Select a type of content

Create a post
Create a Post

Post an article, video or podcast to the community
Create a learning course
Create a Learning course

Post a course to the interactive learning hub
No result
Start searching

You can search for an article or a topic and category.

Alyson Tin
Alyson Tin Verified Account
Social Media and Digital Communications Intern @ Stewardship Asia Centre
A determined young individual who wants to lead transformative changes in society
Equality

Links to my articles:

Bukit Timah or Woodlands? How location stymies one’s access to education
Bukit Timah or Woodlands? How location stymies one’s access to education
One key difference between neighbourhood and elite schools is the location where the school is nestled in. It is evident that in several wealthy neighbourhoods in Singapore such as Bukit Timah, there is a plethora of good schools that are densely clustered together. For instance, you may notice that Raffles Girls’ Primary School and Nanyang Primary School are strategically situated along the Bukit Timah Belt of Schools, which is home to the most expensive bungalows in Singapore. By contrast, you would find neighbourhood primary schools such as Woodlands Primary School or Admiralty Primary School tucked in the heartlands of Singapore, surrounded by Housing Development Board (HDB) flats. Such blatant segregation of locations of elite and neighbourhood schools only means one thing: families who reside in humble neighbourhoods are unable to clinch a spot in such coveted schools. This spells an imminent disaster for families who are not privileged because in the Primary 1 registration exercise, the majority of spots in the school are allocated to families who reside within a kilometre’s radius from these schools. This means that wealthier families are able to claim their spots in prestigious primary schools because they live in close proximity to these schools, leaving those who do not stay in these wealthy neighbourhoods unable to secure a slot for their child. Even if these elite schools did not factor location into consideration, it would still be highly impractical and inaccessible for those living in the periphery of Singapore to send their children to these schools purely because of the distance away from their place of residence, deterring them altogether from trying to enter these prestigious schools. Thus, the location of these schools would persistently favour the privileged in society while disadvantage the remaining Singaporeans. In the rare instance that these ordinary folks want to enter these schools, there is a prevailing perception that these schools are ‘rich men’s schools’. This is because these students entering such schools belong to the upper echelons of society, boasting immense wealth and having well connected parents who command positions of power in their workplaces. Such is a stark contrast from kids who reside in the heartlands of Singapore, coming from humble beginnings and having parents who work ordinary office jobs. Moreover, students hailing from wealthy backgrounds wield the economic capital to indulge in privileges such as travelling to exotic countries during the school holidays and even afford luxurious school necessities such as owning a branded school bag. Hence, when innocuous topics of conversation regarding their parents’ occupation or even about the way that one spent their school holidays are brought up in everyday conversations, it is no surprise that students with wealthy parents will casually weasel their parents’ occupation into the conversation or even intricately share with other students about their exhilarating holiday to the Maldives. This leaves students from ordinary backgrounds to feel a sense of inferiority and displacement, causing them to feel out of place or even withdraw from the conversation entirely. This is because they realise that they are unable to relate to these students at all due to the vast differences in experiences that they have. The confluence of factors thus results in a homogeneous demographic of students entering these Primary Schools and subsequently Secondary Schools, which only serves to reinforce the perennial notion that these schools are reserved for the wealthy, which is contrary to the national hymn of giving all a fair chance of being admitted, entrenching greater educational inequality in Singapore.
0 Comments   3/21/2024
The impossibility of shattering the glass ceiling of opportunities
The impossibility of shattering the glass ceiling of opportunities
It is often touted that Singapore prides herself in her meritocratic ideals, and one of the great hallmarks of that lies in the Public Service Commission (PSC). The allure of prestige and power that it confers unto its recipients is second to none in a country where meritocracy is extolled as gospel. It promises a level playing field, where those who abide by its rules will rightly receive the fruits of their labour. This promise, sadly, only seeks to shroud reality behind a veil of ignorance. It is a well known fact that recipients of a PSC scholarship are showered with benefits, ranging from fully sponsored university journeys to guaranteed employment in the public service. Those who achieve this are expected to be the cream of the crop - the best and brightest of their generation. Upon receipt of such a scholarship, they are given a blessing and a responsibility - as they are groomed to become the next batch of policymakers and even politicians to lead our country. The coveted nature of this scholarship understandably results in swathes of applicants yearly. However, being a PSC scholar is no easy feat, and the stringent qualifying criterias aptly reflects that. One cannot stand out with exceptional grades alone, they must point to exceptional Co-curricular Activities (CCA) achievements, and would need to impress during the interview process. Both of these additional criterias individually tip the scales in favour of those who are from elite schools. The culture of elite schools is one where they pride themselves not only in terms of their academic achievements, but non academic ones as well. Whether this comes from student representation in Olympiad events, performing arts or sports - these schools spare no expense to nurture their students. This would look like investing huge amounts of money into infrastructure such as quality school fields for training, or in recruiting the best coaches in the arena to coach their students. These mean that students from elite schools benefit from a vast array of resources and training to catapult their development in their respective niches. It is no surprise that such quality training helps them to become the best in their field. Comparatively, neighbourhood schools simply do not have the resources to sustain such in-depth training and development of their students. Their priority lies in providing a quality education for their students, rather than focussing on CCAs. Their students, who may be undoubtedly talented, will never have the chance to achieve glory for their school because of the dearth of resources and training allocated to them. This becomes an issue when students from both types of schools are judged on what is assumed to be an equal platform - the inter school national games. It is near impossible for neighbourhood schools to break this glass ceiling and compete with the elite schools. This is represented by the dominance of elite schools in most competitive sports and performing arts year-on-year. Unfortunately, this becomes especially problematic when scholarship applications, like that of PSC, focus on the attainment of such achievements as embellishments to grades. On paper, it is easy to understand why the PSC would prefer a straight A student with competitive victories in the Rugby A Division, and an SYF Gold in Chinese orchestra - as compared to someone who merely has straight As. However, this unfairly punishes the latter for something that is simply out of his control - the ever widening chasm between elite and neighbourhood schools. Moreover, this chasm further widens in another integral element of the PSC selection process - the interview. Most students at such an age are not blessed with quality interview skills, having never been in a position where they would have had to sell themselves to a board of elites. Elite schools recognise this gap, and many take deliberate steps to equip their students with these skills even before leaving Junior College. For example, they may set up Higher Education and Career Guidance programmes to prepare students for the daunting process of going for an interview. They have their doors open to any student who may need coaching for an important interview - such as that of PSC - and readily help to develop them into powerful orators. Additionally, elite schools also prepare their students rigorously for such interviews via their enhanced curriculum. For instance, elite school students would probably be exposed to a plethora of global issues in class discussions or even seminars given by policy makers, ranging from financial market analysis to pertinent societal issues that Singapore confronts. This ensures that elite school students are able to comprehensively answer questions asked by an interview panel, giving answers that are well-articulated, coherent and nuanced. By contrast, neighbourhood schools lack the resources to do this, causing students to be unable to engage in such valuable discussions. This impairs them from forming original and well thought out answers regarding global affairs. Hence, should the PSC interview revolve around global affairs such as the ongoing Israel-Palestine war,  it would be no surprise which student the PSC panel would be more enamoured by. It is an uphill battle for a student to make up this gap if he was not born into such privilege. The lack of attention to it in their upbringing, and the lack of resources dedicated to it in neighbourhood schools results in many students being left in the dark on how to approach an important interview. Thus, even in the rare instance where a student may have sufficient CCA achievements and makes it to the interview stage, they will be spurned due to their comparatively poor interview skills. Yet again, the ladder to reach this prestigious realm of public service remains just out of reach for all but those who herald from elite schools. Whilst the situation is generally bleak, it would be remiss to ignore the steps that have been taken to address these concerns. The PSC board has rightfully begun to diversify their selection process by choosing individuals from polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education, as well as neighbourhood schools. However, these remain the exception rather than the norm - as the vast majority of successful applicants continue to hail from the traditionally elite schools. The very fact that such students are still valorised as “success stories” who have “broken the mould” suggests that the dominant narrative is still one that expects PSC scholars to come from elite schools. This represents a problem for Singapore for two reasons. Firstly, when the narrative is that the playing field is level for all students, those who fail to accomplish what their peers in elite schools achieve will be demoralised. They will believe that if the system is not flawed, it must be they who are flawed and are not good enough. They blame themselves for their failings, and see those who do become scholars as plainly superior to them - creating strong self-limiting beliefs within them. This could not be further from the truth - but the sanctimonious attitude governing our meritocracy policies has resulted in such debilitating effects. Such a problem becomes particularly worrying given that it is exactly this group of individuals who need PSC scholarships the most. They usually do not have the money to fund local university education and going overseas is but an unrealistic dream for many. The very group of people who the scholarship seeks to provide for are being rejected for reasons out of their control, and are simply told that they weren’t good enough. Secondly, it strips the public service of the quality of scholars that they need. Accusations have been thrown at policymakers for being overly technocratic and academic, and for failing to understand the nuanced issues on the ground. This is in part because the demographic of policymakers and scholars are those who come from wealthier backgrounds - both personally and academically. By unintentionally impeding the admission of students from humble backgrounds, it denies the public service the chance to account for varied viewpoints and perspectives. This has severely undermined policymaking and has instigated accusations of policies being tone-deaf. Sadly, the continued rejection of those from other backgrounds today suggests that the silencing of such critiques is not on our immediate horizon. The hallmark of meritocracy should not be the PSC, Edusave awards or any other scholarship. Its fundamental tenets should be fairness, equity and hope. Granted, meritocracy is theoretically an excellent concept but practically hard to achieve. One does not begrudge Singapore for failing to achieve meritocracy in its purest sense. However, what is inexcusable is creating a myth of true meritocracy, and condemning those who fail to achieve it as “not good enough”. It is exactly this mentality that fuels a sense of superiority in some, and inferiority in others - unequivocally engendering elitism in Singapore.
0 Comments   3/21/2024
Tackling Inspirational Porn (Part 1)
Tackling Inspirational Porn (Part 1)
When you see a photograph of a disabled person who recently graduated from high school, what would be your immediate reaction? You probably would instinctively conjure feelings of happiness for the disabled person, even extending your sincere congratulations to the person for accomplishing such a significant milestone in his life. You would even notice that some people would post about it on social media, amplifying the person’s accomplishment, touting that it is inspirational for everyone. They might even attach a cliche caption along with the picture, urging others to ‘work hard like the disabled person: if the disabled person can accomplish something in his life, surely, you are able to do the same.’ This is the dangerous narrative that the media has sold to the beguiled masses, believing that posting such derogatory content would be beneficial to raising awareness of disabled people. This is the pernicious narrative that has besieged today’s society, dehumanising disabled people and confining them to mere stereotypes. This is the toxic narrative that entrenches stereotypes and alienates the disabled from truly integrating into society, being seen as nothing but mere defective people warranting sympathy. Indeed, it is ubiquitous to witness the swathes of posts disguised under the disguise of inspiration and motivation, glamourising the disabled person’s achievement and imploring others to display that same level of strength and tenacity. For instance, it would be commonplace for most people to see a morning post on Instagram or TikTok, with the caption embedded, ‘You can do it! Even though Alex has autism, he still managed to complete his high school diploma! This is no excuse for your lazy attitude towards life.’ In other instances, these posts might feature abled people being valourised for their benevolence and kindness towards disabled people, such as carrying a disabled person’s groceries or eating lunch with him in school because he was alone. Such instances often evoke feelings of admiration and awe from others simply because of how abled people are seen as going against the vein of discrimination against disabled people in society, thus being bestowed with titles of ‘saviours’, ‘samaritans’ and even ‘saints’ simply because they made a disabled person’s life better. Hence, it is pervasive to see hoards of people online affirming abled people for their acts of goodwill, remarking ‘That is so nice of you! I want to be like you!’ or ‘You are spreading positive vibes to others and everyone should learn from you! This is so heartwarming to see this in society.’ These posts are incontrovertibly so addictive to abled people simply because it appeals to the emotional psyche of them, allowing them to relish in feelings of accomplishment and goodwill because they have aided someone in a benevolent light. This is because society perpetually discriminates against disabled people blatantly, crudely viewing them as mere liabilities due to the vast amount of accommodations that society has to provide. These abled people believe that in order to break the mould of discrimination in society, they need to amplify acts of kindness and charity towards the disabled in society, allowing society’s understanding and perception of disabled people to shift in a more favourable direction. Hence, when they see acts of kindness and benevolence towards disabled people, abled people are instinctively compelled to recognise other abled people’s efforts in contributing to a more accommodating and inclusive society, posting online about their feelings of ‘faith being restored in humanity’ when they see an abled person helping a disabled person with tasks in everyday life. However, abled people fail to realise that such acts are in fact derogatory and discriminatory towards the disabled. In fact, some abled people would vehemently assert that these acts of goodwill and kindness should always be heralded and promoted in society because it encourages others to be kind towards the disabled. Some would even say that posting inspirational content about disabled people is ‘all for encouraging others to work hard’ or ‘it is to celebrate the disabled’s achievements with them’. Even though the majority of society thinks that they are aiding the disabled by promoting inspirational content about them or showing that they are receiving help from abled individuals, it unfortunately is under the veil of ignorance and prejudice. This phenomenon is also known as inspirational porn.Inspirational porn, coined by Australian disability activist, Stella Young, is defined as the derogatory content of messages enshrouding disabilities. Her rationale for adding the word, porn, is to emphasise the objectification of disabled people. As uttered by her, she believes that inspirational porn is nothing but the media characterising the disabled as objects to be pitied on or as inspirations for everyone to emulate.
0 Comments   9/8/2024
Educational opportunities: a gold mine reserved for the elite
Educational opportunities: a gold mine reserved for the elite
Another stark difference that is imperative for us to recognise between elite and neighbourhood schools is the wealth of opportunities that students are able to capitalise on. Even though the then-Minister of Education, Heng Swee Keat, vehemently claimed that programmes in all schools are adequate to nurture and actualise a student’s potential, it unfortunately is an insular statement because of the vast chasm of the quantity and quality of programmes between elite and neighbourhood schools. However, it is paramount to acknowledge that the word opportunities is indeed a nebulous word because of the broad definition that it encompasses. Hence, for the sake of this essay, the word opportunities will entail programmes and social networks that schools provide. Evidently, elite schools pride themselves as institutions dedicated to developing and nurturing a student’s potential that hone a student’s holistic development by catering a plethora of programmes. This is because the vast demographic of students hailing from elite schools are inquisitive individuals belonging to the corps d’elite. Hence, to satiate the unquenchable thirst within these students, elite schools will fervently cater to these students to stretch them beyond the syllabus. Take for instance Anglo Chinese School Independent (ACSI), which hosts a buffet of prestigious academic programmes for students to explore such as their Accelerated Class for Science, which handpicks students who have a penchant for Science related subjects and trains them to represent the school in the Science Olympiads. Even if students are not inclined towards the Sciences, they still have a chance to enter the coveted Humanities Scholars’ Programme, which stretches students beyond the regular academic curriculum and bestows upon them the opportunity to attend both local and international conferences and seminars hosted by ministers and renowned leaders in their fields. Such opportunities will further fuel the desire within these inquisitive students to continuously learn and acquire knowledge in various schools of thought, which will greatly broaden their horizons. In stark contrast, neighbourhood schools seem to pale vis a vis their elite school counterparts in terms of the programmes offered. This is because neighbourhood schools often cater to students who are not academically inclined, which means that these schools have to be fixated on helping these students to attain an understanding and mastery in the topics in the prescribed syllabus instead of stretching them beyond the curriculum’s requirements. Thus, it is commonplace to see neighbourhood schools having a dearth of academic programmes offered. Even if such an assumption is untrue, and neighbourhood schools do offer academic programmes to nurture the higher ability students, these academic programmes often are piecemeal and inadequate because most students fail to see the true value in these programmes because they deem it as ‘unhelpful’ and ‘unnecessary in understanding the stipulated curriculum’, which means that the rate of uptake of such programmes will be abysmal. Thus, in neighbourhood schools, it is no surprise that these programmes are swiftly removed from the curriculum or even buried as unrealised plans. This phenomenon is all owing to a sole reason: the presence of funding, which these prestigious schools possess, ranging from charitable donor funds from esteemed companies to hoards of generous alumni donations. This is due to the immense sense of pride and gratitude that many alumni and corporate donors feel towards the school, strongly owing their success to the school’s support system in moulding them into ‘successful individuals’. Thus, they feel a compelling need to give back to their school, helping the school to nurture the next generation of brilliant minds. Hence, it would not be a surprise to see recurring alumni and corporate donations, with such donations even immortalising their names on a donation board and plastering the board near the school entrance because of the gratitude that the school has towards them generously giving back to the school. This strongly bolsters the funding that many elite schools receive aside from the regular funding from MOE, ushering new programmes to be launched by the school and to revamp existing programmes, both of which ensure that students are continuously benefitting from such programmes, thus retaining the prestige and status of elite schools delivering nothing but excellence to their students. By comparison, funding in neighbourhood schools is abysmal because they solely rely on funding from the government, which unfortunately provides the bare minimum to sustain and operate schools. Even though some neighbourhood schools conduct donation drives, appealing to generous corporations to donate, it inevitably fails to amass a significant number of people who are willing to part with their money to the school because of the lack of allure and prestige that the school confers. Sure, some neighbourhood schools implore their alumni to donate back to the school but this is unfortunately a veil of parochialism because these alumni do not possess the financial capital to do so. Even though some might possess the means to donate, these donations are unfortunately inadequate for the school to sustain their programmes. Hence, it is unsurprising that these beleaguered neighbourhood schools are confronted with the impossible and gargantuan task of continuing their academic programmes without funding, severely punishing students with the lack of programmes. This phenomenon serves to persistently disadvantage students from neighbourhood schools because those who are academically competent would constantly feel deprived of programmes and resources that allow them to explore beyond the curriculum, even feeling stifled by the rigidity of the normal curriculum that teachers in class abide by. Hence, when these students ascend to higher education, they would feel the brunt of the ramifications of their teachers’ actions when they are applying for early admissions into institutions of higher learning or even applying for scholarships, pushing them further away from achieving success. Additionally, it is paramount to realise that opportunities do not extend to just academic opportunities. In fact, social networks are a crucial tenet of an elite school, granting elite school students a head start in the relentless rat race. In elite schools, it is ubiquitous to rub shoulders with the wealthy and powerful in school because the majority of students hail from such family environments, having parents who wield positions of power at their workplaces. Hence, it would be easier for students to clinch internships or even jobs in the future because they ‘happen to know someone’ at Drew and Napier, just by simply tapping onto their extensive networks. Nevertheless, these networks are not restricted to just social networks. In reality, it would be pervasive to see a vast array of networking sessions throughout the year, with the school inviting some of their decorated alumni back to give seminars to students or even conduct personalised mentorship programmes. For instance, these highly valorised alumni would educate their juniors on the potential career paths to explore and even give them ‘insider information’ on how to break into these industries. Moreover, alumni would impart knowledge such as teaching juniors how to navigate interview questions, training their juniors to skillfully manoeuvre the interview with ease. These skills are invaluable insights that would inordinately grant elite school students a huge competitive advantage over the rest of their competition. By comparison, the majority of neighbourhood school students originate from humble beginnings. Since neighbourhood school students usually originate from the lower class in society, it would not be surprising that some of their parents command jobs that are scorned as ‘lower class’. For instance, it would not faze many neighbourhood school students when their friends tell them that their parents are working as hawkers or even cleaners because the environment of a neighbourhood school is as such. Hence, students are exposed to mixing with others from the ‘lower class’ and are very unlikely to forge connections with students from the upper strata of society. Thus, these students would be struggling to find illustrious jobs in the future simply because they ‘don’t know anyone’ holding these jobs in their networks. Moreover, since these students hail from neighbourhood schools, there is a low tendency that these schools would offer networking events to allow students to form meaningful connections. This is because neighbourhood schools would deem these networking events as superfluous or even unnecessary because of the lack of decorated alumni. Even if some alumni do successfully challenge the prevailing societal perception of neighbourhood schools and shatter the glass ceiling of limitations imposed by society, they unfortunately do not want to be reminded of their roots to their neighbourhood schools simply because of how society has labelled them as ‘tainted’ or ‘worthless’ during their formative years. Thus, they would have no hesitation in obscuring the fact that they once were a student of such schools, and desire to be dissociated from the neighbourhood schools that they originated from. Hence, without a figure to look up to, neighbourhood school students are unable to capitalise on these networks and connections to benefit themselves as they ascend to higher education, which only serves to contribute to the systemic inequality that current neighbourhood school students face.
0 Comments   3/10/2024
Confronting implicit racial bias in Singapore
Confronting implicit racial bias in Singapore
Moving forward, Singapore has only made efforts in addressing racism in the workplace by legislating the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP), allowing those who face discrimination at the workplace to report these instances. However, reporting discriminatory actions and practices require proper documentation, which is unfortunately unrealistic for casual racism because they can be one off comments and it is not done in malice, unlike overt racism. Additionally, minorities might even fear the potential ramifications by reporting instances of workplace discrimination because they might lose their job or they would be subjected to harsher treatment at the workplace. Indeed, it is also paramount to realise that sometimes, even minorities do not realise that they are subjected to casual racism, thus causing most racially charged sentiments to slip past and go unreported. This is because casual racism develops over time due to backhanded comments and remarks being classified as ‘one off comments’ and they are all said ‘in the name of fun and laughter’, causing the normalisation of racially insensitive comments to ensue. Hence, when minorities hear these backhanded comments, they would either believe that it was ‘all a joke’ and some might not even recognise that such comments are characteristic of casual racism, simply because casual racism has been so normalised and entrenched in society. Hence, to address casual racism holistically, both in everyday conversations and at workplaces, I believe that we can address casual racism with the two solutions that I have posited in the subsequent paragraphs. We need to acknowledge that mere exposure would not eliminate our prevailing attitudes overnight. To understand what an attitude is, one needs to note that there are three components of an attitude, namely emotion, behaviour and cognition. To form an attitude, it requires constant reinforcement and affirmation of our emotions, actions and thoughts. Mere exposure such as community events and block gatherings only scratches the surface because interactions between the various races simply do not occur and races within their enclaves only serve to reinforce their staunch beliefs about the other races, entrenching stereotypes about the minorities. Moving forward, I believe that we need to embrace a call out culture. However, it is paramount to note that call out culture should not be conflated with cancel culture. It is the principle being that call out culture emphasises on correcting the person’s behaviour, getting them to explain his actions and telling them what he should do moving forward, with the hope that he can change. By creating awareness within someone about his actions, emotions and thoughts, it implores him to think about his actions carefully and grants him the opportunity to change. Additionally, when he sees a similar situation in the future, it would galvanise the person to correct others and he would be seen as an ally advocating against casual racism. In contrast, cancel culture is far from correcting someone’s behaviour. In reality, it is a ruthless attempt in getting someone removed from his job and even harassing him, with some going to extremes of threatening the person with his life. It sorely obliterates all chances that a person can redeem himself and robs someone of the chance of being a potential advocate against casual racism. Therefore, when we engage in call out culture, regardless of everyday interactions or at the workplace, we have to address three key issues: tell the person that he is wrong, get the person to explain why he engaged in such distasteful behaviour and tell him what he should do moving forward. This would create cognisance within the person, allowing him to realise that his actions had undesirable and unintended ramifications, making him think twice before he acts in the future. Even if it is difficult to do so in certain environments such as the workplace, just a mere conversation started about the importance of addressing casual racism should be done continuously to get people to realise that it is something that concerns them. For instance, at the workplace, someone can seize the opportunity to correct his colleague when his colleague makes a casually racist joke and share the importance of being sensitive towards the minorities. Another instance is when the colleague can nudge his colleagues gently not to use Chinese in a workplace setting because it would alienate the other races. Sure, the colleagues may not change immediately because change doesn't happen overnight but there is now a conversation started about casual racism. With a continuous conversation about casual racism and with someone catalysing the change, it would be easier for the rest to engage in discourse about this topic and start correcting their actions out of their own volition, thus gradually ceasing casual racism. Additionally, we can look into legislative measures such as TAFEP issuing out incremental warnings to companies for not being racially sensitive towards the minorities when hosting celebrations and business functions. For instance, if a company fails to provide food for minorities with dietary restrictions once, TAFEP can issue a warning to the company, stating how they need to be more inclusive at the workplace and the steps that companies can follow to ensure that food catered takes into account of the various dietary restrictions of the various races. If the company still continues to persist in their discriminatory practices of excluding minorities from business functions and celebrations, TAFEP can issue fines to companies or even bar them from receiving grants from the government. All in all, casual racism is an issue of our concern and everyone plays an instrumental role in ensuring that Singapore is a more inclusive place for everyone to live in. As the national pledge extols, ‘regardless of race’, I sincerely hope that we, Singaporeans, can work towards a more accommodating Singapore and embrace the axiom ‘regardless of race’ so that young persons like Kumar will never feel the weight on his shoulders because of the race he was born into.
0 Comments   3/19/2024
I Am Lucky (NOT) (Part 2)
I Am Lucky (NOT) (Part 2)
Indeed, a gross misconception that has been flippantly thrown around by the rich is the truism that networking events are purely ascribed to luck. However, such a truism is nothing but an insidious web of falsehoods simply because the reality is vastly different. Rich people are able to enter these networking events due to a multitude of reasons: their experiences in their formative years attending their parents’ networking events and signing up for social etiquette classes out of their own volition. Throughout their lives, growing up in a social circle that epitomises prestige and sophistication, it would be pervasive for these people to attend a myriad of events which demand them to behave in a poise and elegant manner. For instance, they would be very well acquainted with opulent and illustrious social events such as ‘Gala Bash’ hosted by their parents’ companies, all of which rub shoulders with people belonging to the upper strata of society. Such events require them to possess knowledge of using the correct utensil at a dinner function or learning how to use a knife in a proper manner while cutting food. Additionally, these events also expect them to be skillful in manoeuvring conversations with the corps d’elite in society, such as possessing great knowledge in the latest sports car or even intricately describing their favourite place to visit during the summer break. Thus, these situations grant these people the opportunity to practise and refine their demeanour, granting them entry to subsequent prestigious social events. Even if these people are unable to attend such social events on a regular basis, they would still fervently sign up for social etiquette classes. Such classes encompass invaluable skills such as learning how to walk in an upright fashion, using the correct utensils at various meal functions and training eloquence in one’s speech. For example, in these classes, one would acquire the knowledge of styling oneself in an appropriate manner, such as learning how to match clothes in a fashionable way or being cognisant of the various dress codes for social events. Additionally, these classes cover the importance of presenting oneself in an approving light, such as having good posture and speaking in a refined way. These social etiquette classes are often touted as rigorous and intense simply because they recognise that there is an inordinate emphasis on decorum in the upper strata of society due to the importance of giving off the impression of being refined and delicate to others. With such social decorum classes reinforcing constant and conscious reminders to these people about how they should act and conduct themselves in social situations, it causes them to inevitably and intuitively pick up subtle cues and unspoken rules along the way. Thus, these people are able to seamlessly blend in with the rest straddled in the upper echelons of society, without facing many barriers to entry to these social events. Another platitude espoused by the rich that should be challenged is the assertion that one must possess sheer dumb luck to encounter people from the upper class. When asked to reflect on their journey to success, the rich often would defensively assert that it is pure luck that they happened to know someone in their social circle. This paints the illusion that luck is the sole explanation in determining one’s ability to forge connections with others in the upper strata. However, this statement is simply untrue because in reality, it is a contrived effort from the rich to be highly selective of their connections in their social circles, causing them to congregate very tightly. As the axiom suggests, birds of a feather flock together. Evidently, the rich hail from circles that are notorious for its high barriers to entry and valorising their exclusivity because society has conferred the notions of prestige and allure onto them. Take for instance in the movie Crazy Rich Asians, which illustrates Nick Young and his family’s tight coterie, embracing those who were deemed as equals and dismissing those who did not belong to their social circle. This resulted in Nick’s girlfriend, Rachel, who hailed from humble beginnings, to constantly be on the receiving end of denigrative comments while welcoming Nick’s previous love interest, whose family was well established in the real estate industry, with open arms. This is because the rich have an astute vision in establishing whether a person belongs to the upper strata of society, looking at various characteristics such as personal wealth and family background before deciding whether to accept them into the social circle. This suggests that the rich only mingle with those who are from the same social strata due to the fact that the rich want to preserve the prestige and restrict the permeability of these circles. Hence, the rich who wish to join these social circles would be accepted without the bat of an eyelid simply because they embody the characteristics of a rich person, blending in with the rest of the people in the upper strata of society. The confluence of factors only serve to prove that the rich would only forge connections with those of the same social standing as them. This causes the rich to be enclosed in a bubble, conversing with others who are similar to them, resulting in an extensive web of connections with other rich people. Therefore, it would be no surprise that the rich are able to deliver a remark with a laissez faire attitude that they ‘happen to know an investor or the CEO of a company’ just by merely tapping onto their networks. All in all, it is imperative for us to recognise that the statements propagated by the rich are nothing but monolithic and harmful beliefs. Indeed, it is important for us to acknowledge and confront the harsh truth that sheer dumb luck does not propel any of us to success but instead, it is a combination of presenting oneself in a favourable manner and forging an extensive web of networks that would increase one’s likelihood of attaining success. So next time when you hear a rich person exalting his success to just mere luck, call him out.
0 Comments   4/9/2024
(Un)equal: educational inequality in Singapore
(Un)equal: educational inequality in Singapore
‘Hey, which school do you come from?’ ‘Oh, do you know that I was from Raffles? Raffles is the best school in Singapore.’ ‘Gosh, I cannot believe that you came from a neighbourhood school. Are neighbourhood school students dumb?’ Since time immemorial, the obsession with good schools has plagued Singapore, with many being piqued with curiosity whenever someone mentions schools. In Singapore, where schools are determinants of your academic prowess and your perceived intelligence, many often gush when they hear that someone is from an elite school but wince at the other upon hearing that he was from a neighbourhood school. Even though many would have moved on with their lives upon graduation, the school where they came from would unfortunately be a dark shadow behind them, causing them to feel uncomfortable whenever someone brings up the topic of schools. This is the reality that many Singaporeans confront on a regular basis as this dark shadow is cast behind them and is a stark reminder of their position and status in society. Even though the then-Minister of Education, Heng Swee Keat, tried his best to remove labels of schools conferred by society, and to eliminate the disparity between neighbourhood and elite schools by constantly emphasising his stance that ‘every school is a good school’, it unfortunately is a quixotic statement laden with nothing but unrealistic hopes. This is because in reality, one simply cannot ignore the stark differences between neighbourhood and elite schools and the vast disparity between the two entities. Even though this statement was uttered a considerable amount of time ago, it has continuously been the subject of controversy that even until today, the mention of that statement will still provoke a national outcry because many cannot not help but to contest that truism, even lambasting that it is extremely tone deaf. Hence, having a general statement ‘every school is a good school’ sorely obfuscates the differences between neighbourhood and elite schools, even serving to perpetuate the gapping divide. To fully comprehend the vast differences between neighbourhood and elite schools, it is imperative to define what an elite school is. If one does a quick google search and types ‘elite schools in Singapore’, one would notice schools such as Raffles Institution or Hwa Chong Institute listed at the top of the page. However, an elite school is so much more than just the fancy name attached to it. In my opinion, an elite school is a school that fulfils the following criteria. An elite school is located in areas where the wealthy reside in Singapore, has high barriers of entry into the school such as taking in academically competent students, possesses a wealth of resources for holistic student development and has a strong alumni network. It also must conjure the image of prestige and allure of a status conferred and bestowed upon one upon the mention of such schools. In contrast, a neighbourhood school is defined as a school that is located in the heartlands of Singapore, which are areas where ordinary folks like you and I reside. It is a school that falls short of these aforementioned criteria and will arouse negative sentiments such as assuming that one is ‘stupid’ or even extending it to one’s life trajectory, dismissing one as ‘being unable to make it in life, ever’. We see educational inequality manifesting in various facets in life, ranging from the point when one steps into the education system to clinching workplace opportunities later on in life. It is a fact that educational inequality unfortunately does not relinquish its grip over one despite the person leaving the education system for a long time. With such inequality being so systemic and persistent, it is hence imperative to start recognising that such stark differences simply cannot be ignored, because of its debilitating and undesirable effects that one would be haunted by even as they leave the education system.
0 Comments   3/21/2024
Casual but not casual: the threat of microaggressions to multicultural society
Casual but not casual: the threat of microaggressions to multicultural society
‘Hey, I cannot see you when I switch off the lights!’ ‘Hey, all Indians are good at Math, right? Help me do my homework.’ ‘Are you sure that you don’t eat prata and curry everyday?’ Whenever Kumar tries to recall the times he was mistreated because of his race, feelings of disgust would often conjure up within him and tears would well up in his eyes. These are the jokes that Kumar has been subjected to while growing up in Singapore. Even though he was born and raised in Singapore, he often feels alienated from Singapore society, knowing that as a minority, he would often be subjected to jokes that the majority race makes on a regular basis. He often questions what he has done to deserve to be at the centre of jokes and sometimes, he even wishes that he belonged to the majority race. This is a reflection of the experiences that most minorities in Singapore would have faced throughout their lives while growing up in Singapore. Even though Singapore has often prided itself as a multiracial country, with the rhetoric of equal treatment propagated in many facets of society such as even finding ‘regardless of race’ in the national pledge, this unfortunately does not materialise for many minorities simply because of how the jokes and comments are a stark reminder of the stark differential treatment that minorities face on a regular basis. However, many people are oblivious to the harm of these jokes and comments and would even ask ‘How are these jokes malicious? They are just casual statements only and there is no harm in making these jokes.’ or assert that these jokes and comments are not malicious and say ‘Just relax only, these jokes are just a small matter. No need to blow it out of proportion.’ Even though many think that these are just mere innocent jokes and comments, they are actually not innocuous at all. This phenomenon is also known as casual racism. Casual racism, as defined by the Australian Human Rights Commission, is the conduct involving negative stereotypes or prejudices about people on the basis of race, colour or ethnicity. Examples include jokes, off handed comments and exclusion of people from social situations on the basis of race. Casual racism also is not necessarily confined to jokes targeted at a minority group but also encompasses alienating them unintentionally by speaking in another language that minorities do not understand, or even being insensitive towards the characteristics of a certain race’s culture, such as the failure to cater food to races with dietary restrictions in social settings. Casual racism, unlike overt and blatant racism, is done in a subtle and casual manner - causing jokes and comments to be normalised and allowing them to pass off as just innocuous remarks. One may think that casual racism only materialises in everyday interactions but this is unfortunately not the case. In fact, casual racism is displayed the most prominently at workplaces because many spend most of their day at work where interactions are plentiful. Thus, minorities are subjected to brutal discrimination such as the feeling of alienation or feeling a huge sense of displacement when their colleagues start conversing in Chinese or even feeling excluded when their superiors do not cater Halal or vegetarian food for them during business functions. In the case of Kumar, when he was serving his National Service as an administrative clerk in the Air Force division, he recalled being alienated and alone because he did not resonate with anyone at the workplace. His colleagues often resorted to conversing in a mixture of Chinese and English because Chinese was a common language that was familiar to his colleagues. Soon, his colleagues started conversing in full Chinese, causing Kumar to be gradually left out of conversations because Kumar did not comprehend what they were saying in Chinese, let alone know how to speak Chinese. This resulted in Kumar being left with nobody to talk to at the workplace, causing him to dread going to work everyday. However, this did not stop there. Kumar’s superiors were Chinese and they relished the fact that Kumar could not comprehend Chinese at all. Thus, they resorted to using Chinese to talk to the various superiors and subordinates when they wanted to express their discontentment towards Kumar without Kumar knowing that he was being gossiped about. With the superiors scrutinising Kumar’s actions and admonishing him when he was unable to perform additional ‘requirements’ set by them such as memorising their coffee orders to the detail, this caused Kumar to feel frustrated and overwhelmed by the ridiculous ‘requirements’. This culminated into him feeling demotivated at his workplace because he was unable to meet the ludicrous expectations imposed on him, resulting in constant fatigue and mental stress, which caused him to make mistakes at work. The gossip thus ensued in the workplace because of Kumar’s perceived incompetence and soon caught hold of the General’s attention in the workplace, causing Kumar to be demoted to an elementary position where he was constantly passed up for promotions because he was unable to ‘display group cohesion with the rest’ and ‘speak Chinese’. Additionally, his superiors constantly conveniently ‘forgot’ that Kumar was not a member of the Chinese race and often failed to cater to Kumar’s dietary restrictions when the office hosted celebrations. Kumar recalled how he had to bring his own food to the office because the superiors said that they had ‘no money’ to specially cater Vegetarian food to him. This resulted in him eating alone and awkwardly standing at one corner to finish his food while the rest indulged in the food catered in the office.These experiences culminated into unpleasant memories for Kumar. Hence, when Kumar finally finished his stint in National Service, he swiftly dropped off his uniform and never went back again because he did not want to recount the relentless and brutal discrimination that he felt back there. Therefore, when we take a step back from the anecdote illustrated earlier, it is important to recognise that casual racism is a cause for concern because it ultimately serves to prove one thing: it is discriminatory in nature and only serves to alienate the minorities. Minorities in Singapore are already conscious of their race simply because identification markers of their race such as their skin colour and facial features are distinctly different from the majority race, making them feel out of place. Jokes and comments made about their race and actions displaying prejudices towards them do not help alleviate this sense of displacement in Singapore, they serve only to propagate the majority’s disparaging and condescending sentiments towards them. This reinforces the preconceived notions towards their race and entrenches the prevailing stereotypes about them, thus perpetuating greater racial divide in Singapore. Additionally, casual racism only serves to widen the income gap between the majority and minority races. This is because superiors might belong to the majority race and might harbour certain misconceptions towards the minority races. With this gross misconception about the minority races, such as perceiving them as ‘less competent’ or ‘less hardworking’, this would mean that minority races are being passed up for promotions, causing them to fall behind in the corporate ladder. Additionally, in business functions, when superiors cater food, they might not be sensitive to the dietary restrictions of the minority races. Thus, due to the minorities’ inability to eat the food catered, they would be more inclined towards skipping business functions, causing them to miss out on a wealth of networking opportunities. This confluence of factors only serves to reinforce the stagnation of career advancement opportunities for the minorities. The lack of career progression would impede their ability to prove that they can excel in the various fields of work because of the dearth of opportunities that they face, resulting in them facing little remuneration at work. This causes the minorities to feel less motivated in their work because of the unfair compensation that they receive for their work, which would only fuel and feed the negative sentiments and stereotypes that the superiors of the majority race harbour towards them. Thus, this creates a vicious cycle of minorities being perceived as ‘less hardworking’ and further entrenches these stereotypes of the minorities. All in all, casual racism thus should be a huge concern and it is imperative for us to address casual racism swiftly before it becomes too entrenched in society.
0 Comments   2/29/2024
I Am Lucky (NOT) (Part 1)
I Am Lucky (NOT) (Part 1)
In a recent interview conducted by CNBC, when Warren Buffet was asked to divulge his secret to his huge success in the real estate industry, it befuddled many when he said a mere word: luck. He heralded luck as his sole ingredient to success, even denying that his intergenerational wealth granted him a head start in life. Towards the end of the interview, Buffet even proclaimed that everyone could be as successful as him, they just needed an opportune moment, that stroke of luck to catapult into success. This is the saccharine narrative that the world has been enamoured by, with swathes of people pinning all their hopes onto the moment when they are ‘discovered by a wealthy businessman who is willing to invest in their business’ or ‘striking it big when the business takes flight’. This is the quixotic narrative that the rich have sold to the beguiled in society, vehemently asserting that the ordinary folk can be like the rich one day. This is the harmful narrative that has cascaded down into society because of how the rich have deliberately misrepresented luck, causing the masses to harbour a twisted ideal of luck. Indeed, it is ubiquitous to witness society valorising success stories from the wealthy, with the wealthy narrating their intricate tale of their journey to success. For instance, it would not faze one to see the number of books with memorable and attention grabbing headlines screaming ‘Learning How to be Successful: Tales Told from a Former CEO’ or ‘Trying and Failing, Succeeding in the End’. These books adopt the cliche story plot, narrating a saccharine tale of how the protagonist, who are the rich and wealthy in society, grew up in unfavourable living conditions and was abandoned at an early age before gathering his limited resources in starting a company and catapulting into success after having some luck. Hence, it is no surprise that these books written by the wealthy are often sold out quickly, even having awards such as Times’ Best Seller or New York Times’ Best Seller being bestowed upon the wealthy because of their ‘sheer bravery and tenacity’ in pursuing success. This is because these books appeal to the emotional psyche of the ordinary man, validating the ordinary man’s plight, with the seemingly empathetic narratives from the rich saying that they were once in their position. Additionally, these books inspire faith within the ordinary man, reaffirming that luck is just around the corner and can befall upon anyone, causing the ordinary man to cling onto that hope and not give up on their aspirations. With such affirmation of hope from the rich, it results in the ordinary man desperately clinging onto their business despite being on the brink of collapsing simply because the ordinary man believes that there will be a day when ‘an investor saves the business’. Thus, the majority in society are more inclined towards listening to the chronicles of the rich, clamouring onto their ambitions and patiently waiting for that singular moment that can change their lives’ trajectory because the ordinary man desires to emulate the rich’s pathways to success. However, it is imperative to recognise that success unfortunately does not befall upon the majority of the population and those who have been pinning their hopes on the ‘investor who can resurrect their business’ will be sorely disappointed. This leaves many bemused and baffled, wondering how the advice from the rich simply did not materialise in their own situation despite emulating the pathway of success of the rich, causing many to feel nothing but despair and hopelessness in the end. This is because the rich conveniently obscure several details of their own narratives, emphasising that luck is the singular ingredient in determining success, causing the majority to be misguided and misled by the rich. Hence, when ordinary folks listen to the advice of the rich, it is paramount to contest the veracity of their statements and reject certain inconceivable claims made by the rich. To understand what the rich mean when they refer to luck, it is vital for us to deconstruct how the word luck has been misconstrued by the rich in such situations. If one does a quick google search and finds the definition of luck, it is posited as the success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions. This is also known as sheer dumb luck or random chance, meaning that occurrences such as striking a lottery are statistically improbable. However, the rich have grossly misused the word luck and have flippantly thrown the word around in situations, especially when they are reflecting on their success. Can it really be attributed to luck if it is seemingly experienced by so many people? The reality is actually the converse - luck has devolved to be a huge distraction from concepts such as carrying oneself in a dignified and sophisticated manner and wielding an extensive web of networks, significantly aiding the rich in attaining success.
0 Comments   4/9/2024
No posts

This person hasn't created any posts yet.