Hi, I have decided to do my next post on teenage sex. Here it is, in red:
According to a survey done by the New Paper on a group of 1553 students, 27% of teenagers of 13 to 14 years have had sex.
It is a shocking number to be sure. And it is a worrying trend. 23% of all these teens have visited a pornography site before and 12% have been or made someone pregnant.
Now, we should wonder, is it acceptable to be so familiar with sex despite their age?
Some worried parents have come out with all guns blazing, blasting at this trend. Their chief concern is apparently teenage pregnancy. Teenage pregnancy would result in trauma and affect the teenager’s growth.
I hold rather contradictory viewpoints when confronted with this kind of questions. On one hand, I am very hopeful to open up Singapore and prise it away from stolid conservative thinking. On the other hand, I feel strongly for the Confucian morals and the importance of keeping sex away from children.
Obviously, premarital sex and underage sex is derogatory to society and individual. The problem is putting your finger on that wrong. If you are religious, you have an easier time. You shouldn’t do it because the sin of lust is forbidden in the Bible.
For the others, the task is not so straightforward. I have collated some arguments against teenage sex.
Ø Teenage sex distracts the teenagers from studying
o However, you may observe that this applies to only some people.
Ø Teenage sex puts teenagers at risk of pregnancy.
o They can have protected sex.
Ø Teenage pregnancy can be traumatic.
o If they get pregnant, they would be responsible as they would probably have gone through sex education, and made their own decision.
I have probably left out many, but these are the arguments I hear the most from parents. I have mainly found these arguments unconvincing logically, but they are very personal to the teenagers in question.
Recently, MP Ang Mong Seng proposed a radical solution to correct this social trend. Why don’t we, he proposed, form a CCA where guys can meet girls and learn the right way of dating? It can be CCA and we can give points to them.
The first thing you think off when you read this, would be the flood of guys rushing to join the Friendship Club, as Mr. Ang proposed it to be called. On the other hand, girls wouldn’t approach it with a ten-foot barge pole. Girls care about image, and thus, joining this club would effectively brand them as desperate. Guys don’t mind because we all know deep down, every guy is somewhat desperate.
You might also notice that the focus of the debate about friendship clubs is not about pre-marriage, or how to date correctly, it is more likely to be about the social stigma of being ‘desperate’ or otherwise, be about sex.
I cannot offer another good solution, but I do hope the authorities realize sex education is no longer working.
I don't know if this is good? It involves more 'Is' than the previous post.
Please comment, before Ms Kuang's comment is final.
The link is http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,124106,00.html
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Ageism, or age discrimination, is cited as the most common form of discrimination nowadays.
Ageism is most apparent in the workplace. Many older workers have been made redundant on grounds of age, or have been denied equal training opportunities that younger workers enjoy. This blatant form of discrimination is termed as overt discrimination. Indirect discrimination includes making ageist comments and treating older workers in an ageist manner.
The UK government has already acted on this problem and has taken steps to rectify this problem. Anti-ageism laws came into effect on 1 October 2006, and forbids all forms of overt discriminations. Other public acts of ageism, such as specifying an age group for a job position, is also outlawed. However, these new laws only protect workers up to the age of 65.
The problem to date is mainly the work of long-standing stereotypes about older workers.
Stereotypes by employers about older workers include notions that older workers are unable to adapt to change, lacking in creativity and flexibility, hard to train, not energetic enough and too cautious for the fast pace of modern day business.
In reality however, ageism has many negative effects. These effects can be classified as personal impacts and business impacts.
Personal impacts refer to the impact on the worker on the receiving end of the discrimination. The most immediate and recognizable effect would be a drop in self-esteem, which would translate into a drop in productivity.
Also, a worker made redundant over 45 would find it difficult finding another job, again because of the discriminating attitudes of potential employers.
Business impacts would refer to the impacts on the business the worker was fired from. Many employers do not realize that their discrimination could in fact be cost ineffective and they still might not get the best man for the job.
Ageism would also upset the balance of youth and experience that an economy needs to stay competitive. An competitive economy would need the right blend of youth and experience. By being ageist when choosing workers, an employer may discover he has too much youth and not enough experience to run the business competitively.
Although this scenario is set in the UK, we might find it all too relevant in Singapore as well. I may be wrong, but I would dare say that most of us have been at some point of time ageist. Discriminating on grounds of age would be against the basic principles of meritocracy, which is upheld in Singapore. An ageist attitude would eventually cost Singapore her sharp competitive edge. (How, I have elaborated earlier in this post.)
These are just my opinions, it may be incomplete, but I feel it gives a satisfactory introduction to the problem of ageism.
Despite all the disadvantages of ageism, I think eradicating ageism is unlikely to be a simple task. After all, ageism is based a deeply entrenched ageist attitude and to uproot such stereotypes would require time.
The post in red is my actual project. It is composed of 490 words.
All the information is taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/business/2006/ageism/default.stm
That is just the main site. But I used a little of each article.
That's all I have. Thank you!
Ageism is most apparent in the workplace. Many older workers have been made redundant on grounds of age, or have been denied equal training opportunities that younger workers enjoy. This blatant form of discrimination is termed as overt discrimination. Indirect discrimination includes making ageist comments and treating older workers in an ageist manner.
The UK government has already acted on this problem and has taken steps to rectify this problem. Anti-ageism laws came into effect on 1 October 2006, and forbids all forms of overt discriminations. Other public acts of ageism, such as specifying an age group for a job position, is also outlawed. However, these new laws only protect workers up to the age of 65.
The problem to date is mainly the work of long-standing stereotypes about older workers.
Stereotypes by employers about older workers include notions that older workers are unable to adapt to change, lacking in creativity and flexibility, hard to train, not energetic enough and too cautious for the fast pace of modern day business.
In reality however, ageism has many negative effects. These effects can be classified as personal impacts and business impacts.
Personal impacts refer to the impact on the worker on the receiving end of the discrimination. The most immediate and recognizable effect would be a drop in self-esteem, which would translate into a drop in productivity.
Also, a worker made redundant over 45 would find it difficult finding another job, again because of the discriminating attitudes of potential employers.
Business impacts would refer to the impacts on the business the worker was fired from. Many employers do not realize that their discrimination could in fact be cost ineffective and they still might not get the best man for the job.
Ageism would also upset the balance of youth and experience that an economy needs to stay competitive. An competitive economy would need the right blend of youth and experience. By being ageist when choosing workers, an employer may discover he has too much youth and not enough experience to run the business competitively.
Although this scenario is set in the UK, we might find it all too relevant in Singapore as well. I may be wrong, but I would dare say that most of us have been at some point of time ageist. Discriminating on grounds of age would be against the basic principles of meritocracy, which is upheld in Singapore. An ageist attitude would eventually cost Singapore her sharp competitive edge. (How, I have elaborated earlier in this post.)
These are just my opinions, it may be incomplete, but I feel it gives a satisfactory introduction to the problem of ageism.
Despite all the disadvantages of ageism, I think eradicating ageism is unlikely to be a simple task. After all, ageism is based a deeply entrenched ageist attitude and to uproot such stereotypes would require time.
The post in red is my actual project. It is composed of 490 words.
All the information is taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/business/2006/ageism/default.stm
That is just the main site. But I used a little of each article.
That's all I have. Thank you!
Sunday, February 4, 2007
The classic sceptical approach
When reading or commenting on a issue, one reader can take many point of views. Any fool can agree, any fool can criticize. But not many fools can criticize effectively.What do I mean by criticizing is to criticize effectively.
By criticizing effectively, I don't mean disagreeing. I mean disagreeing in a logical and rational manner.
To paraphrase, criticizing effectively is to criticize ruthlessly, taking the enemy(other) argument apart justification by justification, premise by premise, point by point.
You do not realise how important it is to criticize nowadays. Criticism improves your spiritual health, deproves others, boosts your ego and shatters other egos. Most importantly, it is fun.
Fun, as in a sadistic kind of fun.
Thus, you will need a systematic way to take the enemy argument apart.I propose scepticism for amateur users.A sceptic {skep-tick} is one who does not believe anything. He has to question. The sceptic's god is the question mark (though most sceptics are quite sceptical about this).
Sceptics come in two groups:1) The ordinary sceptic- He thrives by questioning. Question everything. Question in a disaproving way. Like this: Why do you say this? I don't think it is like this. When disproved, normal sceptics just grumble and accept the best option. Try to make a scene out of it.
2) The philosophical sceptic-This kind is more dangerous. He argues philosophically and indulges in philosophical sceptism.
The first example of scepticism will come soon.
Watch out for it.
Brain in a Vat
By criticizing effectively, I don't mean disagreeing. I mean disagreeing in a logical and rational manner.
To paraphrase, criticizing effectively is to criticize ruthlessly, taking the enemy(other) argument apart justification by justification, premise by premise, point by point.
You do not realise how important it is to criticize nowadays. Criticism improves your spiritual health, deproves others, boosts your ego and shatters other egos. Most importantly, it is fun.
Fun, as in a sadistic kind of fun.
Thus, you will need a systematic way to take the enemy argument apart.I propose scepticism for amateur users.A sceptic {skep-tick} is one who does not believe anything. He has to question. The sceptic's god is the question mark (though most sceptics are quite sceptical about this).
Sceptics come in two groups:1) The ordinary sceptic- He thrives by questioning. Question everything. Question in a disaproving way. Like this: Why do you say this? I don't think it is like this. When disproved, normal sceptics just grumble and accept the best option. Try to make a scene out of it.
2) The philosophical sceptic-This kind is more dangerous. He argues philosophically and indulges in philosophical sceptism.
The first example of scepticism will come soon.
Watch out for it.
Brain in a Vat
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Introductory Paragraph
Hi.
This is the blog for the cynic, the sceptic and the critic. Actually, it is an assignment. But I thought, why not, go public. And have whoever reads this blog call you whiny. Seriously, it is funner than it sounds.
As the title suggests, this are the introductory paragraphs. The author of this blog is seriously demented and dangerous. Don't approach him. Read his blog.
For the record, you can call me (the demented one), the brain in a vat. I'd say it is somewhat fitting.
Have a nice day.
From the author, cynic, sceptic and critic
This is the blog for the cynic, the sceptic and the critic. Actually, it is an assignment. But I thought, why not, go public. And have whoever reads this blog call you whiny. Seriously, it is funner than it sounds.
As the title suggests, this are the introductory paragraphs. The author of this blog is seriously demented and dangerous. Don't approach him. Read his blog.
For the record, you can call me (the demented one), the brain in a vat. I'd say it is somewhat fitting.
Have a nice day.
From the author, cynic, sceptic and critic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)