Today on my way to IHPC, I was tuned into Class 95 and was surprised to be listening to them actually talking about a serious topic for once.
Actually, after the incidents of Glenn Ong, the Flying Dutchman and the Muttons has had with local authorities over indecent sexual content in their respective radio sessions, many comments has sparked on Singapore's radio getting trashy.
Honestly, I tot that particular show that day from Glenn Ong and the Flying Dutchman was quite ok. Sure, it was about Maria Sharapova's sexual preferences, a very racy topic to us conservative Singaporeans, but the message put through was the jokes of her bellowing in courts rather than the point that she doesn't moan in bed. There was no direct aim to be spreading the racy part of the issue at all. But still $5000 was a much better alternative compared to the media's attention.
But back to the topic, Glenn and the Flying Dutchman were having a very fiery debate in the morning. The issue was about the Openness of Relationships and Intimacy in Singapore.
Of course, like any other verbal debate, it went completely off-topic quite a few times, even to the point of a small discussion of overconfidence and what type of kiss is a kiss.
The question was first started with Flying Dutchman claiming that openness in Intimacy in Singapore is very important and could prevent many problems. If people are open, there would be no need for (example as given in show) kissing is 'stairwells' and in dark places, where temptations like sex and rape happen. That if Singaporean parents do not actually mind their children kissing in front of them, there would be a large decrease in numbers of pre-marital sex.
Of course, kiss, in this debate, refers to lips, without tongue. (A conclusion between the 2 hosts after 5 mins of confrontation)
Glenn's rebuttal for this is that in Singapore, a conservative society, we do not welcome such... "abnormal" actions and will take them to be rude as it is currently not normally done in today's society now. Also, he had another point that what makes you think that children who are more open will have less of a tendency to "take the next step"?
First off the hook, I do agree with Glenn Ong for this.
Firstly, on the society's conservative view. 98% of Singapore is Asian, brought up in a conservative environment. Whilst being non-conservative is nothing wrong, unfortunately, changing the views of 98% of a 4 billion population would not prove to be an easy task. Parents would not be able to handle seeing their children getting intimate before them plainly for the fact that it’s not the normal actions of the mainstream society!
The wrath of the conservative society was further amplified a month before, when Section 377A was passed with the current conservative mindset of Singaporeans being the main reason for the holding of that section of the law.
We have to realize, that while more openness is good, the inability for the society to accept such openness with their conservative mindset will not allow this openness to continue.
On the second point, what makes you think that children who are more open will have less of a tendency to "take the next step"? To this, the Flying Dutchman has given the argument that he would trust his daughters enough to believe that they would independently practice self-restraint. That it becomes an issue of trust between the members of the family that is built up with actions like openness.
Unfortunately, I'm a bloody realist.
Trust is really something that we cannot expect whole-heartedly from anyone at all, even family. It comes and goes, and may just disappear the very next second without any signs beforehand.
You trust your daughters. But are they going to return that trust? That is where the theory fails...
Bleh, I'm blabbering again. Nvm stop now. =D
Actually, after the incidents of Glenn Ong, the Flying Dutchman and the Muttons has had with local authorities over indecent sexual content in their respective radio sessions, many comments has sparked on Singapore's radio getting trashy.
Honestly, I tot that particular show that day from Glenn Ong and the Flying Dutchman was quite ok. Sure, it was about Maria Sharapova's sexual preferences, a very racy topic to us conservative Singaporeans, but the message put through was the jokes of her bellowing in courts rather than the point that she doesn't moan in bed. There was no direct aim to be spreading the racy part of the issue at all. But still $5000 was a much better alternative compared to the media's attention.
But back to the topic, Glenn and the Flying Dutchman were having a very fiery debate in the morning. The issue was about the Openness of Relationships and Intimacy in Singapore.
Of course, like any other verbal debate, it went completely off-topic quite a few times, even to the point of a small discussion of overconfidence and what type of kiss is a kiss.
The question was first started with Flying Dutchman claiming that openness in Intimacy in Singapore is very important and could prevent many problems. If people are open, there would be no need for (example as given in show) kissing is 'stairwells' and in dark places, where temptations like sex and rape happen. That if Singaporean parents do not actually mind their children kissing in front of them, there would be a large decrease in numbers of pre-marital sex.
Of course, kiss, in this debate, refers to lips, without tongue. (A conclusion between the 2 hosts after 5 mins of confrontation)
Glenn's rebuttal for this is that in Singapore, a conservative society, we do not welcome such... "abnormal" actions and will take them to be rude as it is currently not normally done in today's society now. Also, he had another point that what makes you think that children who are more open will have less of a tendency to "take the next step"?
First off the hook, I do agree with Glenn Ong for this.
Firstly, on the society's conservative view. 98% of Singapore is Asian, brought up in a conservative environment. Whilst being non-conservative is nothing wrong, unfortunately, changing the views of 98% of a 4 billion population would not prove to be an easy task. Parents would not be able to handle seeing their children getting intimate before them plainly for the fact that it’s not the normal actions of the mainstream society!
The wrath of the conservative society was further amplified a month before, when Section 377A was passed with the current conservative mindset of Singaporeans being the main reason for the holding of that section of the law.
We have to realize, that while more openness is good, the inability for the society to accept such openness with their conservative mindset will not allow this openness to continue.
On the second point, what makes you think that children who are more open will have less of a tendency to "take the next step"? To this, the Flying Dutchman has given the argument that he would trust his daughters enough to believe that they would independently practice self-restraint. That it becomes an issue of trust between the members of the family that is built up with actions like openness.
Unfortunately, I'm a bloody realist.
Trust is really something that we cannot expect whole-heartedly from anyone at all, even family. It comes and goes, and may just disappear the very next second without any signs beforehand.
You trust your daughters. But are they going to return that trust? That is where the theory fails...
Bleh, I'm blabbering again. Nvm stop now. =D
Comments (0)
Post a Comment