Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Loos for transgender
MUMBAI - PRE and post-operative transsexuals in the southern Indian city of Chennai are to get their own public toilets in an effort to boost recognition of the community, a report said on Monday.
Three toilets are to be built to cater for the sizeable transgender population as part of a pilot project that will begin after the upcoming general elections, the English-language Indian Express newspaper said.
Municipal commissioner Rajesh Lakhoni was quoted as saying that the scheme was aimed at 'extending recognition to the community and mainstreaming them' and more facilities could be built if the public responded well to the idea.
But it has drawn a mixed response from the transgender community itself.
'I don't agree with this. We want to mingle with the mainstream. We don't want to be separated like this,' said Aasha Bharati, president of the Aravanigal Association in Tamil Nadu state.
'Using separate toilets will open the way for discrimination. We want to be considered as females. In our hearts, we are women.'
India's first transgender television host, Rose Venkatesan, was more positive. She said: 'It is a big problem, because not everyone has undergone a sex change.
'This is a good idea but in the long run, I see a society where there is no difference and all use the same toilets.'
There are about 30,000 transgendered people in Tamil Nadu state and there are thought to be about 500,000 across India. They are among the most marginalised and discriminated against in India's hierarchical, conservative society. -- AFP
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_347855.html
I wonder what the symbol for the 3rd toilet will look like..
Three toilets are to be built to cater for the sizeable transgender population as part of a pilot project that will begin after the upcoming general elections, the English-language Indian Express newspaper said.
Municipal commissioner Rajesh Lakhoni was quoted as saying that the scheme was aimed at 'extending recognition to the community and mainstreaming them' and more facilities could be built if the public responded well to the idea.
But it has drawn a mixed response from the transgender community itself.
'I don't agree with this. We want to mingle with the mainstream. We don't want to be separated like this,' said Aasha Bharati, president of the Aravanigal Association in Tamil Nadu state.
'Using separate toilets will open the way for discrimination. We want to be considered as females. In our hearts, we are women.'
India's first transgender television host, Rose Venkatesan, was more positive. She said: 'It is a big problem, because not everyone has undergone a sex change.
'This is a good idea but in the long run, I see a society where there is no difference and all use the same toilets.'
There are about 30,000 transgendered people in Tamil Nadu state and there are thought to be about 500,000 across India. They are among the most marginalised and discriminated against in India's hierarchical, conservative society. -- AFP
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_347855.html
I wonder what the symbol for the 3rd toilet will look like..
Labels: current affairs
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Taiwan to end conscription
TAIPEI - TAIWAN will phase out its decades-old military conscription policy over the next five years, the defence minister said on Monday, amid warming ties with China.
Currently all men aged over 20 are required to do one year's military service.
But Defence Minister Chen Chao-min told reporters that the structure of Taiwan's military manpower will undergo a dramatic change over the next few years.
'From 2011, the number of conscripts will be reduced by at least 10 percent each year, to be replaced by professional soldiers,' Mr Chen said.
'That is to say, eventually, conscript measures will come to an end by 2014.' Critics have argued that the island's armed forces have struggled to enhance their defence capabilities because conscripts are unable to become proficient in high-tech weaponry in their short military service.
However, the new proposals sparked concerns over whether the defence ministry would be able to recruit sufficiently qualified professional soldiers at a monthly salary of NT$35,000 (S$1,550).
The plan to phase out conscription was a campaign pledge of President Ma Ying-jeou during the 2008 election.
The number of service personnel in Taiwan stands at around 275,000, down from a peak of 600,000 during the Cold War.
Taiwan's relatively large army is a legacy of decades of tensions with China, which has regarded the island as part of its territory awaiting reunification since the two sides split at the end of a civil war in 1949.
However, ties between Taiwan and China have improved dramatically since Mr Ma's Kuomintang party took office last May promising to boost cross-strait trade and tourism. -- AFP
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_347888.html
That must be nice. Taiwan has China, who has openly threatened to invade her and referred to her as being part of China, is going to end conscription soon. Now compare to Singapore, whose neighbours have.. hmm.. almost never done that? We still have conscription. And a longer service term too. I still say the reason for SAF is to provide cheap labour and have an excuse to pay people a lot of money to do stuff that is otherwise worthless in the real world.
Currently all men aged over 20 are required to do one year's military service.
But Defence Minister Chen Chao-min told reporters that the structure of Taiwan's military manpower will undergo a dramatic change over the next few years.
'From 2011, the number of conscripts will be reduced by at least 10 percent each year, to be replaced by professional soldiers,' Mr Chen said.
'That is to say, eventually, conscript measures will come to an end by 2014.' Critics have argued that the island's armed forces have struggled to enhance their defence capabilities because conscripts are unable to become proficient in high-tech weaponry in their short military service.
However, the new proposals sparked concerns over whether the defence ministry would be able to recruit sufficiently qualified professional soldiers at a monthly salary of NT$35,000 (S$1,550).
The plan to phase out conscription was a campaign pledge of President Ma Ying-jeou during the 2008 election.
The number of service personnel in Taiwan stands at around 275,000, down from a peak of 600,000 during the Cold War.
Taiwan's relatively large army is a legacy of decades of tensions with China, which has regarded the island as part of its territory awaiting reunification since the two sides split at the end of a civil war in 1949.
However, ties between Taiwan and China have improved dramatically since Mr Ma's Kuomintang party took office last May promising to boost cross-strait trade and tourism. -- AFP
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_347888.html
That must be nice. Taiwan has China, who has openly threatened to invade her and referred to her as being part of China, is going to end conscription soon. Now compare to Singapore, whose neighbours have.. hmm.. almost never done that? We still have conscription. And a longer service term too. I still say the reason for SAF is to provide cheap labour and have an excuse to pay people a lot of money to do stuff that is otherwise worthless in the real world.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Mea Culpa?
Parents will complain. And to make things worse, they don't all complain about the same thing. Case in point, the upcoming plan to abolish exams for the children in primary 1 and primary 2. Some parents were happy cause it means the kids won't be so stressed up over exams. Stressed up kids equate to stressed up parents. So one would think that abolishing exams is a good thing.
Well, here comes the other group of parents who are against the abolishment of examinations.Why? Because they fear that the kids will not be prepared to take exams come Primary 3. Also, in place of exams will be continual assessments which.. *horrors* will force their children to know what is being taught everyday instead of cramming at the last minute.
Fast forward a few years, the little tykes are now going to take their PSLE. And the parents complain about this too. About the stress of taking 1 big exam which will decide which secondary school they go to and then which JC/Poly/ITE they go to, which job they take, who they marry, how many kids they have, where their kids go and where they eventually get buried. They want the PSLE to be abolished so that their kids will be less stressed. Then here comes the other group of parents who want the PSLE to remain as it serves as a national examination where everyone can be ranked fairly and ensure that meritocracy "triumphs".
Question: What is a contributing factor of giving the kids stress? Who makes the kids take up extra curricular lessons and activities so that they don't "lose" out to other kids who want to fight with their kids for the best burial plot? Who is the one who drills into their kids that if you don't study hard you'll end up as a road sweeper/cleaner/someone deemed as "lower class" in society?
It's Parents.
Yes, the system is partly to blame, but the system is the way it is because policies have been shaped as such by people who are parents or have been influenced by parents. If all these disgruntled parents got together and did something, like stand their ground and say "We won't put our kids through all this anymore", maybe the system will change.
Came across an article today in the papers about a parent commenting on how her son who is from a "prestigious junior college" was so stressed in school that he faked being ill to not go to school. When the parents went to talk to his school teachers, they were unsympathetic and told them that their son had to go back to school once his medical leave was over as it was only a few months before the A levels.
Ok, firstly what's with the whole prestigious junior college? The only thing worse than this would be adding the location (which parents are very fond of doing). "Prestigious school in the north". Yes yes, your child is very smart. Also why complain about a school being stressful? It's a "prestigious junior college" after all. Why is it prestigious? Cause their students have good grades (not necessarily smart now). Why do their students have good grades? Good teachers? Hardworking? A lot of tough assignments/projects/assessments? All possible. So as a parent, shouldn't you expect this before your child enrolled in that "prestigious junior college"? So why complain now? Don't write to the media and hope to milk public sympathy.
The schools on their part are to blamed for wanting to get good grades, but why? Cause people judge a school by the grades they produce. When was the last time you heard "oh this school is good cause it produces upright citizens who go on to contribute to the good of the nation, not a cold heartless politician who quibbles over giving $40 more to a person"
Mea Culpa is something all parents should learn well.
Well, here comes the other group of parents who are against the abolishment of examinations.Why? Because they fear that the kids will not be prepared to take exams come Primary 3. Also, in place of exams will be continual assessments which.. *horrors* will force their children to know what is being taught everyday instead of cramming at the last minute.
Fast forward a few years, the little tykes are now going to take their PSLE. And the parents complain about this too. About the stress of taking 1 big exam which will decide which secondary school they go to and then which JC/Poly/ITE they go to, which job they take, who they marry, how many kids they have, where their kids go and where they eventually get buried. They want the PSLE to be abolished so that their kids will be less stressed. Then here comes the other group of parents who want the PSLE to remain as it serves as a national examination where everyone can be ranked fairly and ensure that meritocracy "triumphs".
Question: What is a contributing factor of giving the kids stress? Who makes the kids take up extra curricular lessons and activities so that they don't "lose" out to other kids who want to fight with their kids for the best burial plot? Who is the one who drills into their kids that if you don't study hard you'll end up as a road sweeper/cleaner/someone deemed as "lower class" in society?
It's Parents.
Yes, the system is partly to blame, but the system is the way it is because policies have been shaped as such by people who are parents or have been influenced by parents. If all these disgruntled parents got together and did something, like stand their ground and say "We won't put our kids through all this anymore", maybe the system will change.
Came across an article today in the papers about a parent commenting on how her son who is from a "prestigious junior college" was so stressed in school that he faked being ill to not go to school. When the parents went to talk to his school teachers, they were unsympathetic and told them that their son had to go back to school once his medical leave was over as it was only a few months before the A levels.
Ok, firstly what's with the whole prestigious junior college? The only thing worse than this would be adding the location (which parents are very fond of doing). "Prestigious school in the north". Yes yes, your child is very smart. Also why complain about a school being stressful? It's a "prestigious junior college" after all. Why is it prestigious? Cause their students have good grades (not necessarily smart now). Why do their students have good grades? Good teachers? Hardworking? A lot of tough assignments/projects/assessments? All possible. So as a parent, shouldn't you expect this before your child enrolled in that "prestigious junior college"? So why complain now? Don't write to the media and hope to milk public sympathy.
The schools on their part are to blamed for wanting to get good grades, but why? Cause people judge a school by the grades they produce. When was the last time you heard "oh this school is good cause it produces upright citizens who go on to contribute to the good of the nation, not a cold heartless politician who quibbles over giving $40 more to a person"
Mea Culpa is something all parents should learn well.
Labels: education, stupid singaporeans
