross at the traffic lights. They often continue walking slowly even when the green man turns to red. They also often continue to cross the road until the “green arrow” for cars that are turning goes off.

I have come across pedestrians crossing the road so slowly that cars have to slow down almost to a stop in the middle of the road.

…I had stopped at a T-junction to ensure that there was no oncoming traffic before turning out. Just then a group of pedestrians crossed the road in front my car. I could see that some did walk faster to cross the road. However, there were others who did not increase their speed.

I honked at them, cut a little into the next lane and drove off. I stopped at the traffic light a few metres away.  While there, one of the pedestrians at whom I had honked approached me and told me that I had to stop because pedestrians had right of way.  He insisted that he had right of way and threatened to call the Land Transport Authority.

I find that this behaviour stems from the belief that pedestrians are kings of the road.

…The law protects pedestrians from reckless and irresponsible drivers. Shouldn’t it also protect motorists from arrogant, uniquely Singapore pedestrians.

No, the law should protect people against impatient, rude, noisy honkers like Yvonne Tan. Whether pedestrians behave like royalty or not, you can grumble all you want to your fellow passengers,  even try to traverse the crossing carefully provided the pedestrians are far away, aware of your illegal movements and not playing with their phones if you’re really in such a rush, but surely there’s no reason to honk at people for walking slowly when they have the right of way. Why should motorists, behind the wheel of a killing, polluting machine, be granted any special concessions against vulnerable, human traffic? What sort of damage can a bunch of slow-crossing pedestrians do to a waiting motorist other than brittle nails from furious steering-wheel drumming that warrants ‘protection?’ Tell that to the family of the savaged Vietnamese tourist who was near decapitated by a runaway taxi even though she was nowhere near a pedestrian or zebra crossing. Car drivers are kings of the road everywhere else, on the expressways, in parking lots, making a nuisance with their modified engines, hell, they are the reason why roads exist in the first place. Granted, it’s annoying to dilly dally and dawdle about but the onus is on drivers to be cautious and alert for unsuspecting, dashing , or in this case, strolling, humans. As much as inconsiderate behaviour by pedestrians is uncalled for, at least it’s not potentially deadly as impatient, aggressive road warriors like Ms Tan here. As for the real ‘King of the Road’, indisputably it is, and has always been, the taxi driver, as seen in this letter dated 14 July 1949.

Filed under: 1940s, 2010, Motorists, Pedestrians, Taxi drivers | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Put your backpack between your legs

Posted on September 2, 2010 by gdy2shoez

From ‘Tackle backpack nuisance on trains’, 2 Sept 2010, ST Forum online

(Anne Shum): …Commuters with stuffed backpacks are often oblivious to the inconvenience they cause others. When a backpack-toting commuter swings around, those around him could get thrown off balance.

It is worth highlighting that a backpack occupies a space equivalent to that taken up by at least one standing commuter. It would be more considerate for commuters to place their backpacks between their legs.

At a time when we are looking into ways to tackle space issues on our trains, a simple public education exercise on the proper way to carry backpacks on trains will do much to help the situation in an almost instantaneous and low-cost way.

Has it really come down to this, teaching people how to carry their backpacks? Why stop there, how about regulating the type and weight allowable on board the MRT such that innocent bystanders won’t be ‘thrown off balance’ after being struck by a stray one? Or how about a national hygiene program telling people how to scrub their armpits with soap before boarding the train? Or how about reducing the size of Lianhe Zaobao newspaper so that uncles won’t read the damn thing with outstretched arms? Teaching people how to do just one thing out of dozens of behavioural annoyances is not nipping the scourge in the bud, which is the general lack of social graces or basic courtesy whatsoever. It’s either a case of people not being taught at home or in school, or that we’re too civil or wimpy to teach errant passengers a lesson on the trains, as it’s obvious that these people won’t learn unless they’re publicly shamed. It’ll be not just instantaneous but practically free if people the likes of Ms Shum tell people (after forcefully nudging them to remove their earphones of course) to stuff their bags between their legs herself, instead of laying the burden on the authorities to conduct another useless Phua Chu Kang courtesy campaign, where even his most screechingly pontianak imitations will do nothing to stop these people from heaving bags like they’re smuggling little Chinese contortionsits to work. Still, the root cause of all these frustrations is ultimately a lack of space, hence boiling down to congestion and overpopulation, a touchy issue that our government, like what Ms Shum proposed for backpacks, have duly shoved between their legs, bent over, and mooned us like there’s no tomorrow.

Filed under: 2010, Campaigns/Elections, MRT | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers