I came back today to notice that the switch for hot water outside my room was on. This triggered the sudden horrified realization within me that it is on all the time.
When I was younger, I scoffed at people who were soft enough to actually use the hot water machine in this tropical climate. Having ambitions of being a great polar explorer in the footsteps of Amundsen and Scott at the time, I insisted on using cold water at all times, even in Genting.
Unfortunately as the years pile on, I have cowardly sneaked away from my original dream, and the pride that once burned brightly within me has waved the white flag to the tempting hot water machine.
Perhaps a wheelchair will be next.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Gay Marriage
Recently the subject of gay and lesbian marriage has been in the public eye to a significant extent. Firstly, I would like to clarify that I have no personal dislike whatsoever towards homosexuality, neither do I think it is sinful.
Yet, is the standpoint of "being gay is not a sin" naturally equivalent to "gay marriage should be accepted as just the same as normal marriage"? In my humble opinion, I think the two standpoints do have some difference.
I'm sure most of us would agree that it would be morally repugnant to allow gays to be persecuted legally, or called names in streets, or to suffer any kind of discrimination against in society or professionally. As individuals, they should enjoy each and every rights that other members of society do.
However when it comes to the institution of marriage, when we look at it from a more pragmatic viewpoint, what is the purpose of marriage? Obviously it is to raise kids in a stable family setting, with certain economic advantages given for said kids (tax breaks). If it was just to find a soulmate, that could be done without signing the contract.
So since the legal and societal function of marriage is to raise kids, if gay couple cannot have kids, wouldn't such tax breaks be inapplicable to them?
My personal opinion is that all marriages should not have tax breaks - as even straight marriages may not have kids. But after they have a kid, the amount deducted should be larger than present to even things up.
If that is done, then yes I support gay marriage.
Yet, is the standpoint of "being gay is not a sin" naturally equivalent to "gay marriage should be accepted as just the same as normal marriage"? In my humble opinion, I think the two standpoints do have some difference.
I'm sure most of us would agree that it would be morally repugnant to allow gays to be persecuted legally, or called names in streets, or to suffer any kind of discrimination against in society or professionally. As individuals, they should enjoy each and every rights that other members of society do.
However when it comes to the institution of marriage, when we look at it from a more pragmatic viewpoint, what is the purpose of marriage? Obviously it is to raise kids in a stable family setting, with certain economic advantages given for said kids (tax breaks). If it was just to find a soulmate, that could be done without signing the contract.
So since the legal and societal function of marriage is to raise kids, if gay couple cannot have kids, wouldn't such tax breaks be inapplicable to them?
My personal opinion is that all marriages should not have tax breaks - as even straight marriages may not have kids. But after they have a kid, the amount deducted should be larger than present to even things up.
If that is done, then yes I support gay marriage.
Friday, August 3, 2012
Promiscuity
Many people associate promiscuity with the onset of modern, "Western" culture and the decline of traditional morals. The shocking truth though is that cultures which many may regard as primitive can be far more promiscuous.
In the Dyak communities in Sarawak, everyone stays together in the longhouse, which can contain many families. Now if a girl sleeps with some young fellow it is really no big deal, since everyone stays together as one big family anyway, the babies are just cared for by the old women who really don't have much else to do anyway. So everything is fine and dandy.
According to what I have heard, if outside visitors go and visit the longhouses, after the proper ceremonies have been performed and the chief satisfied they become formal visitors of the longhouse and are treated warmly. During this warmth and cheer some hanky panky may occur. As each family within the longhouse has its own room, it might seem hard to accomplish such behavior. Yet the defense of family members is not foolproof; the room is not sealed tight as there is an airspace between the wall and the ceilings. Ardent young men can then climb over the wall and achieve consummation with the young unmarried daughters, if they do not resist the other members of the family treat it as a normal occurrence.
Of course if you decide to try this experience after reading my blog I would refrain from taking any responsibility for your wellbeing, as there may well still be headhunters in the region.
Even this liberality pales before that of the traditional Tibetan society though.
In Tibet, out on the plains, the old custom is that once girls reach a marriageable age of 15 or so, they move out from the main tent in which the family resides into a smaller white tent some yards away. This is an open invitation for every young man in the vicinity to come and make love to her. Once she is pregnant, she is prime marriageable material for she has proven her fertility, thus marriage invitations come flying in like spam mail. Due to the poor hygiene and healthcare in the area, getting pregnant is not easy at all!
The result of this is nobody knows who their father is, at least for firstborn kids. Lest you imagine many Darth Vader moments, the fathers don't know who their kid is too. I think the most that could be done is a rough guess.
Therefore we can see that promiscuity is not copyrighted by modern society at all. Not by far.
In the Dyak communities in Sarawak, everyone stays together in the longhouse, which can contain many families. Now if a girl sleeps with some young fellow it is really no big deal, since everyone stays together as one big family anyway, the babies are just cared for by the old women who really don't have much else to do anyway. So everything is fine and dandy.
According to what I have heard, if outside visitors go and visit the longhouses, after the proper ceremonies have been performed and the chief satisfied they become formal visitors of the longhouse and are treated warmly. During this warmth and cheer some hanky panky may occur. As each family within the longhouse has its own room, it might seem hard to accomplish such behavior. Yet the defense of family members is not foolproof; the room is not sealed tight as there is an airspace between the wall and the ceilings. Ardent young men can then climb over the wall and achieve consummation with the young unmarried daughters, if they do not resist the other members of the family treat it as a normal occurrence.
Of course if you decide to try this experience after reading my blog I would refrain from taking any responsibility for your wellbeing, as there may well still be headhunters in the region.
Even this liberality pales before that of the traditional Tibetan society though.
In Tibet, out on the plains, the old custom is that once girls reach a marriageable age of 15 or so, they move out from the main tent in which the family resides into a smaller white tent some yards away. This is an open invitation for every young man in the vicinity to come and make love to her. Once she is pregnant, she is prime marriageable material for she has proven her fertility, thus marriage invitations come flying in like spam mail. Due to the poor hygiene and healthcare in the area, getting pregnant is not easy at all!
The result of this is nobody knows who their father is, at least for firstborn kids. Lest you imagine many Darth Vader moments, the fathers don't know who their kid is too. I think the most that could be done is a rough guess.
Therefore we can see that promiscuity is not copyrighted by modern society at all. Not by far.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Gap
Yesterday night I was sitting outside a club, waiting to gather up enough soberness to be capable of driving home. As I was sitting there, this girl next to me glanced over to my side just as I glanced over to hers. So I smiled at her, she smiled back, and we started chatting.
We talked about all kinds of funny things, such as how people vomited in the club, how guys in my gang was fighting over girls, how her group was going crazy, etc etc. And everything just felt so normal. When her friends came out she smiled and said goodbye to me, and all her friends waved and smiled to me as well.
So the gap between people, normally so far and gaping, was narrowed just for that moment. And I hope we could all do that normally as well, to strangers who need a ride, to old people in the park, to passer-bys on the road, and everyone else.
The gap that day was bridged partially by alcohol I suppose. I do hope one day we will all be able to bridge the chasm between souls without it.
Or I will have to pass out vodka in the park.
We talked about all kinds of funny things, such as how people vomited in the club, how guys in my gang was fighting over girls, how her group was going crazy, etc etc. And everything just felt so normal. When her friends came out she smiled and said goodbye to me, and all her friends waved and smiled to me as well.
So the gap between people, normally so far and gaping, was narrowed just for that moment. And I hope we could all do that normally as well, to strangers who need a ride, to old people in the park, to passer-bys on the road, and everyone else.
The gap that day was bridged partially by alcohol I suppose. I do hope one day we will all be able to bridge the chasm between souls without it.
Or I will have to pass out vodka in the park.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
A Sample of Society
Recently there was a news piece that shocked the nation, or at least some sections of it. A old lady was accosted by robbers and was lying on the street, and five people passed by without extending a helping hand. When the sixth person called the police and help came it was too late to save her life already.
Now there is a lot of talk about prosecuting, or at least humiliating the five people who did not help.
To me this is ridiculous. Firstly, there is no law saying that anyone must help another. If there was, think what dreadful circumstances it could lead to - people might be sued on the grounds of not giving money to beggars, thus leading to their death from starvation. So the most that can be done is public naming.
Would this be fair to them. I think not. They could be worried that it was a scam, or that she was a drug addict, or something of the sort. Were they model citizens? Certainly not. Was their behavior somewhat normal. Certainly yes. All we can say is that in our society, 5 out of 6 people did not help, which reflects on our society as a whole, not those 5 people.
They are just a random sample.
To me, any form of humiliation of them would be a sort of guilt transfer: "we would never behave like that! I WOULD NEVER BEHAVE LIKE THAT! PUNISH THESE PEOPLE!"
But a random sample of society shows us that most of us act like that. So I say let our actions be to promote a better society, not to punish the sample that showed us how we are.
Now there is a lot of talk about prosecuting, or at least humiliating the five people who did not help.
To me this is ridiculous. Firstly, there is no law saying that anyone must help another. If there was, think what dreadful circumstances it could lead to - people might be sued on the grounds of not giving money to beggars, thus leading to their death from starvation. So the most that can be done is public naming.
Would this be fair to them. I think not. They could be worried that it was a scam, or that she was a drug addict, or something of the sort. Were they model citizens? Certainly not. Was their behavior somewhat normal. Certainly yes. All we can say is that in our society, 5 out of 6 people did not help, which reflects on our society as a whole, not those 5 people.
They are just a random sample.
To me, any form of humiliation of them would be a sort of guilt transfer: "we would never behave like that! I WOULD NEVER BEHAVE LIKE THAT! PUNISH THESE PEOPLE!"
But a random sample of society shows us that most of us act like that. So I say let our actions be to promote a better society, not to punish the sample that showed us how we are.
Saturday, July 7, 2012
The Price of Perfection
I just read an article about a Japanese postal worker who was honored as Employee of the Year in Japan. He was so honored for the fact that throughout his career, he had never missed a day of work due to leave or sickness, nor had he been late to work or left early. In other words, he had a perfect record.
I also hear that some companies pass out awards for such perfection. However, let us examine the other side of the coin. What does it take to achieve such perfection?
Lets think about it. Say a drive to the office in the morning takes 45 minutes under normal traffic conditions. If we left exactly 45 minutes before work, we might be late 20 percent of the time due to unusually heavy traffic, road conditions or other such things beyond our control. Obviously this is not acceptable.
So lets leave 55 minutes early, giving ourselves a buffer of 10 minutes. This may cut the lateness percentage down to 10 percent. If we leave 65 minutes early the percentage may go down to 5 percent; 75 minutes may cut it to 1 percent, 85 minutes to 0.1 percent.
0.1 percent of lateness is pretty good I would say, that would mean an employee is only late once in 1000 days, close to 3 years. That would be good enough for me already.
But to not be late in one's whole career? Say one works from the age of 25 to 60, 35 years. One would have to be late less than 0.01 percent to achieve that. This may mean that one has to leave 115 minutes early. All that extra time wasted in the office.
As for not taking leave, if everyone had that as an aim, wouldn't that induce them to come to work when sick? It's pretty hard to expect people to not get a flu over the course of thirty-odd years. Coming to work when sick would be worse for the workplace I think, germs would be spread and productivity would be low anyway. Might spread an epidemic too.
In short, I feel that never being late or taking leave is not a good thing for us to aim towards, as the hidden costs of trying to achieve it far outweigh its benefits.
I also hear that some companies pass out awards for such perfection. However, let us examine the other side of the coin. What does it take to achieve such perfection?
Lets think about it. Say a drive to the office in the morning takes 45 minutes under normal traffic conditions. If we left exactly 45 minutes before work, we might be late 20 percent of the time due to unusually heavy traffic, road conditions or other such things beyond our control. Obviously this is not acceptable.
So lets leave 55 minutes early, giving ourselves a buffer of 10 minutes. This may cut the lateness percentage down to 10 percent. If we leave 65 minutes early the percentage may go down to 5 percent; 75 minutes may cut it to 1 percent, 85 minutes to 0.1 percent.
0.1 percent of lateness is pretty good I would say, that would mean an employee is only late once in 1000 days, close to 3 years. That would be good enough for me already.
But to not be late in one's whole career? Say one works from the age of 25 to 60, 35 years. One would have to be late less than 0.01 percent to achieve that. This may mean that one has to leave 115 minutes early. All that extra time wasted in the office.
As for not taking leave, if everyone had that as an aim, wouldn't that induce them to come to work when sick? It's pretty hard to expect people to not get a flu over the course of thirty-odd years. Coming to work when sick would be worse for the workplace I think, germs would be spread and productivity would be low anyway. Might spread an epidemic too.
In short, I feel that never being late or taking leave is not a good thing for us to aim towards, as the hidden costs of trying to achieve it far outweigh its benefits.
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
The speed of life
As you get older and older, time passes faster and faster. I find this to be definitely true for myself. When I was a kid, waiting in a queue for something was pure torture, if I was caught in a supermarket line or stuck waiting in a government office I would feel like digging my eyes out with a spoon.
But now if you ask me to wait in line, I can actually close my eyes and relax for awhile. For some reason it doesn't seem as much like hell as before. Perhaps time really does slow down. But why should time slow down as we get older? Some say that we measure time by how much we have lived; a one year-old measures a year as his whole life, practically an eternity, a ten-year old measures it as one-tenth of his life, still a long time, while for a fifty year old it passes in the blink of an eye as it is merely a fiftieth.
Now I know why my dad is fine with boring television shows, they go by much faster for him than for me.
The thought of life running by faster and faster does comfort me when I'm standing in line or doing boring documentation work... yet when I think of being pushed to the grave faster and faster the thought does seem a little disturbing. Doesn't that mean that I won't have much time with my grandkids from my perspective?
So now I know why my dad is asking me when am I going to find a girl, he's worrying about time spent with his grandkids too.
However perhaps the accelerating passage of time for us humans may be a good thing. If we think of life as a movie, wouldn't the fact that the last 5 minutes pass faster than the first 5 mean that the movie was, generally speaking, an interesting one? If the last 5 minutes passed slower than the first 5, that would indicate a pretty boring movie.
So in this brief flight of time between cradle and heaven, we all enjoy a decent ride at least.
And maybe that is all that matters.
But now if you ask me to wait in line, I can actually close my eyes and relax for awhile. For some reason it doesn't seem as much like hell as before. Perhaps time really does slow down. But why should time slow down as we get older? Some say that we measure time by how much we have lived; a one year-old measures a year as his whole life, practically an eternity, a ten-year old measures it as one-tenth of his life, still a long time, while for a fifty year old it passes in the blink of an eye as it is merely a fiftieth.
Now I know why my dad is fine with boring television shows, they go by much faster for him than for me.
The thought of life running by faster and faster does comfort me when I'm standing in line or doing boring documentation work... yet when I think of being pushed to the grave faster and faster the thought does seem a little disturbing. Doesn't that mean that I won't have much time with my grandkids from my perspective?
So now I know why my dad is asking me when am I going to find a girl, he's worrying about time spent with his grandkids too.
However perhaps the accelerating passage of time for us humans may be a good thing. If we think of life as a movie, wouldn't the fact that the last 5 minutes pass faster than the first 5 mean that the movie was, generally speaking, an interesting one? If the last 5 minutes passed slower than the first 5, that would indicate a pretty boring movie.
So in this brief flight of time between cradle and heaven, we all enjoy a decent ride at least.
And maybe that is all that matters.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)