Yes or No?: August 2006

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Yes or No to privacy?

Living in a big community, it is hard to put a boundary to privacy. How much should other ppl know about us? How much can they ask? What shouldn't they know? and most importantly, how much they can do before we feel that they have invaded our privacy?

Just came back from Hong Kong, I was so furious to hear that Gillian Chung (one of the Twins popstars) was being snapped when changing at Genting. You wouldn't believe what the hongkees were reporting in HK! Internationally, it has tarnished Malaysian's image as a safe country and ppl just think that Malaysians are unethical enough to be setting up camera in the changing room. The funny thing is that the magazine(EasyFinder) which publishes (they still do!) the photos is a Hong Kong magazine and therefore the dirty job is almost certainly(giving it a space of doubt) done by the paparazzis in HK! And puhlezzz....Malaysians are not stooping that low! Nevertheless, I still think that Malaysians do have to bear some responsibility about the security at Genting. How come the paparazzis could enter the changing room so easily and a camera to be set up there would be creepy enough to scare a lot of artists from coming to Msia for performances!

Of course, snapping photos without approval is an invasion of privacy. Now, let's think about something more petty, like....reading ppl's smses on hp, reading ppl's emails, opening ppl's letters and etc. Would you be angry if somebody does something like that to you? Have you done it before? Honestly, I would be so pissed off if I find out that my friend/relative is doing such a thing to me. To be fair, I refrain myself from committing the same thing to others cos I believe that 'you shouldn't do something to others that you don't want to happen to yourself'.

Sometimes I just cannot understand ppl's curiosity on others; wanting to know where they have gone to, what they have done and so on. It is up to them whether they want to tell you or not and if they don't, you should respect their privacy. Have you heard of ppl sneaking into other ppl's rooms or record other ppl's passwords to enter into their emails or e-diaries? My goodness, are ppl ready to be stooping that low?

Even in the case of celebrities, they should have the rights to be alone and not stalked by paparazzis. I was so disgusted that some hongkees even commented that Gillian was purposely doing it and she was just snapped adjusting her bra clasp, it wasn't like she had never taken any photos with less clothing. Ya, I suppose that if you search for images for Gillian, you can see that there are some photos of her in bikinis but for Heaven's sake, you guys think that it's right to snap photos of her changing???

Hundreds of celebrities in Hong Kong are now lodging complaints to the government for stricter laws on publications by the entertainment industry. Hopefully, celebrities can feel safer walking on the streets in the near future. I do hope that the paparazzi who snapped Gillian's photos can be caught and put in jail (he/she deserves it!). You would be surprised to hear that paparazzis in Hong Kong are paid quite a big sum of money for photos like this. In a programme that I watched last night on Astro, a group of artists in HK including Jackie Chan, Andy Lau and many more gathered at Tsim Sha Tsui to protest about the loose laws on publications; it was mentioned that some paparazzis are paid up to HKD 500,000 for juicy news like this!

What do you think is the most appropriate sentence for the perpetrator who set up camera in Gillian's dressing room?

Saturday, August 26, 2006

Yes or No to tit for tat?

Revenge is a dangerous word. It stimulates anger and hatred in most people. Gone were the days that people only link revenge with killing his father's killer or punching up the rapist. I would like to talk about the petty issues today, something so trivial that you wonder the other party has done it delibrately as a revenge.

It is not uncommon that there can be misunderstanding among friends. Even more, when you are staying under one roof or seeing each other everyday e.g. classmates. Sometimes small misunderstanding could lead to big arguments and nobody knows the real cause unless both parties calm down and explain to each other. It is such a shame that even long-trusting friends turn enemies due to a small matter. Recently, I have a friend who told me about her flatmate. They seem to be ok with each other but not the closest of friends. One day, they had a small disagreement on the utility bills and of course both parties were a little upset. Then, my friend decided to take a bath and halfway during the process, she noticed that there was no hot water from the tap and she was bathing cold chilly water and it was winter! So she was certain that the other friend had turned off the hot water button. Didn't ask her flatmate why, she just did the same to her flatmate when the opportunity came. The revenge to each other just continued for about three months. Until one day, my friend had to top up the electricity for the flat and they had always been postponing payment until the credits run flat, i.e until there was really no more electricity! Then she remembered that it was the same scenario on the first day that she bathed in cold water. Although her flatmate was in the flat at that time, another flatmate had gone to top up the electricity.....OOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPSSSSSS!

I was literally scolding my friend for being so impulsive. For the whole three months, she was being troubled about bathing in cold water and definitely her flatmate had the same problem. It wasn't only that, my friend had to go to turn off the hot water button and stealthily went back to her room. Revenge is all about hard work! Besides, 'an eye for an eye' was going to continue if not for my friend clearing up with her flatmate after that. It all started from a small misunderstanding, how worthless!

Now to think it through, if something like what happened to my friend happens to you; let's say it was deliberate. Would you have done the same thing , i.e. vow for a revenge? Is it worthwhile to commit to something that is wasting your time and hurting the other party in the process? Let's talk about ethics here. Is it ethical? and is it against your religion or your beliefs to enjoy doing bad things to others. Are you sadistic? We are talking about misdemeanours here, not big crimes that will put you in jail. Are they justifiable?

I have always believe that revenge is not the best method. Doing small petty things like trying to make the other party irritated by turning off hot water button or throw away other ppl's things (that's what i've heard too!) is somehow unethical. If you don't like a person, show it and tell him/her why you think so. Being estranged to each other in a flat or in uni may be a better solution than to show how close you guys are but later commit some stealthy crimes, thinking that the other party hasn't noticed. Sometimes, it is only painful when you don't know whether the other party has noticed and things happen to you...you'll be troubled pondering whether it was done by them.

Another question to all of you, will you forgive somebody who had done petty things(like something discussed above) to you? Let's see what you'll do to settle this?

So, yes or no for tit for tat?

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Yes or No to lies?

Definitions:

A lie is an intentionally false statement. To lie is to say something one believes to be false with the intention it be taken for truth.

A lie-to-children is an expression that describes a lie told to make an adult subject, such as sex, acceptable to children. The most common example, though not currently in widespread use, is "The stork brought you."

A white lie is a lie which is believed harmless or innocuous, or in is accordance with the conventions of the culture. A common example of a white lie is, "You look marvelous."

Lying by omission means allowing another to believe something that one knows is false, by failing to reveal the truth, rather than by stating an untruth.

Perjury is the legal term for the offence of lying under oath, for example in court or in an affidavit. It is normally restricted to lies that are also false statements.

Yup, the topic today is all about lies. Have you lied before? I suppose those who said 'I've never lied' is already making a false statement. Telling a lie might sound fun but being lied to or fooled is nothing near it. Let's see the pros and cons of lying.

Pros	Cons
Some lies are necessary e.g. you’ll say ‘I’ve eaten’ to your mom when you call home although you haven’t either to escape nagging or from her getting worried.	It’s still a lie. If you do this continually, you can be lying everyday without noticing.
When gf asks whether she looks good in a new dress or when she has got a new hairstyle, it’s either you lie or you’ll get a cold shoulder	Some girls prefer their bfs to be honest with them. If they look ugly, tell them before they walk out and get laughed at. Although I must say that you should criticise in a subtle way.
When children ask “where do we come from?” It’s a difficult question to answer.	Parents could simply tell them that they are the ppl who make children without telling the whole process and promise to tell when they have grown older. Why is all these stories about being picked up from the dumpster or storks brought babies?
Children learn lessons from fairy as well as scary tales e.g. never go wandering in dangerous places from the tale Hansel and Gretel	Firstly, Hansel and Gretel encourage children to be adventurous to find the chocolate house. And secondly Santa Claus has given the false imagination to children that they can get anything they want for Christmas. Pity the parents!
Some lies are important to avoid conflicts and arguments	Sooner or later, when the lie is exposed it might lead to a bigger complication.
Lying by omission is not really lying because you have not even opened your mouth to utter a single lie.	It’s not called LYING by omission for nothing. From an ethical pt of view, you are still suppose to rectify the situation even though you can choose to keep quiet.

Have you lied before? Do you think that lying is necessary at times?

Monday, August 21, 2006

Yes or No to website pranks?

When I was thinking hard of what to write, I simply googled 'yes or no' and found an interesting website- yes or no oracle. Isn't it wonderful when you have difficult questions to answer, you can just type out your questions and in a blink of an eye, an answer pops up saying yes or no. Don't believe me? Try it at http://www.facade.com/yesno/

After all these years of surfing the world wide web, I must admit that I've been fooled umpteen times by many stupid and ridiculous websites. The most embarassing one was the personality test that was sent by a friend. In such test, you are suppose to enter three names of opposite sex that you have interest in and the test will count the compatibility of you with these three persons. Obviously (but not obvious enough to me five years ago) it is a prank programme to set up friends to find out who they have crush on because after you have entered the names, the programme will automatically send a copy to the friend who sent you the invitation to the website.

Another website that I find ridiculous is the love calculator that is widely speculated on the net. On the website, you are suppose to enter two names and the calculator will count the percentage of them getting together or being compatible. Some girls or even guys must be pretty excited to calculate their names with their crushes' to tell whether they can get together. Undeniably, I've used the calculator too but hmm...I've grown out of it and I can tell you that it doesn't work *wink*.

Ahem, credits to a friend of mine, I was sent a website to play an online game not too long ago. It involves moving the cursor between two narrow lines and it is really challenging as it gets more difficult in the later stages when the two lines are basically just 1 mm apart! So as I was carefully manoeuvring the cursor in level four, suddenly a large photo of a ghost(a woman with long hair, bloody face with big nose) popped up! Ya, I almost had a heart attack!

Not to mention the number of forwarded emails on ridiculous topics such as:
1) Japanese ppl have worms in their brains due to eating sushis
2) Kittens kept in boxed bottles
3) You can get free credits on prepaid by pressing this and that buttons on your phone
4) A clown will appear next to your bed tonight if you don't send this to at least 5 ppl now!
5) You will find your prince charming in the next five days if you send this to 10 ppl or more!
6) Your love life will be cursed for seven years if you don't send this to at least 25 ppl!

Comeon', get a life! Stop all these chain emails because I don't know why ppl are just gullible enough to believe that they should forward them. I suppose that you wouldn't want to pass such bad luck to your friends too if you believe in such emails. The next time you have such emails forwarded to you, just read the top part( if you are interested) and skip all the cursings. I always close the browser or delete the email when I come to 'Forward this to....'

Have you encountered other types of pranks online? Plz share them.

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Yes or No to lasik?

Well, some ppl think that girls like wearing contact lenses like some men do; for the comfort and convenience. In fact, most girls just want to avoid wearing spectacles-yup specs are ugly. Wearing contact lenses isn't convenient after all as you need to wash, put them on ( some ppl take ages to do this), take them off, wash, keep in solution and etc. Imagine doing it everyday, it contributes to an extra 10 to 20 minutes in the bathroom. A permanent solution to not wearing lenses is therefore welcome by most women: The Lasik.

Quoted from Wikipedia :
"LASIK, is an acronym for Laser-assisted In Situ Keratomileusis, is a form of refractive laser eye surgery procedure performed by ophthalmologists intended for correcting near- and far-sightedness in vision. The procedure is usually a preferred alternative to photorefractive keratectomy, PRK, as it requires less time for full recovery, and the patient experiences less pain overall. Many patients choose LASIK as an alternative to wearing corrective glasses or contact lenses."

1) Yay! No more contact lenses and glasses. If that's what you think, you might be mistaken. Lasik is not really a 'permanent' solution to myopia and astigmatism. You are advised to only undergo lasik if your prescription has stopped changing. This usually happens after the age or 28 or more. If you were to undergo lasik at age 22, for instance, you might have to undergo it again at age 24 because your eye's ability to bend, or refract, light may have changed. Also, ppl who undergo lasik may still have to wear reading glasses after the age of 40 for presbyopia (lens of the eyes have less ability to focus after the age of 40).

2) Lasik is not totally safe. There are many complications involved in this surgery such as:

Dry eyes
Overcorrection or undercorrection
Visual acuity fluctuation
Halos or starbursts around light sources at night
Light sensitivity
Ghosts or double vision
Wrinkles in flap (striae)
Decentered ablation
Debris or growth under flap
Thin or buttonhole flap
Induced astigmatism
Epithelium erosion
Posterior vitreous detachment
Macular hole

3) Lasik is also expensive to start with. The last I heard was RM 10,000 for an eye. It's getting more affordable as more eye-surgeons are providing this service but still exorbitant to start with if you can still imagine yourself wearing glasses a few years after lasik.

4) Lasik surgeries have so far been satisfying and surveys have detected up to 92-98% satisfaction. Some who undergo lasik have commented that they have sharper and clearer vision after lasik as compared to wearing glasses/contact lenses before surgery.

5) Why are most eye-surgeons who offer lasik are still wearing specs? One joke says that they don't trust the other eye-surgeon. So, not all eye-surgeons are convinced of the surgery, huh? Can we be convinced?

6) Some claimed that having lasik is like doing a plastic surgery, you are having operations to correct your looks. I suppose if ppl are not ok with plastic surgeries, what do they think about lasik? Do they still have the same views?

What's your say?

Saturday, August 19, 2006

Yes or No to freedom of speech?

Blogging is just like saying whatever you like on the net, one would say. It's not true! I must admit that all this while I've been trying careful not to mention something sensitive in my blog, just in case that it might lead to complications. Living in a country such as Malaysia, with the restrictions on speech, one is not allowed to speak freely about what is on one's mind. There are just so many topics that we must avoid such as religions, sexist commentations and dirty politics.

The question asked today is : Should we be entitled the rights to say whatever we want?

1) In a multi-racial country such as Malaysia, it involves a lot of understanding and tolerance to live with each other in the community. It would be catastrophic when everybody is voicing their thinkings without regarding the other individual or party's feelings. A restriction on the freedom of speech will allow active idea contributions with consideration.

2) In politics on the other hand, The ISA has been consistently used against people who criticise the government and defend human rights. Known as the "white terror", it has been the most feared and despised, yet convenient tool for the state to suppress opposition and open debate. The Act is an instrument maintained by the ruling government to control public life and civil society. Many countries* had objected to the ISA practised in Malaysia. However, after the terrorist attack such as the 911 and 7-11, these countries have changed their opinions towards the act and thought that this act is definitely an important tool to arrest suspicious criminals before presenting concrete evidence; a fast action against terrorists.

3) Under the ISA, a person may be detained by the police for up to 60 days without trial for an act which “prejudices the security” of the country. After 60 days, the detention can be extended for a period of two years, with the approval of the Minister of Home Affairs. It can then be renewed for successive two-year periods. A detainee can thus expect to remain in detention indefinitely.

4) There is no true boundary of what one can speak and one cannot. It is absolutely a grey area that one can simply overstep. It is not unusual to hear about countries which practise communism arresting people merely because they mentioned, gossiped or critised the government. Since a government is never perfect, a restriction on the freedom of speech is simply preventing the public from complaining and suggesting an improvement.

5) Freedom of speech will allow a continuous flow of opinions in debate and discussions. It can be practised with consideration for people to voice about their views and dissatisfactions on sensitive issues. But how many ppl out there are rational enough in their angry mood against something that they have strong opinions about?

What do you think?

Friday, August 18, 2006

7 Days Anniversary!

Yay! It has been seven days since I last published the first post. Thank you for all your support! I must admit that I wouldn't be motivated to write without ppl reading, giving comments and voting. I'm scratching my head now thinking of what to write. It's already 10 pm here and being out the whole day, I'm so exhausted to think of anything to write.

So let's take a day off! hehe... Plz be back tomorrow as I still want to maintain my dicipline of publishing one post a day. Hopefully, there'll be something interesting published tomorrow!

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Yes or No to equality?

It is not a new thing that women feel that they are being supressed and looked down upon in the modern society. Feminists claimed that women should be given more rights which are currently reserved for men. Nevertheless, one cannot deny that there is definitely a difference between men and women in aspects such as strength, intelligence, perserverance and etc. Equality is therefore far from reach. Let's see what women and men think:

Note: All the info below is what I've gathered from friends and websites and therefore may not be a true representation of the whole population .

Feminists' view:

Feminists say:	Rebuttal
Men and women are the same	Men and women have been shown to be different physically, biologically and behaviourally. Men are proved to be stronger and hence are mostly assigned to physical labour since prehistoric time. Women are given the natural gift of giving birth. Therefore women are left at home to take care of children.
Despite the obvious difference, there are areas that both men and women can contribute equally for instance, voting for a new government	Now, let’s see which country is still having the law that females cannot vote. From what I know..nil?
Females can be prime ministers too!	There are many countries which have current or past female prime ministers : UK, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Bangladesh, NZ and more. It’s just too bad that in a country such as Msia that ppl don’t vote for females for PM
Females should be given the same opportunity in application for work as men	Undeniably, there are some jobs which are more suitable for men than females such as engineers, construction jobs and drivers(obviously men are better drivers, feminists won’t agree). There are some jobs which are reserved for women too e.g. secretary, salesgirl(salesboy? you'll be irritated to find a notice saying only female salesperson needed), maid and babysitter. Perhaps masculinists (there’s actually such a term) should fight against this inequality!
Women have the potential to work well and therefore stop thinking that they have high positions in companies solely because they have pretty faces and figures!	Well done to the women who have brains and beauty! If you can work well and show it, I’m pretty sure most ppl can see it.
Stop thinking that women should be protected because we can stand up for ourselves!	Men are getting confused now. They think that they can show their gentleman side by opening doors, sliding chairs and sending you home but you don’t seem to appreciate it. Some gfs insist on them. So what do you girls want?
We are career women and therefore don’t expect us to cook, sew and take care of babies.	When men are expected to be gentlemen, women are expected to cook, sew and give birth. Isn’t it only natural?
Women are not baby-making machines!	Men: “Oh no! What should we do to make babies? Can we have babies on our own?”

Men think:

Men say:	Rebuttal
Females are weak	Yes, women might be weaker physically but not internally. Women are proven to be calmer and by having longer attention span, they persevere better in challenging situations when men are panicking.
Women cannot read maps and are bad drivers	Who says? I know females who can read maps and drive better than males. Although I must say, it’s a small proportion and therefore rare.
Women are big spenders and they spend more than they can earn!	It’s only true that we spend a lot but we do know where the money goes to. And about spending more than we can earn, it’s not totally true. Husband’s earnings are ours and our earnings are ours. So, we are spending what we earn!
Pretty women have no brains	It’s all Bs: Big Boobs Bitches, have the Best Brains. It’s unlucky that men can’t have both being handsome and smart. Women are just more perfect.
Women cry, breakdown and panic	Well, it’s too bad that women are smart enough to think of such a strategy that they can get help from men even without asking!
Women are backstabbers and they gossip like nobody’s business	Who says that guys don’t gossip? What happens when a group of guys sit down and talk about what their female colleagues wear during work or what they don’t like about their bosses?

Are women and men equal?

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Yes or No to piracy?

Who hasn't bought a pirated item? Did you know that other than cds, vcds and dvds, there is plenty of other pirated items out there such as bags, clothes, games, computer softwares and even handphones. Answers.com defines piracy as "the unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material". So as long as you are purchasing and using something that is not authorised by the the patented company, you are supporting piracy. Did you know that even if the item is an original, buying it illegally i.e. from a smuggler is also supporting piracy?

Here are some examples:

1) Cheap games and softwares cds for RM5 at lowyat
2) Branded watches for RM20 each at Petaling Street
3) Dvds, cds, and vcds
4) Branded t-shirts, handbags, shoes, blouses, skirts from pasar malams or buying them at half the original price or less from small unauthorised shops
5) PSP or PS2 from unauthorised dealers
6) Downloading mp3s, movies, mtvs and ringtones from torrrent websites or p2p programmes such as limewire or kazaa.
7) Downloading sharewares and then break the codes from hacker websites online
8) Streaming tvs online from unauthorised websites
9) Sharing movies, music videos and songs on websites
10) Photocopying and distributing books such as textbooks and story books illegally

Here are some of my views:

1) Originals are usually very very expensive. Pirated items are cheap and can be as cheap as one-tenth the original price or more! For instance, a pirated cd is RM5 and its original is about RM50. A pirated bag can be bought with RM20 when the branded original is approx RM 1500! Perhaps the owners (entertainment industries and commercial companies) should lower their prices to an affordable level?

2) Pirated items are ubiquitous and are sometimes even more accessible than the originals. You can get them from pasar malams and even in small shops in shopping malls. The next time you walk in a shopping mall, try to notice how many of them sell pirated items.

3) Piracy is taken so seriously under Malaysian Law, which provides for fines of up to RM20,000 for each unlicensed software copy, or up to five years in prison, or both. But despite these punishments, you must be wondering why you can still see pirated items everywhere. There are places which are confirmed to have pirated items and yet are not raided. The question is, whether the authorities are serious about stopping piracy?

4) Downloading movies and songs online is so easy! You just need a fast broadband connection for it. Compare that to going to stores to buy vcds, cds and dvds.

5) Some believe that piracy saps the creative work of thousands of people. It's only fair to pay these ppl for their hardwork. You think that piracy brings the sales down? I've read an article online (can't find it now or else I'd quote it) saying that experts cannot really pin-point the relationship between piracy and sales. Sales are generally believed to be lowered, there is an evidence saying that both piracy and sales can both be going up together: isn't it a common knowledge that only popular items are pirated? The pirated items generally attract ppl from lower classes i.e. those who cannot afford to buy the original. Since the social classes targetted are different, they are independent of each other.

6) Is wiping out piracy a responsibility of every individual? Do we want it to be wiped out at all?

What do you think?

Michigan Mesothelioma Lawyer Counter

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Yes or No to homosexuality?

Aha! I can see why I am talking about this topic. Recently I've been seeing too many gay and lesbian couples that I start thinking whether many people actually look at this issue the same way as I do. Since UK legalised homosexuality in Dec 2005, I'm sure that many of you have seen more and more homo-couples walking down the street; holding hands and even hug and kiss in the public. I seriously think that it's a wonderful thing that ppl have the rights to do what they feel suitable to them. However, I was still in disgust when I saw a couple kissing intensively in front of me in a tube station. Do you think that homosexuality should be regarded and be legalised in Malaysia?

First, let's see the two sides of the argument:

*totally lazy to write today, I was delighted to find the pros and cons from wikipedia*

Pro

"It is commonplace in nature." Based on zoologists' observations of many different species.^[28]
"Suppressing it alters the balance of nature." A Bedamini Melanesian belief.^[28]
"It foments close friendships and independent thinking." Also in Lucian
"It [male homosexuality] is a mark of true masculinity." Claimed by Indian Sufi Akhi Jamshed Rajgiri in self defense before the Sultan of Jaunpur for his love of youths. (In Vanita & Kidwai, 2000, p.139)
"Suppression is irrational." Jeremy Bentham, in his 1785 essay on "Paederasty" (first English language text on homosexuality). In that same work, he also states: "It is wonderful that nobody has ever yet fancied it to be sinful to scratch where it itches, and that it has never been determined that the only natural way of scratching is with such or such a finger and that it is unnatural to scratch with any other."
"The male form is superior to the female form." (implication for male homosexuality). Medieval Arabic text included in The Book of One Thousand and One Nights (The Debate Between the Wise Woman and the Sage).

Con

"Same-sex love is against nature." This charge dates back to Classical Greece, where it was first articulated by Plato in his Laws. Of course, Plato also portrayed many homosexual and homoerotic scenes in his dialogues, most notably in the Lysis, Charmides, and Symposium.
"It is condemned by God." Expressed by early Christian exegetes (claimed to be the moral of the Sodom and Gomorrah story), and also in the Qur'an. The Scriptures of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) condemn the practice.
"It leads to plagues and natural disasters." Advanced by Christian authorities from late Antiquity through the Renaissance, as well as by orthodox Islamic ones. (As in the poems of Sanai)
"It is abuse of the young." Encountered in "Erotes," a dialogue of the early Christian era by Lucian.
"It is a dissipation of one's reproductive force." Plato, Laws, 838

*but still, there are a few pts that I want to add*

1) Generally some religions view homosexuality as an act against nature. Human nature is about two individuals of the opposite sex getting married. Sex is a gift from God for the human population to flourish and for our species to continue in existence. So are monks and priests acting against God's will by not getting married? If everybody become nuns, priests and monks, will human kind still exist? The same applies to spinsters and bachelors. Are all these people sinful too?

2) If two individuals can be happy together without hurting other ppl, why can't we just let them be? Normal heterosexual relationships can lead to divorces too. In fact, it is found that there is a much lower rate of gay divorce.

3) If it's unnatural, why are the homos tend to go for the individuals of the same sex? Is it a fetish? Just like the argument about watching porn; some say that it's only natural but others think that it's an unhealthy addiction.

4) It is not uncommon to hear that there are married men out there who disguise themselves as normal by having a family. Even after marriage, they would meet their lovers (same sex) undercover. This wreaks families when the wives found out. All these are said to be due to the pressure from the public for them to have a healthy hetero relationship. Sympathy to the wives and children who were used as tools of disguise.

5) Some scientists have hypothesised that being gay might be inherited. So, is this a destiny? Then it's not against God's will, is it?

6) It might be wrong to think that being homosexuals would not have any effect on other ppl. First, they will break their family members' hearts. Parents who are hoping to be grandparents will be disappointed of the fact that they won't be getting any and siblings might be embarassed to tell other ppl about it. If the homos are followers of the religions which detest homosexuality, other staunch and religious followers may feel betrayed and will try to correct the homos. So, one can conclude that being a homo is not only a one person's choice.

Finally, in my opinion, it is only sad to suppress ppl from what they want to do. I stand on the 'yes' side of this argument despite the fact that I might still be disgusted to see two guys kissing in front of me.

What do you think?

Monday, August 14, 2006

Yes or no to Makeup?

Yes, make me beautiful!

Undeniably that a high proportion of women in Msia today wash, tone, moisturise, brush and blush before stepping out of the house. It's a known thing that a man should wait for at least 15 minutes for his gf to get ready(that is if he's lucky, some girls are said to take about 1 hour!). It was actually a heated argument between my friends and i some time ago about girls putting on makeup. Well, girls think that they are making up to make themselves beautiful (of course!) and at the same time make their bfs feel proud to have pretty gfs like themselves. Little do they know that behind their backs, there are some guys who actually think that girls shouldn't be putting on make up at all. One guy friend of mine actually commented that girls look prettier without makeup and he hates most when chicks slap on thick foundation to cover pores on their faces. But hold on, will the girls be better off if they walk on the street with big pores shown? It is really a hard question to answer!

Before I comment further on what I think, let's see the comparison.

Go for makeup:

Pros	Cons
Most women look better with makeup	There are some too who look worse due to the wrong technique used
Applying makeup is a courtesy. It’s like dressing up to meet somebody else. You just want to give a good impression.	Instead of a good impression, you can make it worse, for instance, exaggerated make up will make oneself looks cheap*(sorry for the crude word)
Make up is a necessity. One cannot go out and show others the big pores!	In fact, cheap makeup foundation is reported to block pores and make pores look worse.
All celebrities apply make up	Make up makes them look good under the bright spotlight. If you see them in person, you might not think that they look too good.
It’s cheap to makeup	Not true at all. There is a big range of prices for cosmetic products. The cheap ones are really damn cheap but do you dare to risk your face for it?
You can look natural with makeup (thin foundation with skin colour eyes shadow and etc)	Without makeup is natural
Make up makes you feel good about yourself.	If you are confident with your skin, you can feel good without makeup too!
Cosmetic products are safe	Some ingredients mainly used in cosmetic products cause side effects such as allergies, pores blockage and acnes. paraffin used in 10% of cosmetic products block pores and inhibit the natural function of skin Propylene Glycol (widely used as solvent) causes allergies

Anti-makeup:

Pros	Cons
Applying Makeup is a waste of time	If it can make you look like a star, who minds?
Makeup makes you look artificial	There are natural colour products out there
Women look exaggerated with makeup	Perhaps the reason why they put on makeup is only known when you see them without makeup!
Cosmetic products are expensive Amount Americans spent on eyebrow makeup in 2004 : $44 million Amount American women spent on lipstick in 2004: $389 million	Well, buying clothes is an exorbitant hobby too. Besides, if you look pretty, you might be able to end up with a rich bf who will buy you all the things you want wink
Most cosmetic products are non-biodegradable	Yeah..just like plastics. but we are still using plastic bags and other plastic products. Doesn’t it show enough that we don’t care about the environment?
Applying makeup is a skill to learn	Nowadays, the cosmetic product counters in shopping malls have promoters who will teach you step-by-step on how to apply each product that they sell.

Frankly, I'm on the fence with this issue. I think that applying makeup is not that bad but I am always too lazy. At times, applying makeup may be a good idea but you don't really need to do it everyday. What do you think? Is makeup a good human invention??

Sunday, August 13, 2006

Yes or No to blogging?

Alright, I hope today's issue is another interesting one. Many people have been blogging and I'm sure that you all have somehow read somebody's blog online. What do you think about the act of blogging?

Pros	Cons
You can express your feelings online. Blogging is just like writing a diary, you can write about what you have encountered in a day.	The main difference with a diary is that blogging is public. I suppose you cannot write whatever you want online. It tends to be quite superficial too if you only write what you want others to know.
You can write about your travel experience, knowledge or even new ideas to share with others	Most of the time, ppl are only interested to know what others are doing. It’s easier to look for general knowledge via google anyway.
It’s cheap and entertaining	Yup, it is definitely cheap with just the cost of using internet and electricity for the comp. But what about the time wasted in front of the computer?
It’s a healthy hobby (yup, rather than watching porn online)	Not totally healthy since it’s a sedentary hobby.
You can earn money through adsense (advertising on blogs)	Money is only generated if your visitors click on those banners (not really sure about how many clicks to earn money, but it’s not much for a normal site, I’m told). Besides, those advertisements flood your blog!
What is more fun than criticising ppl online with them not knowing even when they are reading your blog?	It’s another art of gossiping, I suppose. I have a friend who purposely says that there is a ‘girl’ that she hates and how much she hates her on her blog. Basically, unless you know what is going on, you wouldn’t be able to guess who’s that person a blogger is talking about.
Blogging is like writing articles online. You can write anything that you like and readers can decide whether or not they want to read.	Bloggers usually write as though they know everything but since it’s not edited, there are plenty of mistakes either in grammar or information provided. On top of that, some bloggers ‘syok sendiri’ by exaggerating in their blogs.(hmm…I feel as if I’m directing this to myself, hehe)

It's just funny that I am questioning what I am doing. Blogging is something that I had never thought of doing until recently that my friends have started blogging and I find their sites to be very interesting. Personally, I do not like writing anything private online because I feel it's as if spilling everything about yourself online and who knows who will be reading your blog. I used to feel that blogging is more about promoting yourself since you'll only write what you want the others to know. Little did I know that blogging can be writing about something general and of what you want to share with others. That's the true reason why I've started this blog entitled 'yes or no' to see how many ppl out there will actually agree with me on certain contradicting issues. Despite the comparisons, I must admit that I am always biased to one side of the argument. Hoping to give a slightly different touch to my own blog, I have added in a poll after every post to know about your views on the issue discussed. Besides, comments field is provided to gather your thoughts. Please do not hesitate to contact me if there's anything that you think I should improve on.

What do you think about blogging? Yes or No to blogging????

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Yes or No to a new accidental life?

Pro-life vs Pro-choice?

Pro-life :-

Pros	Cons
Every life has its own right to live. It’s a gift from God and therefore you should treasure life.	No con to this that I can think of. I truly agree that life is a miracle.
“You should be responsible of whatever you’ve done!”	That only applies to conception due to own actions. What about rape victims? Besides, accidents do happen! Did you know that the failure risk of condoms is 14%? About 14 out of 100 sexual intercourse will result in pregnancy!
Having abortion anytime you like will encourage killing lives	It depends on the definition of life: is it after conception, implantation, primitive streak or birth? Does abortion means killing a life to you? It’s truly subjective.
As a mother, it’s instinctive to love your child. You will regret killing your own flesh and blood.	There are many cases of child abuse out there. Not all mothers are the same. Who can be sure that forcing a mother to bear a child will provide the child a good future?
It’s not accidental; it’s your destiny. You are destined to have this baby.	Perhaps after the abortion, someone can turn the table around and say that it’s destined to be this way too?
Abortions are illegal in many countries such as Malaysia.	On the other hand, abortions are legal in countries such as UK.
Certain religions* banned abortions	No comments on this. It is definitely a teaching to follow but whether it’s practical or not, it’s a different issue. Since usually these religions prevent contraception as well, there is no way that one can plan his/her own family.

Pro-choice :-

Pros	Cons
It’s your choice to have a baby when you are prepared for it	Working mothers will wait and wait. It increases the risk of having down syndrome babies when a mother reaches the age of 40 and above.
It’s justified to abort when you do not want the baby.	It’s not like shopping that you can return or throw away things that you don’t like after purchasing.
It’s hard to be a single-parent	Abortions encourages one-night-stands. It’s funny that ppl nowadays do not know that there is contraception out there.
“Accidents do happen, but we cannot allow it to continue”	Have ppl heard of morning-after pills? Also, don’t these ppl learn from mistakes? Why do they undergo multiple abortions?
Abortions are safe in the modern age of science and technology	Repeated abortions will cause scarring in the uterus (Asherman’s syndrome) and can lead to miscarriage and infertility in the future.
Abortion allows family planning. It’s practiced in China, which encourages its citizen to have only one child. Singapore used to practise it too by allowing 2 in a family.	If it’s the law, then the law is forcing a family to have a limited number of children. It’s not a matter of choice anymore. Besides, the reason why Singapore has lifted that law is because the country is now facing the problem of low population. The funny thing is, they are now encouraging citizen to get married by having a matchmaking program called the SDU (Social Development Unit, and also joked to be the club for Single, Desperate and Ugly)

There are numerous discussions online pondering upon this topic, either you are a pro-life or a pro-choice person. Honestly, I am towards pro-choice because I think that everybody should be given a choice to decide whether or not to take the responsibility and if decided, therefore must carry out the role perfectly. There is no point of having a mother carrying a baby without a definite guarantee that she can take care of her child. Also, there is also a tendecy for child abuse too if for instance, the child is going to remind the mother of poignant memory, i.e. if the child is the baby of a rapist. I suppose that situations can differ and therefore the child-bearer should be given a choice and decide her own future.

But again, above is clearly an one-person's view. I have summarised the pros and cons of practising pro-life and pro-choice policies. Your comments are most welcome.

So, what say you??