When I Was Young

ESTHER NG
estherng@mediacorp.com.sg


SINGAPOREANS, gracious? Scepticism has dominated the debate among readers of this paper, but the chairman of the Singapore Kindness Movement’s belief is: Of course we are, we’re just too shy or “paiseh” to show it.

For example, people wonder “should I give up my seat? What if the person rebuffs me, will I look stupid?”, said Mr Koh Poh Tiong, urging Singaporeans to be spontaneous and “not think too much before performing an act of kindness”.

This weekend, the movement launches its Project Gracious campaign, in hopes of making kindness more instinctive at home, work, school and the neighbourhood.

But students are coming in for particular attention.

“Ungracious behaviour is across the board,” said SKM’s general manager Teh Thien Yew. “Still, there are some who feel, rightly or wrongly, such behaviour is more likely to come from young people.”

And so, SKM will conduct a series of school assembly talks from this month; 47 primary and secondary schools have signed up. Students will learn how to greet parents and neighbours, how to be considerate on public transport and the proper way of asking for help.

SKM will also partner theatre group Drama Box to help teachers overcome difficulties in teaching kindness in school. “We hope to empower them and boost their confidence as mentors,” said an SKM spokersperson. So far, 142 schools have each nominated a “SKM coordinator”.

The movement will also work with parents, NTUC First Campus and PAP Community Foundation kindergartens to inculcate the values of kindness through stories and activity books. For example, one activity requires them update a chart with “the courteous deeds that both child and parent complete each day. This is to encourage parents to be good role models and each can affirm the other’s behaviour,” said the spokesperson.

In a straw poll of who they considered the main culprits of ugly behaviour, most of the 10 respondents fingered young adults aged 20 to 30. Secondary school students came in a close second.

“I think it’s the ‘me’ generation — the ones that never did housework, the marketing, the dishes — because there was always a maid to pick up after them. So they don’t know what is hardship like, how to be considerate to others,” said architect Andrew Lim, 35.

With secondary school students, it’s behaviour like kicking seats and not moving to the back that annoy others. “Some students press the bell at the last minute and scold the driver for stopping a few metres from the bus stop,” said Ms Koh Ling Ling, 34, a public relations manager.

Mr Mohamed Fuad, 24, used to be one such uncouth youth — but he says it’s a phase teenagers go through.

“It was the company I kept. We were rude, we didn’t care what people thought. We would walk in a big group and not give way. Our attitude was we could do whatever we wanted,” he said.

“And if any of our friends or classmates were polite, we would make fun of him or her. Having said that, I’ve seen really gracious youngsters — it boils down to how well you were brought up.” He turned over a new leaf in polytechnic when “I realised there was karma: What goes around, comes around. That’s when I decided to grow up”.

Once taught, graciousness stays with one for life.

Said SKM chairman, Mr Koh: “I taught my sons to open doors for women and their friends used to laugh at them. They’re in their 30s now, but they still do it.”

But sociologist Paulin Straughan thinks Singaporeans “need to learn how to receive graciously as well”. She said: “I’ve seen young people give up their seats on the train, but many feel daunted when they are stared at or their offer is rudely rebuffed. If you don’t want it, say ‘Thank you, but I don’t need it’.”


From TODAY, Afternoon Edition
Wednesday, 01-April-2009

COURTESY SHORTFALL

From Third World to First, there are both courteous and impolite

Letter from Rejesh Seth


I refer to “Efficiency’s a drag” (March 30). I believe “we see what we want to see” and our minds are mostly biased when we make observations.

Mr Joseph Wong compared an incident at a fivestar hotel in Tokyo with one at a public event which drew a record crowd in Singapore.

I am sure if the comparison was made between a Tokyo train station during peak hour and one in a lift at a five-star hotel here, the result would have been the opposite.

I have travelled extensively all over the world and I have found that humans are similar in their behaviour regardless of their backgrounds.

Circumstances or the existing way of life are what makes people behave the way they do.

To take this discussion a little forward, in Third World countries, where a majority of the population do not have a decent lifestyle, you may perhaps find a lot of pushing and jostling.

But this in no way changes human behaviour, as you will still find most of the people there eager to be polite in the way they know best.

On the other hand, recent cases of natural disasters in first world countries brought out shocking cases of inhuman behaviour in normally orderly people.

Behaviour is very complex and cannot be generalised.

In any case, I strongly consider Singaporeans as one of the most polite people compared to their counterparts elsewhere.

From TODAY, Voices
Tuesday, 31-March-2009

Letter from Arthur Lim


I REFER to Mr Joseph Wong’s “Efficiency’s a drag” (March 30).

I have come across both Singaporeans and visitors here, who after asking for assistance such as the way to a particular destination, simply walk away as if I owed them an answer to their queries.

I have on several occasions called the person back to ask, “Did you forget something?” to the astonishment of that individual.

After looking confused for a minute or two, I would then say “You forgot to say ‘thank you’”.

The person would then thank me, embarrassed.

Courtesy is a two way street, if you want and expect the other party to be courteous, you must be likewise.

From TODAY, Voices
Tuesday, 31-March-2009

If I may say, this "courtesy" thing cannot be originating from the government, but it does help if the government advocates this beneficial character trait to the citizens. Bottomline is, it starts from home.



COURTESY SHORTFALL

Letter from Joseph Wong


I refer to Nury Vittachi’s “They’re dead polite” (March 28-29). On a visit to Tokyo, I stayed at the Hilton and was going up to my room when a Japanese lady entered the lift. She bowed to me out of courtesy. When she got off at her floor, she stepped out, turned to me and apologised for having interrupted my lift ride.

I agree with Nury Vittachi that this sort of generous politeness has to come from the depth of a culture. I doubt it can be faked.

Contrast this to an experience at the recent IT Fair at Suntec City. A man at the top of the escalator was tasked with crowd control. With loud hailer in hand, he barked at the throng of people: “Move away from the escalator ... do not block the escalator!”

I waited to see if he would use the words “please” or “thank you”. No. Later, it was “keep moving, keep moving”! As much as I believe this man may be efficient at his job, I also think he is naturally impolite.

Our need to be efficient is probably the thing that keeps Singaporeans from making courtesy a way of life. We need to get everything done in the quickest time — a product of the productivity campaign back in the 1980s.

To become a courteous nation, Singaporeans must scale back on the importance of being efficient and learn to stop and smell the roses.

If we are to make courtesy part of our culture, we must emphasise it in every campaign. It would be great if we can get Singaporeans to apologise to other lift users for interrupting their ride.

But first, we need to educate them to stop urinating in lifts.


From TODAY, Voices
Monday, 30-March-2009

Letter from Chen Junyi

I DISAGREE with the points raised by Sarah Sum-Campbell "The cane is a bane" (March 26).

Firstly, her use of "well-documented research" to claim that children who witness violence suffer from psychological damage presumes to equate caning with violence and fails to distinguish between disciplinary caning and abusive violence.

The misuse of such research is clear — many children grow up without psychological damage after witnessing their peers caned for unacceptable conduct.

Please give children more credit — they can understand if it is explained to them what abuse is and what punishment for unacceptable conduct is, and if what they see is consistent with what they are taught.

There is nothing special in the writer's daughter being able to approach people with confidence. Many other children of the same age can do the same.

Despite what the writer might think, Western systems do not have a monopoly to define what is fair and open-minded for an education system. In addition, Singapore's invitation to foreign talent is not exclusive to Westerners.

It would be irresponsible for the Ministry of Education to impose one set of standards for foreign children and another for local children. Therefore, foreigners who choose to enrol their children in a local school should not expect different treatment for their children.

The writer should bear in mind that agreements and disagreements with the philosophy of caning is a personal issue and has no direct relevance with whether a Singaporean has spent any significant time overseas.

Singapore's education system is, I admit, not perfect. Even if caning were to stop, many Singaporean parents would still migrate for their children to undergo an education system elsewhere. There is no such thing as a perfect education system — people have to choose what they can live with and what they cannot live with. Some would find it is better to live where discipline is taken seriously.

From TODAY, Voices
Friday, 27-March-2009

I SAY
It will not be wise to compromise our values so that foreigners will come

David Dorairaj

I REFER to "To cane or not to cane" (March 24) by Dr Rachel S Kraut.

Much has been talked about the rights and wrongs of public caning, by both locals and foreigners, over many years. Having been on the receiving end of a public caning in school — it was a particular end of my anatomy that received it — I have my own views regarding public caning. Some of these views run contrary to Dr Kraut's. But then, I was born and raised here.

But that is not the main issue of Dr Kraut's piece. The main issue seems, as summarised in the final paragraph of the article, is that the "local system (of public caning)… should be relooked" in order to encourage integration of foreign talent.

A check in the dictionary reveals that the word "integrate" means "to bring together or incorporate (parts) into a whole". This brings forth an idea of give and take. Naturally, as understood by most, it is the "parts" that has the greater onus to flow into the "whole", not the other way around.

When I studied in the United States for four years, there were many things that shocked me as a Singaporean. Among these was the easy purchase of firearms at the neighbourhood Wal-Mart, and the aisle full of bullets; both of which were just behind the children's clothing section.

In the '80s, my brother was posted for several years to work in Holland. He had to deal with issues such as the legal sale and consumption of marijuana, the prevalence of prostitution and open practice of euthanasia.

My point is simple: My brother and I, like others who move to a different country with a different culture, had to carefully analyse and assess both the benefits and costs of that move and arrive at a decision. We understood that it was a package deal. We did not go expecting America and Holland to be like Singapore or for their cultures to conform to us. The onus was upon us to fit in.

Singapore is Singapore because of the values we have had for many years. The success of this country cannot be dissected from her values. And these are distinctly Singaporean values. Thus, it will not be right or wise to compromise these values so that foreigners will come.

Furthermore, everyone needs to understand that our methods flow as an extension and implementation of our values. While we remain open to dialogue and change, foreigners need to understand that our methods, like our values, are distinctly Singaporean. To be otherwise is like expecting an apple tree to bear oranges.

All the "foreign talent", like Dr Kraut, who are here are not martyrs; they are not here even though everything about their country is better. Also, the pull factor must have been sufficiently strong enough in order for them to leave the good of their own country.

Therefore, to the "foreign talent" of the present and future, I say you are most welcome to our home, Singapore; but, kindly do not assume or insist that we ought to rearrange the furniture just so that you would come. I am certain you would not like it if I came over to your house and rearranged your furniture, would you?

From TODAY, Voices
Friday, 27-March-2009

Go to www.todayonline.com/voices for more views on caning

Studying overseas

Letter from Lydea Gn Wei En

I refer to "Stress and the foreign student" (March 14-15).

As a Singaporean studying overseas, I am able to empathise with the challenges faced by international students in Singapore.

Many such students feel homesick, especially if the host country is vastly different from theirs. Imagine not having a familiar face by your side and having to adjust to the demands of a tertiary education.

The price of your favourite chicken rice is double that at home, and you may have to travel an hour to get it, only to find it tastes nothing like what you have in Singapore. Regardless of how much you may like other types of food, going for months without the comfort of local food can be depressing. The feeling of isolation is exacerbated if the locals do not speak a language you are fluent in.

Most students like me learn for the first time how to look after themselves when overseas.

Independence is a double-edged sword — it means being away from the watchful eyes of parents as well as being responsible for cooking, grocery shopping and budgeting, things we never had to worry about at home. The lack of parental supervision may sound like a dream, but it also means no one is there to stop us from going onto the wrong track.

One of the greatest joys for me as an international student in Australia is not only getting to know locals and their culture, but also other nationalities including Japanese and Pacific Islanders. It is an eye-opening experience but one does not have to study overseas for it. You can do so in Singapore by befriending an international student.

Having interacted with the local Australians, I also come to understand their point of view. Some of them do not know how to approach international students. A number have never travelled outside Australia and are afraid of offending us.

Cliques occur everywhere and are not limited to schools in Singapore. It takes a considerable amount of effort to get to know and develop relationships with others from different backgrounds. University life is hectic, which makes it unsurprising that many choose the easier path of hanging out with their own countrymen.

There is nothing wrong with that, as cultural preferences (for example, the pub culture in Australia is not my cup of tea) make it difficult for those of different backgrounds to develop close bonds. Assimilation and integration is a two-way process. Both local and foreign students have to be willing to broaden their horizons and have the eagerness to learn and accept each other's differences.

Being culturally exclusive is similar to being a frog in a well that refuses to accept the existence of a world beyond that well.

From TODAY, Voices
Friday, 27-March-2009

From TODAY, Voices
Thursday, 26-March-2009

I SAY
Foreign parents should be told of such punishment

Sarah Sum-Campbell

I AGREE whole-heartedly with Dr Rachel Kraut "To cane or not to cane" (March 24) that the Education Ministry should rethink and revise their policy of public caning in the Singapore school system.

It is well-documented in research that children witnessing violence suffer an equivalent if not more psychological damage than those on whom violence is inflicted.

Our daughter is two years old and my husband and I have already sworn off Singapore schools as we believe in a nurturing and enquiry mode of learning. We agree not to reprimand or put her down in public, especially in front of people with whom she has regular contact. She has yet to learn how to string a sentence together but she knows there are rules to play by and if she does not behave in public, she will not get to play outside of her home. It gives us joy to see her approach people with confidence.

Dr Kraut is right that if the Government is serious about engaging and retaining foreign talent, our education system should be seen to be fair, open-minded and conform to standards of other western systems.

Should the Education Ministry see fit that public whipping be retained in schools, perhaps foreign parents should be well informed beforehand, and be given the choice that should such treatment be meted out, their children have that choice to be left out.

The Government should also bear in mind that there are many Singaporeans who have spent significant periods of time overseas and do not agree with the philosophy of public caning.

I know a Singaporean couple who migrated because their child was very unhappy in school. A happy childhood and learning in a nurturing environment are topmost on parents' minds when they make decisions on where to live.

It would be such a pity if foreign talent is deterred from coming to Singapore because of our education system, and if Singapore loses her own born and bred sons and daughters for the same reason.

See www.todayonline.com/voices for more views on caning

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Letter from Peck Bee Choon

I am a Singaporean who has been living in Tokyo for about eight years. My five-year-old daughter was born in Tokyo. Her mischievous acts sometimes pose a danger to herself.

I bought a cane from Singapore to use for disciplinary purposes. It is a teeny-weeny cane which I wave in the air or hit the sofa with to send a warning to my daughter whenever she repeats any mischievous act.

I advocate punishment for kids who repeatedly misbehave in public or indulge in acts that could hurt others or themselves.

I use the cane on my daughter but only at home. I believe that public punishment humiliates the kids concerned and may cause emotional scars that can take a long time to heal.

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Letter from Caireann O’Neill

I am from one of those “liberal” countries where teachers can’t even talk with a loud voice to students.

The result of such liberalism is that pupils do what they want.

Teachers can’t even control the students because the latter know they can’t be “touched”.

If bad behaviour has no painful repercussions then children think its all right to behave poorly.

To me, the Singapore system is not horrifying. Nowadays children hardly get caned at school and the negative consequences to society can already be observed.

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Letter from Koh Wee Keng

There are certain things that need to be protected, such as individual freedom and the freedom not to be bullied. There is no such thing as the freedom to bully.

Caning is by far the most proven form of prevention of problems such as violence.

Schools seeking the parents’ endorsement before meting out such a punishment is the mark of a civil society. After the pain is gone, caning as a lesson has a high retention value, even for those who merely witnessed it.

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Letter from Duncan Edwards

Having witnessed the increased lack of discipline in British schools, lack of respect for authority and the increasing number of teenage knife attacks, then far from the use of the cane deterring foreign talent, I think Singapore’s school discipline may actually attract parents.

When Dr Rachel Kraut asked “What sort of repercussions will the witnessing of this event have on other students?”

Quite simply, they will think, “I’m not going to do that, else I will get caned!”

It’s called discipline. Carry on, schools. Singapore has a respectful, decent, honest society that we should be proud of.

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Letter from Tan Chong Seng

Discipline begins at home, and if one has brought up children well, one does not have to worry about one’s children being inflicted by corporal punishment.

If what the author says is true, why do criminals still go to jail for crimes they have committed? Will counselling still help at this juncture?

I believe the law serves as a reminder of the consequences which would apply to others who wish to commit the same crime. This helps to bring order to society.

It has worked well for Singapore thus far, and this is the direction in which we will continue.

The Government can consider giving parents the choice to send their kids to schools that give teachers authority to use the cane.

Alternatively, there should be schools that do not have corporal punishment.

From TODAY, Voices
Wednesday, 25-March-2009

Yes, caning can teach children the right values, but reasons must be explained

Letter from Dr Anthony Thian

Caning has its place in instilling certain values into children, but should only be used when the offence is serious and not as a form of punishment for offences such as having long hair or long nails, being late for school or not handing in homework.

In this case, the child has exhibited violent behaviour (chasing down another child and kicking him) over a small matter — the rightful owner of the online game refused to tell him his password.

Violent behaviour cannot be tolerated. However, before the discipline master effected the punishment, he should have explained to the assembled students why the offence was serious and why it should never be repeated. It would also have been a good opportunity for the discipline master to give students some tips on anger management.

As a medical doctor, I come across many parents who now lament that they should have meted out stronger punishment when their children were younger. They regret their inaction, as some of their children have joined street gangs, others have gotten into serious fights and others have taken up drugs. The parents now wish that schools had been more strict with their children too.

Let us not get carried away with the notion that public caning would always have a negative effect. It certainly does not dampen any creative spirit. There is nothing creative in violent behaviour.

I SAY
From TODAY, Voices
Tuesday, 24-March-2009

Dr Rachel S Kraut

ONE night, over dinner, my 11-year-old daughter whispered something in my ear: One of her Primary 6 classmates had been publicly caned that day, in the classroom, in front of all the other students.

His offence was apparently computer-game related — he had chased down and kicked another child after that child had refused to tell him his password for the online game Maple Story.

I am not much consoled by the knowledge that the child’s parents were first consulted, and gave the school permission to cane their child.

As someone who didn’t grow up in the Singapore system, this is horrifying. Not only because of the public display of barbarity, but because of several messages that were delivered by the school’s discipline master presiding over the event. He compared this caning to the punishment meted out in Jakarta jails, telling the class: “The cane they use is four times as thick!”

Are we supposed to be reassured by the comparison of our children’s school to an Indonesian jail? Before and during the caning, the students sat silently, terrified, dreading the moment. My daughter told me what she thought: “I don’t want to watch this. No one should be caned, especially in public.” She turned away and didn’t look.

One wonders: Will public caning lead to better behaviour? Was caning the right course of action in this case? Wouldn’t psychological counselling have been both more humane and more effective, as well as less damaging to the collective morale? What sort of repercussions will the witnessing of this event have on other students?

I’m sure the discipline master is confident he’s doing the right thing by caning children. The adage “Spare the rod and spoil the child” may have some validity, but as an educational philosophy, it certainly doesn’t contribute to creating a self-confident, free-thinking, creative populace.

The Singaporean school system acts according to its own rules, beliefs, and cultural norms. This is fine, as long as the system is homogeneous. However, one of the stated goals of Singapore as a nation is to attract “foreign talent” and to nurture and integrate other cultures, as a mechanism of achieving technological advancement. This is sensible, and admirable.

But before the scientific establishment in Singapore recommends to Western scientists that they should immigrate and try to integrate their families into the local system, the system should either be relooked, or parents and children should prepare themselves for a shock.

The writer is an Associate Professor at the School of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University. She is a Singapore PR who has lived here for four years. She is writing in her personal capacity.

Email your views to voices@mediacorp.com.sg

From TODAY, Voices
Monday, 23-March-2009

Letter from Li Juexun

I REFER to Trevor Tan’s Tech Comment, “Violence and video games” (March 13), debating the link between the two.

Perhaps some readers may be too young to remember this, but not too long ago, people blamed movies for violence, blamed television for violence, blamed music for violence. Heavy metal music, they said, surely was the cause of so much violent crime the world over.

The truth is this: People always try to find something to blame when something tragic happens. What they are unwilling to do is to look into a mirror.

Whatever violence has taken place would have happened even without the video games. The video game market is one of the largest of the various entertainment industries. If violent games did beget violence, we would have millions of murderers on the streets.

I am no expert on child psychology, I am no expert on video games. But what I do know is this: If my child spends 20 hours a day at his computer shooting zombies with an assault rifle, maybe it is time I started spending more time with my child and maybe doing some sports together, instead of just reprimanding him harshly and walking away without doing anything.

THE RECESSION
- Foreclosure is painful, but it isn’t the end of the world

From WEEKEND TODAY, Voices
21-22 March 2009

ESTHER FUNG
esther@mediacorp.com.sg


AS A reporter covering the business beat amid Singapore’s worst recession in memory, I often have a sense of deja vu whenever the issue of home foreclosures crops up.

My family and I have been down that road before.

Back in 2000, my parents, whose business had yet to recover from the 1997/98 Asian Financial Crisis, managed to stave off bankruptcy. But our family had to move out of the semi-detached bungalow that we had called home for five years because the bank was breathing down our necks.

I watched as my parents, who were in their late 40s, overcame feelings of inadequacy, anxiety and angst when they were forced to sell our home.

I remembered how sad I was when my parents told the six of us — we were then between five and 18 — that the red-roofed home, along with the sushi dinner parties and garden barbecues, had to make way for something simpler.

As a 16-year-old caught in this unexpected setback in life, I had to make some mental adjustments quickly. The house that I had imagined I would live in until my wedding day had to go.

My parents also had to swallow their pride when relatives, friends and business partners asked about our downgrading.

But later on, I realised that children could be pretty resilient in times of adversity. Rather than wallow in self-pity, my siblings and I kept our chins up and learnt to be more accommodating towards each other.

The spacious Volvo was sold and the whole family adapted to squeezing ourselves into the more economical Hyundai Elantra.

This reduction in personal space soon became a regular fixture in our lives.

Moving into a rented, smaller terrace home packed with unopened cardboard boxes subsequently made me a wee bit more responsible da jie, or eldest sister.

There were many nights when I would sit and chat with my younger sisters on the mattress to help them feel more comfortable in our new home. I shared with them my personal stuff when they could not get theirs from the still-sealed boxes.

We were definitely not miserable and managed to get by staying in a house that I suppose could constitute a fire hazard.

We had to share our rooms with two other siblings — it used to be two to a room — and throw away a significant amount of our possessions that were deemed of little monetary value.

As I watched my father’s apparel machinery business teeter on the brink of failure, along with its attendant ramifications, I developed a sense of humility that was, in some ways, liberating.

My siblings and I learnt to accept that certain luxuries that we had long taken for granted would no longer be there.

I didn’t know much about business then, but I did remember reminding my sisters — frequently — to be thrifty. I didn’t want our parents to worry more than they already had to.

Looking back, those days weren’t really so awful, after all. While at times we argued because it was really easy to step on toes, literally or otherwise, we gradually adapted to living in a smaller and less attractive house.

It helped that we were never hungry at home, as my mother made sure we remained adequately “prosperous” at the waistline.

We enjoyed our new surroundings enough to make them the backdrop of many a family photo. Pictures of my sisters posing with an orchid plant still grace the walls of our current home.

My parents eventually got over their colossal loss of “face” as they realised that they still had many things to be thankful for. If nothing else, all their six kids were still healthy and adequately well-behaved during this trying period.

Then guess what?

A year later, we had to downgrade again because the much-hoped for business recovery took much longer than expected. This time, we moved into an even smaller, four-room HDB apartment, permanently.

But having been through it once, we became more numb to yet another humbling experience. It was really not such a painful experience any more: We already knew what it was like not getting our first, second or eighth choice.

Soon, we got over the fact that we were unlikely to live in a big home with a fancy address for a long time to come.

Downgrading — not once but twice — was a difficult transition. But it toughened my family up and gave us the confidence that we could cope with whatever hand life might deal us. WEEKEND XTRA