On Interpretations on Racism

The offending picture which started it all.. The following was the second major discussion on the list, coinciding with a remarkable period of growth for the mailing list.

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 17:53:23 +0800
Subject: [youngrepublic] Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Thus reflecting the reality of the situation...

--

Gabriel Seah

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 19:28:59 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

I formally protest against your racism.

Elgin.

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 21:00:12 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

and me too. lets not have any of that here, even in jest.

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 22:11:01 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
( A joke in terrible taste! )
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

What worries me is how prevalent this sort of casual and distasteful racism

seems to be among people who are supposedly better educated and should know

much better.

Interestingly enough, is it my mistaken impression, or is there a tendency

among "better educated" (read, mainly english speaking) Singaporean Chinese

to look down upon Malays, Indians and other dark skinned races, while

fawning the White man? I think consciously or subconsciously, there is a

tendency in Singapore to assume that the way of the West is best.

And some of these Westerners do take advantage of our tendency of

favouritism towards them. Look at the puerile and unethical conduct of the

former National Neurological Institute (NNI) director Dr Simon Shovron. Yet

in the first place we were so eager to hire this foreign talent that we

overlooked other well qualified local talent. And in spite of repeated

breaches of ethical conduct, it was only after Dr Lee Wei Ling blew the

whistle on the case that Dr Shovron was finally probed and eventually

sacked. And Dr Lee happens to be the senior minister's daughter. If it is

necessary in Singapore for action to be taken against unscrupulous

foreigners ( frequently Westerners) in high places only upon the word of a

well-placed local personality, should we not be reviewing our current

recruitment policies? Thankfully, the NNI ( now headed by Dr Lee herself)

now has a policy of choosing locals first if it can help it.

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 22:45:32 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

yes. well. this is not the first time i have encountered racism among groups of friends (usually chinese). it is disgusting, shameful and abhorrent. i know of far less educated people who have far better attitudes with regards to ethnicity.

forgive the ad hominen attack, Mr Seah, but your offensive views make me sick, whether or not there are malays in this group.

i suggest you apologise to the civilised members of this mailing group.

elgin.

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 02:40:30 -0000
Subject: [youngrepublic] Re: Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Fie, it seems to be the case that whenever I talk about that company, I am accused of racism.

Perhaps it is because we, in Singapore, have been over-sensitised to the point that any mention of race is automatically suspect, and any mention of it beyond a socially/governmentally approved context - meaning in an unambiguously positive way - gets one labelled as racist. This is especially the case with minorities which are traditionally discriminated against by the majority.

Please note that in the picture attached, *all* of the staff are Malay. This I have not altered. In all transactions I've had with this company, further, all but two of the people I've interacted with - the people answering the phone, delivering the goods and even manning the outlets - are Malay, and even then one of the two was what I took to be the owner of a particular branch, since he came in his private car to deliver the pizza.

Thus, "Malay" is a purely descriptive term, and any negative connotations are purely in the mind of the offended. I'm sure if there was a joint I termed "Long Haired Blondes 2 for 1 Pizza", or advertised a place as having food cooked by my "Italian chef, flown in from Italy", no one would be offended. Perhaps the outbursts this matter always triggers is but a manifestation of Freudian Projection on the part of the naysayers.

In conclusion, I leave you with these words of wisdom from King Edward the Third (1312-1377), who adopted them as the Motto of the order of the Garter: Honi Soit Qui Mal Pense (Evil to him who evil thinks).

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:52:20 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Re: Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

a commendable effort in defending yourself. except for the fact that your act was indefensible.

every pharmacist i've met at Guardian Pharmacy so far is a chinese. should it be renamed Chinese Guardian Pharmarcy? a restaurant near my house is run entirely by a Caucasian family. Should it be renamed Caucasian Family Restaurant?

The truth is race relations are so sensitive in Singapore that everyone ought to go out of the way to watch what he says. Whether or not you meant any malice by your comments, a Malay counterpart would have felt offended. That you did not have any intention to hurt is not the only consideration. Quite the opposite. What is often more important is whether insult is perceived by the listeners of your comments. You are insensitive to that because you are a Chinese, a majority race in Singapore and never a target of racist remarks. Perhaps a trip to Pauline Hanson's Australia will wake you up a little.

That said, I am not convinced that you meant no malice by your comments. The feeling i (and, i suspect, many others who read the mail) got from reading the mail was that you sent it out with a tone of mockery and discrimination. To tell us that you had no offensive intentions. In the words of BG George Yeo to Chee Soon Juan during the inquiry into the many statistical errors in the latter's book: "We were not born yesterday."

Elgin.

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 20:37:05 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] it's a matter of sensibilities
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

in the supposed 'mockery' of the photo there is humour; i think it's

reasonable to find it funny and also not harbour any prejudices about

Malays. making a point that Canadian Pizza seems to have a surprising

proportion of Malay staff isn't in itself a completely abhorrent act. i

don't believe the original message implied anything beyond that. i also

don't think it can fairly be said to be highly offensive - maybe

'distasteful' at worst.

anyway, with specific reference to this:

---

every pharmacist i've met at Guardian Pharmacy so far is a chinese. should

it be renamed Chinese Guardian Pharmarcy? a restaurant near my house is run

entirely by a Caucasian family. Should it be renamed Caucasian Family

Restaurant?

---

1) it would be far less statistically surprising to find that every Guardian

pharmacist seems to be Chinese, since we're comparing against the population

proportion here. it's not a uniform distribution.

2) you could validly lampoon the Caucasian-family-run restaurant like that -

notice that i say 'lampoon' and not 'rename'. the point is not serious -

it's meant to be humorous.

elgin, i gather you don't like The Onion?

-dennis

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:16:29 +0000
Subject: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Just to put some of the practical criticism skills i learnt in lit class to

good use:

The joke in the photo revolves around the play between 'Canadian' and

'Malay'. Thus no real parallel can be established between Canadian Pizza and

Guardian Pharma and the restaurant. The joke is in fact three-fold. Firstly,

we are made aware that Canadian 2 for 1 isn't really very Canadian. A

similar joke could be made about, say, Delifrance, which isn't very French.

Secondly, it seems amusing/absurd that all the staff should be Malay. A

similar effect would be achieved if they were _all_ tall and thin or

whatever. Thirdly, there is the word play in substituting the two adjectives

of race/nationality.

Overall, it seems that no malice was intended. Unless one thinks the

implication is that Malays are generally found in menial jobs. But fast food

isn't all that menial. Even dear Luke Goh worked at Mos burger earlier in

2003. Plus we all know that other joints like Pizza Hut/Macs etc are well

staffed with ppl of all races enjoying the (lack of a) minimum wage.

I must say, though, that this joke isn't all that funny. Certainly the

irritating habit, puerilely practised by many when I was in RI, of calling

very tanned Chinese ppl (e.g. Dexian, AikYong) 'Ahmad' or 'Bala' or whatever

it was wasn't very funny at all. But that had the implication that

Malays/Indians are defined by dark skin, which is of course racist.

I do think that certain 'harmless' racist jokes are a cover for true racism.

But removing all mention of race from public discussion is very harmful both

to race relations and to freedom of speech. We have enough 'OB markers' in

our press as it is (Singapore, according to the Reporters Sans Frontieres,

has less press freedom than Cambodia. Quite deplorable really). By ignoring

race as part of public discourse, an impression of racial equality in S'pore

is created. But this perception is very much inaccurate. What is shameful

and abhorrent are not jokes which have a shading of race sensitivity but the

policies of our government which are either directly or indirectly racist.

To give an example, Muslims are officially discriminated against in the SAF.

Of course this is not publicised. But it is very real. My own unit, 2nd

Signal, has absolutely no Muslims. This rule applies to all other Signal

Units. Muslims cannot be signallers, and cannot work in Signals units in all

vocations. A driver from my unit who converted to Islam (a shotgun marriage,

not even real religious conviction was the reason for his conversion) was

posted out within a week of his conversion. No attempt at providing a reason

was made. It really was quite unsubtle.

Furthermore, an IPW project done by my class established, using a

wide-ranging survey, that educational attainment among Malays has been

consistently and significantly worse all other races for at least 5 years.

When the IPW group who tried to get official info on this matter from the

MOE was informed that such info was 'sensitive' and could not be released.

Well, I wonder why.

So, perhaps we should bring race back into public discussion. But discussion

should be reasoned and mature, not hysterical and infantile, as it often

sadly is.

Caleb.

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:53:39 +0000
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Whether or not any malice was intended, I find it hard to believe that

"Malay" was used purely descriptively. When you single out a group of

people for no reason other than their race, and say "Look! There are

so many Malays working here that they should change their name to

Malay Pizza!" and then go on to ILLUSTRATE your point or joke or

whatever, you're really just being racist.

I don't think the joke is very funny either, because whether or not

Canadian pizza or Delifrance are very Canadian or French is determined

more by the food they sell than the race of their staff.

What makes this joke offensive is the fact that brand names seek to

highlight companies' selling points (eg. Delifrance for vaguely French

food, even Hooters and its waitresses), so changing the brand name to

remark at the disproportional racial distribution of the staff is

particularly derogatory because it suggests that this minutely amusing

phenomenon is the company's true selling point. In a way, if you have

to poke fun, poke at the overpaid people who come up with the ideas,

not the people who earn $5 an hour there.

Also, for the record, working in a fast food outlet or a sort-of

restaurant is VERY menial, and mind-numbing, and depressingly boring.

It's not even worth the meagre amount you get paid.

I'm so glad for Elgin's strong reaction because it has seemed to me

that RI boys are particularly fond of racist jokes. Perhaps I'm wrong;

I hope I am.

Finally, we must not confuse race with culture. I think the racial

disparities in academic success can be attributed at least in part to

cultural and historical factors (immigrants and all). Just like the

Chinese are probably far more kiasu than any other race in Singapore.

Liang Ying

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:59:04 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

we shouldn't go too deep into implications raised by material such as this,

because people have widely varying perceptions of them. to me, the photo

says nothing more than "notice how many malay staff Canadian Pizza seems to

have?". no doubt the mere fact that malays are the subject will offend many

of that race, but if we become so paranoid about even mentioning race at all

we'll only be kidding ourselves. look at the context. this is merely a

doctored photo circulated over the net. it's not from a newspaper or on TV

news. surely there is some space for this sort of humour? or must we purge

racial references and subjects from humour altogether?

also, one could say the picture *highlights* a particular stereotype,

perhaps phrased as 'many malays work in low-skilled service jobs in F&B'. is

that in itself unacceptable? i think the highlighting in itself is quite

neutral, in the absence of any particular insult. to read an insult in it is

the individual's choice, and that seems to me a case of oversensitivity. the

original message used this particular specimen of humour to bring up a point

- thereby highlighting the stereotype and the question of its veracity. this

is a *discussion group*.

btw, i thought this was a male-only discussion group! ...um anyway, jokes

aside, i'm curious to know if every one of us here was asked to join by

jiekai.

-dennis

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 07:18:52 +0000
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Not to make light of the plight of ppl who are forced into such jobs but

" VERY menial, and mind-numbing, and depressingly boring.

It's not even worth the meagre amount you get paid."

also seems to be an apt description of NS. Well for some of us anyway.

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:53:28 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

thank you caleb for your literary analysis of the "joke" by gabriel. something i feel i want to reiterate is the question of what constitutes an offensive or racist remark.

i think caleb over-analyzes it. racism and offense is not something armchair philosophers can sit around, discuss and come to an academic conclusion over. it is the perception of the listener, and solely that, that matters. there is no such thing as a universal, true guide that tells us if something is racist or offensive and something isn't. it's more a case of if people think it is racist and offensive, then it is so because those people are offended.

malice does not matter because an ignorantly-made racist remark is no less racist.

now for the subjective issue of perception. one should ensure that what one says will not be considered racist by an overwhelming majority of the society or community. even if you think the entire society or community is stupid, unenlightened and not as educated as you are, they will still be the ones who judge if what you say is offensive or racist.

because racism hurts people, the only measure for racism would be how much hurt is resulted from your words. it cannot be analyzed. it cannot be debated and theorised. it just is so because people think it is so.

elgin.

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 20:05:55 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] Literary analysis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Some more clarifications on this:

1- No this is not a male-only discussion group. Women have always been

welcome to take part in the discussions on this list. ( And THANK YOU so

much Liang Ying, for breaking the female silence that has been so far the

feature of this discussion group )

2- Yes, every one on this was invited by er...me. Then again, none of the

other founder members of this discussion group have invited anyone to join

in the fray ( where are the other alchemists Shyh Chang? ) Come on, there

are loads of people with opinions you know out there! Get them in!

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 20:14:42 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Re: Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

As a friend observed: "I have nothing against racist jokes; hell, once I

was driving an Indian colleague & a Malay colleague to lunch. The Malay

guy was sitting in the backseat. He suddenly said: "Now this is rare - a

Chinese driving a Malay around." It is a sign of true multi-cultural

integration when all of us can tell racist jokes in front of each other.

I'm a Malaysian. Racism is part of my national heritage. Most people I

know here, when it comes down to it, like individuals and despise races.

Too bad if you can't see the distinction."

I do not disagree that my picture relied on race to some extent in its

attempt at humour, but if you take marginally half-racist jokes to be

dangerous, then talkingcock.com, with its large database of "Mat Jokes"

and "Mama and Bhai" jokes (eg Qn: When a normal female kills her foetus,

it's called abortion. What is it called when a Minah does the same

thing? Ans: Drug abuse prevention), would have been lambasted and

declaimed. Intriguingly, however, we see that no one has even mentioned

this - it seems to be a non-issue. But I digress.

If we all tread about anxious not to step on any toes, I think life

would be utterly boring. Face it, humour involves looking at something

in a lighter light (sorry), and if you're going to be so politically

correct about everything, the only safe jokes left would be corny jokes,

a prospect which I do not relish.

If we assume that something which offends a significant (or more

accurately, audible) proportion is thus intrinsically offensive,

especially in conservative societies, we have no shortage of people who

get "offended" at the drop of a pin.

For example, do you think Muslims are happy about the term "Islamic

Terrorism"? We see Christian Terrorism (bombing of abortion clinics) and

Hindu Terrorism (Ayodha), but no one sees fit to label them as such.

Most people, especially those of the faiths concerned, would object to

and be offended by the linking of their faiths to terrorism. Do we then

ban terms such as "Islamic Terrorism"? Surely not, despite the offence

it might cause, for the fact is that much terrorism is motivated by

religion.

If you're going to read too much into harmless actions and see daggers

where there are none, then I think a job as a conspiracy theorist will

appeal to you. Either that or something in the field of literature,

where commas and semi-colons are regarded as significant regardless even

if they were really ink blotches on the original manuscript (sorry).

Pretending that racism does not exist in Singapore is an extremely

imprudent thing to do. Do you think that, just by burying your head in

the sand and ignoring the problem, it will go away? A cursory look at

Singapore society will reveal that the races are hardly integrated - for

example, people tend and prefer to mix with others of their own race.

Just like the AIDS epidemic in South Africa, the problem of racism in

Singapore has not resolved with time but has gotten worse, if the

apocryphal stories about the Kampung Spirit (TM) are true.

At the same time, while the current happy-happy picture of race

relations if false, so is the alleged fragility of the relationship

between the races. Some people would have it that a few chance, off-hand

remarks will inevitably spawn racial conflict on a scale approaching

Ragnarok, but I believe and perceive that decades of social engineering,

progress, literacy and education have enabled us to progress socially to

a point where feelings of race are expressed passively, verbally and

indeed - light-heartedly - rather than on the streets with smashed beer

bottles and parangs. (In a similar vein, we have this interesting

article: "Conversion and subversion: Religion and the management of

moral panics in Singapore",

<http://www.singapore-window.org/sw01/010307mh.htm>, which proposes that

"the issues of multiracialism and political subversion have been

highlighted as sources of the precariousness which, it is claimed, is a

continuing feature of Singapore's existence.")

Just a few more short notes before I shut my trap:

1) "But that had the implication that Malays/Indians are defined by dark

skin, which is of course racist." - Actually dark skin is one of the

characteristics Malays/Indians almost surely have. It's just like seeing

a pair of breasts and concluding that they belong to a woman - that's

not being sexist. (Aside: Of course, some men have breasts too, but

they're relatively rare. Try the Moobs or Boobs quiz at

<http://homepage.ntlworld.com/djol/b3ta/mob.html)>

2) "I'm so glad for Elgin's strong reaction because it has seemed to me

that RI boys are particularly fond of racist jokes. Perhaps I'm wrong;

I hope I am." - Sorry to burst your bubble, but they are. Perhaps it is

because there are disproportionately few Indians and even fewer Malays.

I remember in Sec 2, someone said: "So much for Racial Harmony Day. Now

back to Racism Month!" (or words to that effect)

I think perhaps the worst sin I can be accused of is a failed attempt at

humour, for the picture itself is not intrinsically offensive. Any

offense is in the eye of the beholder, and that I cannot control.

Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 22:31:51 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Re: Canadian 2 For 1 Finally Changes Its
Name!
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

>

>If we all tread about anxious not to step on any toes, I think life

>would be utterly boring. Face it, humour involves looking at something

>in a lighter light (sorry), and if you're going to be so politically

>correct about everything, the only safe jokes left would be corny jokes,

>a prospect which I do not relish.

I disagree. Even then we would face protests from the Grains Protection

League, the Pulses and Nuts Society, the Save Our Puns Fund.....

>If we assume that something which offends a significant (or more

>accurately, audible) proportion is thus intrinsically offensive,

>especially in conservative societies, we have no shortage of people who

>get "offended" at the drop of a pin.

Or more precisely, at the drop of a burqa (or tudung/headscarf).

This would be funny if it weren't happening all over the developed world.

Take the case of the "I ain't taking off my veil for my driver's licence

photo" woman in America (was that in Florida?).

Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:17:04 +0800
Subject: [youngrepublic] Young republican 2-for-1 ripostes! (to be taken with 3 pinches of salt) =P
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } <!--

-->

I am mildly amused. When I first received that pic I smiled a little, thought "sheesh Gabe you’re really bored", then deleted it, all within 20 seconds. I’ve marked this email as having LOW importance cos I think that’s what the whole issue deserves. People, people, why get your knickers/boxers* in a twist about all this? *delete as appropriate for gender.

Race is a sensitive issue only as long as WE think it is. It’s a part of our (extensive) social conditioning and upbringing which we can choose to hold on too, or cast off when we feel mature enough to do without it. Sure, we have to be careful not to upset others, but let’s not go about life constantly on tiptoes. As Alfain Sa’at says, if he had to choose, "I (would) choose recklessness over paralysis". Even if Gabriel made a mistake, he made it while living life to the fullest! Daring to take risks! Standing up for his (humorous) beliefs in the face of public outcry! Being a Technopreneur! (okay, that last one was going to far.)

I firmly believe that life should be taken seriously enough to be laughed at from time to time. If I were you Caleb, I would be slapping my forehead and going "Ohgosh was I REALLY attempting to PC a joke pic?? I can’t believe I’m having this discussion!" But that’s okay. I’m in NS too, and have nothing better do as well. Hence, my (flippant) collated responses to the recent emails follow below. As Talkingcock would say, "if you do not understand the meaning of HUMOUR or SATIRE, please SIAM now!"

>>I don't think the joke is very funny either, because whether or not Canadian pizza or Delifrance are very Canadian or French is determined more by the food they sell than the race of their staff.

And I’m sure that the satay pizza I had in Delifrance last week is really French. It’s a j-o-k-e. Joke. You know? Something you, like, laugh at then promptly forget all about, like I did?? You want something factually accurate, go read a White Paper (and even then there are statistical errors). Other than that, same comments from me as Caleb (i.e. "Ohgosh, I can’t believe I’m having this discussion!")

>>"I have nothing against racist jokes; hell, once I was driving an Indian colleague & a Malay colleague to lunch. The Malay guy was sitting in the backseat. He suddenly said: "Now this is rare - a Chinese driving a Malay around."

Gabriel, your joke above was spoken by a Malay in self-deprecating jest. I’m sure that if the Chinese had been the one to make light of the odd situation he’d be flamed. Why? Because the underdog/minority always has the "right of way" (to use a driving term). At some metaphysical level I suppose it’s supposed make things fairer, like Affirmative Action. But like AA it’s really based on screwed up logic that’s hasn’t been thought out real clearly. It’s a "do something, do ANYTHING" shortcut maneuver.

>>"malice does not matter because an ignorantly-made racist remark is no less racist."

Are you saying the joke was no worse (and no better…!) than a Ku Klux Klan meeting in full swing? Seriously, the pic is no worse than what goes on at Talkingcock and the other numerous politically incorrect websites springing up in Singapore. If you feel bad about it just delete the pic and if you really want to tip the next pizza boy/girl who delivers to your house/dwelling/residence. (regardless of race…let’s not be racist!).

>>"Also, for the record, working in a fast food outlet or a sort-of restaurant is VERY menial, and mind-numbing, and depressingly boring. It's not even worth the meagre amount you get paid.

Well, "menial" is relative. As a clerk serving In The Defence Of Our Illustrious Nation, I get paid $1.90 an hour, which is roughly half of what pizza boys earn. I do of course get to steal office stationery, but the people there get free pizza, which tastes FAR better than Swan Stabilo pens I assure you. Worse still I’ve realized (only recently, forgive my naiveté!) that I’m not really serving the nation, I’m just serving my CO’s personal vanity as a toy-boy pawn! Oh, the horror, someone’s lied to me! *gasp*

>>"i think caleb over-analyzes it. racism and offense is not something armchair philosophers can sit around, discuss and come to an academic conclusion over. it is the perception of the listener, and solely that, that matters. there is no such thing as a universal, true guide that tells us if something is racist or offensive and something isn't. it's more a case of if people think it is racist and offensive, then it is so because those people are offended."

‘Scuse me, but we ARE armchair philosophers. Well, more like in-camp philosophers, but work with me here. Furthermore you sound like a Gahmen speech: "well, I can’t tell you where the OB markers are exactly, but go ahead and speak freely! You’ll find out where the markers are when we sue you!"

>>"one should ensure that what one says will not be considered racist by an overwhelming majority of the society or community"

Read my mind. No, seriously, you can’t can you? If comic artists (such as the one who edited that pic) had to do a straw poll on public sensitivities every time he did a comic it would be no fun. Why? Cos many people disagree over many things (oh gods did I just state the obvious? Shoot me with an M-16, someone!). Imagine a comic that everyone agrees with. It would run thusly:

A: "Hey, dude, water is wet!"

B: "Yep and the sky is blue! How cool is that!"

C: "I’m hungry. Feed me."

(Okay, so C was Garfield, but you get the point.)

And next-to-lastly, I repeat that I’m not saying race is not an important issue. I’m saying it’s so important that we must laugh about it. You know, half of life’s problems would be solved if people laughed a bit more ("Fun is serious business" as our dear PM would say, though I’m quoting him quite out of context). Can you imagine the scenario below?

Israeli PM Ariel Sharon: "I denounce the *giggle* evil terrorist acts *snort* of the Palestinian militants!"

Palestinian Leader Yassr Arafat: "And I decry *sniggle* the human rights abuses *haha* of the Zionist regime! *chortle*"

Sharon: "Hell, this is so inane. Wanna come over to my place for Hannukah?"

Arafat: "Sure, why not? I’ll tell Hamas not to bomb your house while I’m there"

On the whole, I think the only mistake Gabriel made in posting the pic here is this: he (naively) misjudged and believed that this forum was really open and mature discussion enough to handle a little photo that pokes fun more at corporations and Globalisation exploiting the uneducated than at minority races per se. Yeah right, and Speaker’s Corner/your MP is really a place to go air your grievances. And if you believe that, I’ve got this Nigerian with $50 million who wants to talk to you.

May we all live in Interesting Times!

David,

Who has read too much Dilbert of late.

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 00:26:33 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Perhaps it's time we wrapped up this discussion on racism and the photo and moved ahead. it's time we agreed to disagree. some of us think the photo and it's caption were racist and offensive. some of us don't. we're both entitled to our views.

it's unfortunate that liang ying seems to have been proven right in her proposition that ri boys tend to like telling racist jokes. the many 'ri boys' in this forum have more than amply attested to that.

in conclusion, i have to disagree with a particular para by david. this one:

"On the whole, I think the only mistake Gabriel made in posting the pic here is this: he (naively) misjudged and believed that this forum was really open and mature discussion enough to handle a little photo that pokes fun more at corporations and Globalisation exploiting the uneducated than at minority races per se. Yeah right, and Speaker’s Corner/your MP is really a place to go air your grievances. And if you believe that, I’ve got this Nigerian with $50 million who wants to talk to you."

i think the emails over the last week or so have only demonstrated the opposite of david's view. if this forum were not open and mature (as david believes), gabriel would have been kicked out of the group. either that or someone would have quit the group in vehement protest of his "joke". it's only because we are open and mature that we can discuss the issue within the group without taking any other forms of action. you have the right to air a racist joke. but so do i have the right to air my dismay for your racist joke. and you subsequently will have the right to defend yourself. and everyone else has the right to say what he/she thinks as well. no lawsuits. no bans. no arrests. no action. only words. because that's what a discussion group is about. words.

to quote the liberal french, voltaire, i conclude: "i disagree with what you say but i fight to death your right to say it." that epitomises the spirit i hope this discussion group will adopt. one of open and mature discussion. sure, we don't always agree with each other (that's why we have a discussion group in the first place). but we make our views known while respecting one another's rights and space.

elgin.

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:29:53 +0000
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Perhaps I shouldn't re-open this can of worms especially since most of this

happened before I joined the group. But I have to agree with the

'generalisation' that RI boys are prone to racist statements, knowingly or

not. In fact, the same applies for most boys who have grown up in a

predominantly Chinese environment with little opportunities to mix with

other races. And doesn't that include most of the population?

I have noticed a tendency to make racist remarks and pass them off as being

humourous. The whole 'dark=malay', 'indian/muslim=stupid' stereotypes are

far too common. Perhaps in making such statements you believe you're really

mocking the stereotypes. But do bear in mind that often, such statements can

be very very easily misconstrued. And even if you did make them with no

malice intended, it doesn't mean it wouldn't hurt someone. Furthermore,

pardon me for being cynical, but I sincerely doubt that the majority of the

people who make such racist 'jokes' are really joking. Half the time, such

remarks are reflective of a (subconscious?) racist sentiment.

My bf is Indian so I have heard my share of 'jokes'. Perhaps it's unfair to

base my beliefs on anecdotal evidence, but I never knew that such racist

jokes were common until I started hanging out with my bf and his air force

friends. In my circle of friends, I have NEVER heard of such comments and

remarks (I don't really count acquaintances from RJ). But my bf has to deal

with them every day. He's usually quite ok with it, because he understands

that the jokers who make such statements are genuinely ignorant of their

impact. But I'm not. I'm sick of silly Chinese boys saying that I'm with my

bf because he, like all Indians, have a big dick, thinking they're being

witty by insinuating that my bf, a SAFOS scholar, Stanford graduate, is only

'better' than them because of his penis size. It just stinks of jealousy and

envy - that he managed to 'score' a Chinese gf while they're still single.

Maybe you guys are genuinely joking when you pass such remarks. But please,

think about the possible impact. This isn't about being politically correct.

This is about being consideration and sparing a moment to think about how

your remarks may affect others.

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:37:41 +0000
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

PS. This was dashed off when I was quite riled, so I do apologise for the

rather harsh statements and grammatical errors. ;) Most of you are probably

not racist at all, but I really wish that Chinese Singaporeans would be more

considerate in their behaviour towards others, especially those belonging to

different races. You may see it as succumbing to govt propaganda, but I feel

it's just about making others around you a little more comfortable, which is

what most of us would do in any other situation.

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:48:27 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

why do i feel vindicated? thanks xueling for your insightful anecdote. i certainly hope this serves as a slap in the face for the many racists we now know exist in this group.

elgin.

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:58:55 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Mmm, I agree. We should probably stop discussing racism in contemporary Singapore, since we have generally come to a consensus that racism is bad and that humour based on racial stereotypes should only be dished out very carefully.

Someone once told me that NS was an excellent means to punish gay people. This is because there are a million and one loopholes in the system which gay dudes, whom are usually fairly perceptive and intelligent, spot outright and whine incessantly about. Amusingly, for two-and-a-half years, there's absolutely nothing they can do to change their lot. Which, you've got to admit, is pretty funny. I know a number that end up requiring psychiatric aid for chronic or manic depression.

Sowhaddayathink?

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:59:51 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

xueling wrote:

>I'm sick of silly Chinese boys saying that I'm with my

>bf because he, like all Indians, have a big dick, thinking they're being

>witty by insinuating that my bf, a SAFOS scholar, Stanford graduate, is

>only

>'better' than them because of his penis size. It just stinks of jealousy

>and

>envy - that he managed to 'score' a Chinese gf while they're still single.

>

>Maybe you guys are genuinely joking when you pass such remarks. But please,

>think about the possible impact. This isn't about being politically

>correct.

>This is about being consideration and sparing a moment to think about how

>your remarks may affect others.

maybe you ought to clarify who you're directing your comments at here. no

one here's made any racist jokes or comments about how dark=malay/indian

etc. the only thing that was put out was the canadian pizza joke, which is

entirely unlike the highly offensive remarks passed about you and your bf.

you can decry the state of racism in general (whether among RI boys or the

whole population), but recognise that we in this group wouldn't ever have

such extremely distasteful opinions, even privately. we aren't bigots, i

believe.

elgin wrote:

>

i think the emails over the last week or so have only demonstrated the

opposite of david's view. if this forum were not open and mature (as david

believes), gabriel would have been kicked out of the group. either that or

someone would have quit the group in vehement protest of his "joke". it's

only because we are open and mature that we can discuss the issue within the

group without taking any other forms of action. you have the right to air a

racist joke. but so do i have the right to air my dismay for your racist

joke. and you subsequently will have the right to defend yourself. and

everyone else has the right to say what he/she thinks as well. no lawsuits.

no bans. no arrests. no action. only words. because that's what a discussion

group is about. words.

>

i think you've missed the point of david's comment. david wrote that we

weren't open and mature enough "to handle a little photo that pokes fun more

at corporations and Globalisation exploiting the uneducated than at minority

races per se." all we saw was the racial reference in it, nothing more - got

into a hoo-hah over whether it was racist or offensive or not - and we

completely ignored the underlying points, stereotypes and questions the

picture raised. sure we didn't ban anyone, or take legal action or

something, but we couldn't even see past the reference to malays without

getting all hot and bothered. that isn't really too open and mature, i

think.

anyway, good to see some issues coming up. wonder if we can convert

responses into some sort of article with assorted opinions, then put it up

somewhere or archive it. welcome to the new members, btw. :)

-dennis

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 20:01:57 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Oh! And on an unrelated note, hello to those whom I've lost contact with! Gee, we need to catch up some time. Glad to hear you're still around and debating stuff, Xueling, Dennis and Gabriel. Drop me a mail if you're free. Onward.

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:07:50 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

>

why do i feel vindicated? thanks xueling for your insightful anecdote. i

certainly hope this serves as a slap in the face for the many racists we now

know exist in this group.

elgin.

>

umm...i find that quite unfair. so merely because we don't view the picture

as racist, we're racists ourselves?

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:11:40 -0000
Subject: [youngrepublic] Re: time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

> umm...i find that quite unfair. so merely because we don't view the >picture

> as racist, we're racists ourselves?

This reminds me of one of the many reasons why gay-bashing is so popular.

People think that if they don't hate gays, others will think that they are one of them.

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:20:27 +0800
Subject: [youngrepublic] time to move on: (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } <!--

-->

*a term coined by educational psychologists, describing the phenomena that crabs in a bucket will always pull down the lone crab who’s almost crawled out of the bucket. Prevalent mainly where large groups of oppressed/disempowered people gather hoping no one will rise above his/her station and make the rest of them look lazy. e.g. school, the workplace, the military.

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:54:27 +0800
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on: (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

no don't worry about it david. i very much welcome your comments.

you seem to have told us nothing, though. except for the fact that you're a budding satirical cartoonist.

the reality of a free speech community is that people end up disagreeing. we all grew up differently, with unique influences and separate biases. there's no way everyone is this mailing group (and i'm talking about a lot of people here. it seems everyday someone new speaks up) can agree with everyone else on any single issue.

Just witness the situation in the United States of America. the bastion of free speech usually ends up being hopelessly divided on most issues. half of america hates bush while the other half idolises him. half decries abortion while the other half embraces it as a basic right. half campaigns for a ban on guns while the other half dismisses that as a move towards totalitarianism. the truth is, when an open and mature society allows its members to debate their ideas freely, people are going to disagree. that's when democracy comes in and the country progresses.

i'd like to think that's very much the case here as well. we don't agree with each other and we don't have to. it's as simple as that. every individual ultimately decides for himself what he wants to believe in. the beauty of free discourse is that we all have the opportunity to hear the diverse views and different perspectives on the same subject. that helps each one of us to better make that personal decision as to what stand we want to adopt for ourselves.

what exactly are you trying to say david? do you mean that an open and mature discussion group must end up coming to a consensus about the issues we discuss? perhaps you'll find that in a communist politburo discussion group. not here, though.

elgin.

Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 06:18:27 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] time to move on: (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

I think it's fairly obvious to all but you, Elgin, that what David has succeeded in pointing out is that for someone who seemingly has a beef against unwarranted generalisations, you seem quick to embrace the stereotype of another group of individuals. If the Malays in the Canadian 2-for-1 picture are not fully representative of the pizza company's staff, then the opinions aired by ex- or current RI students in this e-mail forum certainly do not represent the collective voice of generations of Rafflesians, whom I'm sure are not bigots.

And after you draft your reply to this, which you invariably will, I only ask that you give it the once-over so that you're absolutely sure you won't be shooting yourself in the foot once again.

K.

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:38:02 +0800 (SGT)
Subject: [youngrepublic] time to move on: discussions about discussions, without the distraction of humour
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Yes Kairen has got my meaning mostly right—I was actually pointing out the larger issue that no truly mature forum can exist in a culture of hypocrisy where people agree to disagree only because they want to appear/feel mature, but deep down insdie still wish to claw the other guys (idealogical) eyeballs out.

Incidentally, I hope we all realize that I’ve long ago stopped talking about race/racism, but am instead talking about talking—discussions about discussions, as the title says. I’ll re-state my point without humour:

>>Perhaps it's time we wrapped up this discussion on racism and the photo and moved ahead. it's time we agreed to disagree. some of us think the photo and it's caption were racist and offensive. some of us don't. we're both entitled to our views.

I hold nothing against your views, but I am genuinely concerned about the attitude with which you hold them. (sticks and stones may break my bones, but ideas can only interest me) What an open, mature forum is supposed to achieve (its Desired Outcomes, to use a much-familiar edu-phrase) is this: we meet, we talk, we thrash things out, and we part ways agreeing or disagreeing (this is immaterial, really). But as we walk away, I hope each of us is filled with a sense of humility and hopefully some wonder, that "gosh, there’re more people and views than I could possibly imagine in the world—and I’m just a small part of all this." It is, to me, the intellectual equivalent of (the more purely emotional) lying under the night sky and being wowed by the endless starry universe.

>>it's unfortunate that liang ying seems to have been proven right in her proposition that ri boys tend to like telling racist jokes. the many 'ri boys' in this forum have more than amply attested to that.

Your parting line above seems to say that we should part still thinking poorly of each other. If that is the case I am truly dismayed. We should part like good sportsmen, shaking the other’s hand and saying "good game! Perhaps another time?"

Lastly, I hope you understand I’m rebuking the action, not the person (yes it’s a very oft-used parental/teacherish cliché but it’s true). Don’t take all this personally--but do take it as a person.

In honest concern,

David.

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 03:50:17 +0000
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Hey,

I wasn't directing this at anyone in particular. It was simply meant to be a

reminder of how we should all be a little careful before making jokes that

can be taken to be racist. Personally, I find the Canadian Pizza 'joke' just

silly - not particularly funny, not particularly racist either, more like

the result of a v bored mind. ;)

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 03:51:48 +0000
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] time to move on.
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Hey Kairen!

I'm glad to see you around too. ;) I've been holed up in London having fun

and letting my brain rot, so I thought joining something like this would

make me think a little more. ;)

xue

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 03:58:26 +0000
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] time to move on: (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

-------------

Firstly, that's an interesting term and it can definitely be widely used in

quite a few situations I've encountered.

But regarding that anecdote, I mentioned the one that got me riled most, but

there're little ones that go on every day. The strange thing is that these

guys are really decent and they seem to genuinely like my bf. But at the

same time, they think it's fine to diss his race and that racist jokes are

actually funny.

I do agree that most jokes tend to make fun of stereotypes. But when the

jokes are mocking a particular stereotype most of the time, then it does

seem like there's something more to it.

*shrug*

It's noon and I just woke up, so my brain isn't working. Will write more

when I can think.

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:54:21 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] time to move on: (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

to gideon: i have never tried to claim, as you have asserted i have, that the views aired by ex or current RI students represent the collective voice of generations of Rafflesians, whom i am sure are not bigots either (note: i have never used the word bigot till today, and even so only in response to your initial usage of the word).

the simple message i have been making from the start, and one that i still stand by today, is that the photograph "joke" was racist and offensive in nature. besides being senseless and immature, it was highly objectionable and unsavoury. that is the view i continue to hold.

and now to address david's slightly flawed analogy. david likened our discussion to a sports game, in which members of opposing teams should shake hands in the spirit of sportsmanship after the game and be filled with respect for each others' abilities and competitive drive. i agree that that would have been the case if we had been arguing about a morally neutral issue, say, of whether or not the mass rapid transit system should be nationalised.

however, the subject of our discussion was hardly one of a morally neutral nature. instead, it was about a "joke" that was detestable and reprehensible. to use david's analogy more appropriately though, i must confess, not perfectly, it was a football game in which one side resorted to dirty tricks like diving and taunting the other side with racist comments.

certainly you do not expect shaking of hands and filling of hearts with respect anymore, do you? neither do i. for me, to respect views i consider racist, offensive and disgraceful would be tantamount to condoning those views. and that is the precise opposite of what i set out to do in the first place.

elgin.

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 21:23:11 +0800
Subject: Re: [youngrepublic] (discussions about discussions)
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

hi elgin,

i'd just like to check something first. all this while i've been assuming

you're my ex-pri-sch-classmate (ACSBR) - is that right? or are you someone

else altogether?

ok, on to my hopeful attempt at a more peaceful closure to this issue. i

have to say i really do respect your principles and your rejection of racism

(however you perceive it). on that note, no one here disagrees - racism, as

both attitude, speech and action, is detestable and deserves a permanent

death. the crux, though, is what each of us considers to be stepping beyond

that fuzzy line that divides rotten racism and the realm of the acceptable.

while there cannot be a clear division, many of us feel that the Canadian

Pizza joke is probably still quite within safe limits. this view isn't

tantamount to racism at all. no one's made racist comments (though maybe

some taunts) - in fact, much to the contrary. our beef is with the limits of

acceptability, and with the phenomenon of over-PCness to the point of

hypocrisy. and beyond that, there're deeper issues that the photo points to

that would have been more worthy of discussing.

anyway, since we've shifted away from the issue at hand and gone into a spot

of meta-discussion (with some ad hominem thrown in), how about we just dump

the entire flame-thread and wait for a new topic to come up. i seriously

think it'd be a lot more productive, not to mention less abrasive.

to everyone:

debate tends to be unpleasant, and it's pretty hard to avoid that without

coming off as a bit insincere/fake/dishonest. we reign in our most immediate

responses so we can craft more neutral, less offensive replies. (or else we

shoot off our mouths.) that's probably david's point, as i understand it.

i'd like to suggest we all moderate ourselves a bit. if you're holding back,

just speak out and say exactly what you want to say, and if you're already

scathingly pelting people, hold back a bit and write in a less inflammatory

manner. so let me begin by saying,

david, i find your comments veering towards the overidealistic. i've told

you that before in real life, and i'd say the same here. no one's going to

go away from discussion with eyes open to a whole universe of opinions,

overawed by the mere fact that there are so many details to consider. that

would constitute nothing more than a public airing of views, and not a

debate or discussion per se. rather, what each of us should aim for, i

think, is to crystallise and (re-)formulate viewpoints based on the

arguments raised by others here. there is no ego, no ownership of opinions,

in such a mode of discussion. no one should stubbornly cling onto his/her

initial stance. in the lingo of debate, case-shifting is allowed. it's

encouraged. so long as it's internally consistent.

wow, the member list sure is growing. who's doing all the inviting?

-dennis

Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:37:16 +0800
Subject: [youngrepublic] Moving on: this group itself
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Well I guess we can now all see why the Govt very tightly

regulates/censors racial issues even if they don't appear terribly

contentious at firsts glance. If even the bunch of us, who are

supposedly endowed with slightly more maturity/intellect than the

population average, cannot keep this discussion from turning into an

(admittedly minor) flame fest, then perhaps racial riots (or at least

severe racial outcry/public dissent) is a rather real threat and not

some bogeyman the Gov digs up to scare us into civil obedience/apathy.

As for how this group got so big (30+ I think): I have no idea.

Certainly not by my doing. =) I suppose I never bothered to invite

anyone as most guys are in-camp and have no Net access anyway, and the

girls are at uni, and hence I assumed (wrongly, it seems =p) that they

were getting quite enough intellectual exercise to keep them gainfully

occupied. Jiekai, what's your idea of an optimal number of members?

David

Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:44:31 +0000
Subject: RE: [youngrepublic] Moving on: this group itself
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

-----

uh-uh, not me! The only intellectual exercise I've done since returning to

Sg is from calculating how much I've spent. Which actually isn't all that

intellectual. ;)

Jiekai invited me and he probably invited everyone else too, I'd assume.

But back to more 'intellectual' issues, discussions on race can easily

become v v ugly. But I don't think that's a good justification for banning

all discussions on this subject. A little dissention is fundamental to a

discussion - what sort of discussion would it be if everyone agreed?

Furthermore, heated words are inevitable when people speak about issues

close to their heart and I believe that it's a good thing people feel so

strongly about their views on racism. Perhaps, heated debate is one of the

ways we can ever come any closer towards understanding each other better and

developing a policy that more people would be comfortable with, as long as

things don't get out of hand.

I guess the issue here isn't whether people are racist, because I believe

that most Singaporeans aren't, they're just ignorant of the impact and

implications of what they say. Basically, most of us here agree that racism

is abhorrent but we disagree on what exactly constitutes racism and racist

remarks. I think I can live with a little disagreement on that.

Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:15:05 +0800
Subject: [youngrepublic] After the Synthesis
Reply-To: youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

First of all I would like to welcome all the new members on this list (

that is, everyone who joined the list since the start of this year ). I

hope you are enjoying the debates on the list. And to Kairen and Xueling in

particular, thank you for making your thoughts heard ( and read).

The stuff that is being sent on the list is most encouraging. When I

started the group that this list would flop over, curl up and die due to

lack of interest, or neglect. This is quite clearly by now not the case.

Despite our historically short existence and relatively small number of

topics ( The Great Canadian Pizza Debate is only the second major

controversy on the list after National Service ), it has been shown that

the potential for and interest in intelligent discussion is very much alive

and still kicking in Singapore.

Onto the question of "How did this list balloon to (now) 43 souls?" Most

of the invites were from me, but there are a lot of people reading this who

were invited by other people on the list. (Kudos to Gabriel and Shyh Chang,

who were primarily responsible, to the best of my knowledge. If there is

anyone else who was not invited by any of us, please, name your inviter so

that we can thank him or her), as is appropriate. I believe that the people

on this group are here quite voluntarily Thankfully there has been to date,

only 2 unsubscriptions, so people I think would rather continue to receive

this semi-solid brain food rather than leave. Do tell all your (interested)

friends about youngrepublic@yahoogroups.com

Wishing everyone a great year ahead.