Monday, August 14, 2017

The Best and the Worst in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.

One of the things that you have to give the Trump Administration credit for is finding new lows. Just when you thought the administration could not get any more immoral and incompetent, they find a way to prove you spectacularly wrong.

During the weekend, far right protesters descended onto the town of Charlottesville in Virginia to protest the removal of a statue of General Robert E. Lee, the Confederate General who lead the Southern States to battle during the American Civil War. The protesters were met with counter protesters and violence erupted. People were killed and America finds itself at a bitterly divided point.

This event has been something of an eye opener and for me, it was an incident that brought out the worst and the best of what I’ve called “White America.” I stress the point about “White America” because the largest ethnic groups in the USA are of European ancestry and we have to acknowledge that this remains the ethnic group that holds the largest influence in what goes on in the USA and by extension the rest of the world. America remains the country that sets the tone for the rest of the world.

Let’s remember that we had hope when America elected Barak Obama to the Presidency back in 2008. I know lifelong Republicans who actually said, “I am proud of the fact that his name is Barak Husain Obama.” The message was simple – after 200-years, America had lived up to its promise of being a beacon of hope for the rest of us – a place where the son of a Kenyan immigrant could rise to the highest office of the land. While President Obama didn’t fulfil every hope and dream, he did turn around an economy that was in its worst state in several decades and he did bring healthcare to millions who couldn’t afford it. He wasn’t liked by everyone else around the world but he did make an effort to bring peace to places like the Middle East by being “fair” – so fair that Binyamin Nethanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister was quite open about his dislike for Obama and here in Singapore, the powers that be decided to remind the public on several occasions that “change” was a foreign concept.

Things are different now. The son of an African Immigrant has now been replaced by the scion of a wealthy family that made its money on government projects. He inherited office by playing up to the worst in people, stroking their fears and attacking anyone who wasn’t part his version of the main stream. Somehow, he made the obvious character flaws (inability to be pleasant, competent, brave, truthful) into things that the ordinary people could relate to (it still astounds me whenever people tell me that Trump tells it like it is when he’s openly collecting money for charity and then using the money to enrich himself.)

You could say that the events that took place in Charlottesville was the chance for Mr. Trump to prove to the world that he was more than the narcistic clown who had conned the American people. Instead, of choosing leadership and being as tough as he had sounded on North Korean missile threats, he decided to take the easy way out by condemning the hatred on “so many sides,” and then said somethings about how “ideally, we should love each other.”

It didn’t help that David Duke, the leader of the Ku Klux Klan, an organization that was founded on the premise of destroying black people, happily got plenty of air-time telling the world that he and his ilk got Donald Trump elected. More on Mr. Duke’s positions can be found at -

To put it crudely, Mr. Duke had chosen to commit an act of domestic terrorism and he had gotten away with it and even got the type of air time that the likes of Osama Bin Ladin could only have hoped for. The clan members, Nazis and other pleasant people at the protest took their chances to attack anyone who was of a different skin colour, Jews and even members of the clergy (which is ironic considering many of these groups consider themselves Christian. An example of the violence can be found at:


This was perhaps the worst in “White America.” The question of how this group of people who once claimed to have “saved the world from Nazis” be the actual Nazis themselves.

Having said that, there were great moments that were inspiring and saw the best of humanity come out. Let’s start with the most obvious – political leadership. If Trump didn’t have the courage to call out the worst in humanity, Governor Terry McAuliffe showed plenty of it when he told the “alt-right “ that their racism had no place and they were neither patriotic or American. This is what Donald Trump in a higher office should have said. The Governor did what a President should have done – told the world that there was no place for bigotry in a nation founded on the premise of giving everyone opportunity.

More of Governor McAuliffe’s speech can be found at:

What was especially encouraging was to hear a lifelong Republican, who served under George W Bush (a President I loathed for his policies in the Middle East) denouncing the “alt-right” supporters and advisors of Mr. Trump for being unAmerican -you can hear his disgust at sight of the KKK and its ilk at

While White America was on the side of the devils, it was also on the side of the angels. The woman who gave her life was called Heather Heyer, a White American who chose to stand up to bullies and to fight for the victims. More on Ms. Heyer can be found at

I am emotionally involved in this. While I haven’t been to America in nearly half a decade and I don’t really do much with America in my daily life, America is the nation that gave me two great blessings – my stepdad Lee and his family and my step mum, Nora and her family. These are the families from “White America” that accepted me and took me for who I am. They helped to nurture me into the person that I am today. I like to believe that America, for all its faults, is a land of decent people who accepted people from around the world as one of their own (I do make the point that it’s the part of America that accepted people from around the world as their own that prospered).

The families from “White America” that touched me are the ones that remind me that Americans are intrinsically a decent people and it’s hard to look the KKK ilk and think of them as being “Americans.” I don’t recognize them as American and yet I have to acknowledge that they are sitting in America.

I can only pray that this Nation of Decent people triumphs over the likes of David Duke and condemns them to the dustbins of history quickly. 

Monday, August 07, 2017

What’s Next for Singapore?

Since National Day is only two-days ahead, I thought I would try and bash out a few thoughts on a topic which should be on the minds of every right-thinking Singaporean – namely, what is it that we want our little nation to be?

Image result for national day 2017
I’ve somehow avoided this topic for the last 12-years because, for all my complaints about Singapore, it’s been pretty much the “Celestial Kingdom.” I never tire of saying this but Singapore is pretty much what a city should be – rich, green and clean. Our crime rates are low and as long as you’re reasonably intelligent, you can get by. It’s been as if we got one formula right at the start and everyone after that just needed to follow the proven script. If you don’t believe me, just ask yourself – “When was the last time you heard the Singapore Government come out with a vision for the nation?” There’s plenty of talk about how to grow the economy but we haven’t exactly heard anyone talk about what they want for the nation.

I can say with all honesty that I’ve never thought much of the question of what I want Singapore to be. Like my fellow citizens, I’ve merely been following the path of just making a living and avoiding getting into any trouble. However, now that fatherhood to a teenager has become part of my life, the question has suddenly become important and why shouldn’t it – this is, after all, the ONLY country that I have an obligation to die for.

I guess we should start with what I hope never changes, which is for Singapore to remain a safe little red dot that remains open to the world.
Safety is something I never fully appreciated until I became a father of a teenage girl. I’ve lived in London, which is generally pretty safe and I’ve visited big American cities like New York and Chicago. While I’ve never experienced anything really nasty, there are parts of those cities that I wouldn’t walk in. I remember getting lost in “California Avenue” in Chicago with a best friend of mine who was driving a sports car. We were running low on gas but we drove on till we got the hell out of there – the local residents didn’t exactly look like they were going to let us keep the car if we got out.

You don’t get that feeling even in Singapore’s neighbourhoods. I remember a US Navy boy asking me if Geylang was our worst neighbourhood and when I replied that it was, he invited me to the States to show me what a bad neighbourhood was.

Image result for Geylang
This is officially a bad neighbourhood in Singapore

I hope that aspect of Singapore remains in perpetuity. I can live with a slowing economy but I don’t want to live in a place where I worry for my safety or more importantly not being able to sleep because I’m worried that my little girl hasn’t come home yet. One of my favourite Englishmen tells people, “Singapore is the freest place in the world – the safety it provides makes me feel free.”
I also want Singapore to be a place where we continue to accept people from all over the world. I love the fact that we remain a place where you see people of various shades walking around and having fun together. 

I love the fact that I can walk around and find a mosque, church and a temple side by side and worshipers popping into each other’s place of worship for a friendly nod to the divine. To my mind, God is everywhere and nothing is Godlier that human beings acknowledging him in all his various forms. I pray that we will remain the place where a Hindu temple is crowded with Taoist devotees worshiping the Hindu Gods outside. This is the way it should be. I want Singapore to always be the place where a Buddhist can enter a church and a Christian family will observe Hindu rights and Muslims celebrate Christmas.

Image may contain: 1 person
The Way it Should Be.

What would I change about Singapore? One of my biggest frustrations with life in Singapore lies in the fact that the minds of people tend to be preconditioned to look at the world in a certain way. Admittedly, it’s something that you could say about any other part of the world but I guess, since I live in Singapore I feel it the most here.

One of the most prominent examples of this “preconditioning” comes in the area of race. For all our talk about being a “multi-racial” society, we are shockingly racist. I go back to my favourite Englishman who tells me that when his son when to apply for a job at F1, it was quite noticeable that anyone who was white or yellow ended up as an usher while anyone who happened to be brown or black ended up on cleaning duty. I’ve refused to take up certain positions because what I was being offered was significantly lower than my predecessors and my colleagues have defended the discrepancy in what was being offered because the other person was of a lighter shade.

The other area that frustrates me about Singapore is that it can be an unforgiving place for people who don’t follow the prescribed cast system. I speak as someone who never had a conventional career path of going into the government or the government and decided to do his or her own thing. My own people could never look beyond the fact that I never took the position that New York or London were essential to global prosperity. For me, it was the companies from places like Dhaman (Saudi) or Chennai (India), that gave me a chance and I guess you could say I’m biased but I’m willing to give people outside the established order a chance because they gave me a chance.

It's like this, I applaud the fact that we welcome people from the third world to work here. However, if those people from the third world become uppity and try and go beyond the menial job we gave them, we don’t like it.

We need to be the place where second acts are celebrated. On my Facebook page, I’ve linked up with a few of the girls who worked at the bar that I drink at. They’ve gone back to the Philippines and reinvented themselves as online entrepreneurs. They came here with not very much and gone back as entrepreneurs.

Image may contain: 1 person
An example of the Capitalist Success Story of a Girl with Hunger

While I celebrate their success, I ask myself, why can’t we encourage them to start their second act in life here?

As well as celebrating the success of migrants, we should also be the place that encourages second acts amongst our mid-career professionals. We succeeded by producing the people who could work in one job and at one thing. So, as the world becomes more fluid, we should now focus on being the place where second acts take place and succeed. Would Ray Kroc, a milkshake mixer sales man at the age of 60 plus or Colonel Harland Sanders a washed out cook in his 60s get their second acts as restaurant owners in Singapore. The answer should be – why not.

Majullah Singapura. 

Friday, July 28, 2017

Put Faith in Science

I was delighted to read “Marmite may be brain food: Study” (5 April 2017) because the article brought home an important point about how we approach many of the issues – letting the science speak for itself.
 Image result for Brain food
Marmite, like many things in life is more than just an item that we eat. It is something that defines us in an emotional manner. You either love marmite or you loath it. Both sides have plenty of reasons to support their arguments and somehow, if one speaks to one side about the other’s argument, they will inevitably ignore the points that the other side is trying to make. Thankfully, in this instance, the science has been allowed to speak for itself – it has now been established that marmite will not harm you and may even be good for you. This fact won’t change the mind of those who loath marmite but it will allow people who enjoy marmite to do so without government interference.

Unfortunately, letting the science speak for itself is not an approach that applies to everything. Take the example of alcohol and cigarette consumption. Everyone agrees that alcohol and tobacco consumption are bad for you is bad for you and nobody complains when governments raise taxes of alcohol and tobacco and places restrictions on their consumption. Yet, despite all of the efforts to curb alcohol and tobacco consumption, those who love to smoke and drink continue to do so.
 Image result for Heavy Booze
Surely the approach to alcohol and tobacco consumption is to “create” science to find a way that allows those who enjoy alcohol and tobacco consumption to continue to do so in a way that minimizes harm to the user and eliminates harm to innocent bystanders. If we can send people to the moon, surely, we can find a way for people to drink and enjoy the pleasures of drinking without the risk of them becoming a danger if they get behind the wheels of car. If we can get people to live underwater, surely, we can find a way for people to smoke without putting the rest of us at risk?
 Related image
As much as the tobacco companies are unlikeable, they’re trying to come up with ways that that smokers can smoke without damaging the rest of us. Unfortunately, few governments around the world are trying to encourage the tobacco companies create science. Smoking remains an emotional issue guided by emotional responses.

There are, however, encouraging signs. New Zealand recently allowed the use of e-cigarettes in effort cut smoking rates and respected international bodies like the Royal College of Physicians in the UK have argued that science points out that this is the way to go.

One might argue that the science is not conclusive. However, instead of doing the draconian thing, surely the thing to do is to encourage all sides to create more science until there’s a clear direction. Both the tobacco and alcohol companies have made millions selling harm. Surely, its time they returned the money though investment in science and research to create better paying jobs for the rest of us.

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Beauty is the Mouth of the Complainer

I got to admit it, I am total cad when it comes to beauty contest – I love watching them. As a heterosexual man, I like looking at women walking around in not very much. Then, there’s the anthropologist, sociologist in me, which enjoys something more – the reaction of the public towards these contests and what it says about them.

Beauty contest evoke a host of emotions in people. You have the brigade that hates them, arguing that beauty contest degrades women to the lowest common denominator (Let’s not forget that the Miss Universe Pageant was once owned by Donald Trump). Then you have the extreme end, the societies that take pride in them. Venezuela, for example takes so much pride in the fact that it has produced more “Miss Universes” than anyone else and has established a school just train girls to get through the pageant.

While I do admit that Beauty Contest are shallow and superficial, I believe that they have their uses. Just as sports has been used to raise boys from the streets into well to do heroes, beauty contest can do the same for girls. Conservative India for example, celebrates the various Miss’s by turning them into Bollywood starlets. As well as producing a great number of pageant winners, Venezuela produced the woman who won the grown and gave the world a first-hand account of what the soon to be US President is

While places like Venezuela and India use the pageant to get its girls onto better things, we in Singapore do something entirely different. No, we don’t attach the pageant for being a sexist relic. We merely set up the girls who enter the contest for a royal roasting. Where one would expect men to have sympathy for women who willingly parade in swimsuits, here in Singapore …..well just read the comments in the  following links:

Sure, I understand that we’re a society that doesn’t value the beauty pageant winner the way Venezuela does. I can understand that we’re a more conservative society where the girls considered “beautiful” don’t enter beauty pageants (once again, I don’t think Singapore can claim to be more conservative than India). – But do we really have to take so much delight in being so mean.

Sure, some of our beauty queens deserve the roasting they get. I think of Miss Ris Low, the 2009 winner of Miss World Singapore, who proceeded to give a lesson in how to turn people off while possessing a decent body in a bikini by giving an interview on internet TV ( and then getting caught shoplifting and committing credit card fraud.

Now, Miss. Low is back. She no longer looks like this:

Image result for Ris Low

She now looks like: 

Image result for Ris Low

However, she’s learnt how to speak properly ( and somehow she’s managed to use her infamy to propel herself into different things.

While Ms. Low deserved her online roasting, many of our other beauty queens have been decent representatives of the country and projected a respectable image of what a beautiful Singaporean woman should look like. I was particularly fond of Nuraliza Osman, our 2002 winner, who happens to be a senior legal counsel at Shell. Another beauty that comes to mind Eunice Olsen, who became a nominated member of parliament (a job I would love to have). I’ve also had the privilege of meeting with Dr. Cheryl Tay, who was the 2005 winner and a vet (brains and a good heart – girl who loves animals).

What makes girls like these join the pageant? Surely you can’t say any of these ladies are lacking in the brain department nor can you say that they were coerced into the joining the pageant.

Which leads to the main point here – we may like beauty pageants for being shallow and superficial but we don’t have to mean spirited about the girls who enter the pageants. We should accept that a woman has the right to define beauty in her own way and we should celebrate that women with brains have the conscious choice to enjoy these pageants.

As for the guys who are complaining about the girls in the competition – I’m reminded of what my favourite flesh ball once said – “Eh, you think you very handsome ah!”  

Thursday, July 06, 2017

What is the Purpose of 377A?

I couldn’t agree more with writer of “Repeal of 377A won’t automatically change people’s minds” (Today Newspaper 21 March 2017). The writer has rightfully argued that it takes time to achieve a change in social attitudes than it does a change in legal statutes. Repealing 377A won’t make the general public any more accepting of homosexuality overnight.

What the writer and other writers did not address is the question of who does 377A protect. Why do we insist on criminalizing a particular sexual act when we have legitimized almost every other sexual act?

If one looks at laws governing sexual activity, one will notice that the key word is consent. As long as both parties are deemed capable of consent to a sexual act it is legal. If one party is deemed unable to give consent it is not. Rape is not legal because one party did not consent - a inconvenient fact that Professor Thio Li-Ann failed to take into consideration in her infamous 2007 speech to parliament when she urged Singapore's MP's to "Reject the argument of consent" citing it as morally bankrupt. I'm surprised that nobody has called the good professor out on this fact.  

The other area that governs most sexual acts is the question of where they take place. A sexual act in public is a criminal offense because it disturbs the public while an act in the bedroom does not.

So, given these two general facts, why is 377A on the statute books? Who does this law serve? In her 2007 speech, Professor Thio Li-Ann argued that keeping 377A served to protect the national interest. However, Professor Thio did not provide conclusive evidence of how the law protected the national interest.

Take, for example, the most obvious – public health and safety. It can be argued that participating in anal sex increases the risk of catching HIV/AIDS. However, while this may be the case, why is it legal for a heterosexual couple to engage in anal sex while it is not for homosexuals. Are we to say that the law is in favour of protecting homosexuals and not heterosexuals from the possibilities of catching sexually transmitted diseases?

Professor Thio did argue that homosexuals tend to live more promiscuous lifestyles, hence it was in the public interest to keep 377A. While 377A criminalises the act of anal sex between men, it does not criminalise promiscuity. Unless Professor Thio is able to provide scientific evidence linking the act of anal sex between men and promiscuous behavior, it’s hard to see how the act protects anyone in this respect. Furthermore, the Ministry of Health’s statistics would on HIV infections have shown that HIV/AIDS has long since ceased to be a homosexual disease.

There is an argument that people disapprove of homosexual behavior. However, once again there is no evidence to suggest that people believe that something they disapprove of should be illegal.

The topic of 377A creates many passions. However, nobody seems to have asked who the law protects. It would be in the national interest to have an evidence based explanation. 

Thursday, June 22, 2017

The Best School I Went to

My Dad is going to shoot me for blogging this but I’m going to state that the single best school that I attended was School of Infantry Specialist or SISPEC as it was commonly known (SISPEC has since been rebranded as SCS or Specialist Cadet School). This is the school that dad didn’t have to pay king’s ransom for and it wasn’t the school that gave me the prestige of being a “Graduate from England.” It was the school that prepared me best for life.

It’s not to say that I didn’t value my time at Churcher’s College or Goldsmith’s College (In Arty Circles, the Great Art School of the University of London.) Goldsmith’s was great or should I say, it gave me the great experience of living in one of the greatest cities in human history – “The London Experience.” I also have great affection for Churcher’s College, a place where I have many happy memories and where I made some of my best friends.

While Churcher’s and Goldsmith’s were great for the academic training and prestige value, they didn’t quite expose me to the life that I was to have. While Churcher’s was by no means a major league public school, those of us who attended all came from a similar socio-economic background and we were basically a group of nice kids and it was understood that we would all be going to university. Goldsmith’s was like a bubble where you could hide from the realities of daily life.

SISPEC on the other hand was brutal. We all came from different socio-economic backgrounds and saw life from different sides of the road. My best friends included the Chinese speaking son of a fishmonger, who was raised by a single parent and the son of the plastic bag tycoon. Somehow, we had a find a way of gelling together.

SISPEC was supposed to train us how to “LEAD.” It was about getting guys who didn’t always feel like cooperating (or in some cases, thought fucking you up was a sport) and to add fuel to the fire, you had the superiors who weren’t exactly keen on making your life easier either. Somehow, between all of that, you had to find a way of getting things done.
One of my former officers described SAFTI OCS as the best leadership school in the East. Officers spend nearly a year learning how to lead. In the Singapore system, the NCO’s or “Specialist” as we’re known, are there for our “knowledge” of a particular topic. So, in a sense OCS might be a better leadership school than SISPEC.

However, being an officer is relatively simple in the sense that you’re part of management. Your job is to provide “leadership” and there are plenty of cooperative subordinates to do things for you. I remember reading a manual for NCO’s published by the American army, which tells a wonderful story. It involves a major, a few second lieutenants and a sergeant-major. The major asks the second lieutenants to put up a flag pole and the young officers spend hours trying to figure it out. After watching them struggle, the major offers to show them how to get it done. He turns to the sergeant-major and says, “Sargent-Major, please see that the flag pole is up by sun rise tomorrow.”
This story is the perfectly illustrates the difference between being part of the team that plans things and the team that has to execute things. As an NCO (or Specialist, as Singapore insist on calling them), your job is basically to get the basic unit to execute things. While you have some leadership authority, you are primarily the bridge between the boardroom and the shop floor. An officer has the advantage of a rank that says he’s entitled to lead. There is that distance between you and the men to say that you are the boss.

The NCO doesn’t always have that luxury. You have to be close to the men so that they feel compelled to do what you say but you also need to except orders.

In later life and having worked several industries (PR, advertising, insolvency, food and beverage and retail), I’ve noticed that the key skill is the ability to manage people.

One of the key problems with management is that it’s constantly presented as a top down thing. You are told that you manage when you can get your subordinates to do things. The thing that management schools generally fail to teach you is the need to manage up or “boss management.”

As an NCO in a military unit, you got to be able to command your specific unit but you also have to learn how to manage your bosses and believe me – you have plenty. In professional armies like the USA and UK, an NCO has to manage the men and very often his boss – the young officer, who in many cases is often young enough to be his son. Learning how to tell your boss he’s a total idiot in such a way that he understands and does something about it while still showing the proper deference is a skill. In corporate sector, the easy way out is to avoid telling your boss there’s a failing.  In the military, where you deal with lives in life-ending situations, it’s irresponsible not to acquire the skill.  

I’m not saying that SISPEC taught these skills perfectly but the experience made one aware of the need to acquire such skills.

In my current existence, I find myself learning to manage. I am essentially a bridge between various competing interests like bosses, clients, staff, colleagues, suppliers and so on. I don’t always do it perfectly, but the experience of going through SISPEC (nearly 30-years later) made life easier.
National Service wasn’t something I wanted to do. The job was forced upon me. However, when I look back, I’m grateful to the experience. It was wonderful preparation for later life.

Thursday, May 04, 2017

Boys - Let the Cougars Hunt You Down!

As the French election draws to a close, I thought I would drop a line on the topic of being with an older woman since there is a possibility that the next “first lady” of France is significantly older than her husband. I am, of course, talking about Emanuel Marcon, the current front runner who is married to a woman 24-years his senior and the woman who has given him seven step-grandchildren and the ripe old age of 39.

What’s interesting about this, is the fact that Mr. Marcon’s marriage to an older woman is the fact that it’s been positioned against the marriage of the 70-year old Mr. Trump to a much younger woman. Not even the most extreme “Trump Haters” have questioned the marriage of a 70-year old man to a 46-year old woman. Sure, there have been comments about Mrs. Trump’s propensity to plagiarize speeches or to sue people ruining her chances on cashing in on being First Lady, but nobody has questioned a woman marrying a man old enough to be her father. Mr. Trump is actually somewhat respected for having a woman with a “hot-bod” walking next to him in public. Having a significantly younger woman is probably one of the better things Mr. Trump has done – most men overlook his record of being a miserable failure of a husband because he’s snagged their “wank fantasy” (cool – we like electing old farts who get young babes) and most women have an “understand” Mrs. Trump for making an advantageous marriage.

By contrast, Mr. Marcon gets flack for marrying a woman significantly older woman. His sexuality is being questioned and quite a few people have wondered if he’s got a “mummy fixation” (would you trust a Mummy’s boy to run the country?). The fact that Mr. Marcon has been a loyal husband makes people question him even more. I think the person who summed it up best is a Finnish friend of mine who suggested that Prince Charles had a screw lose because “What type of man kicks out a beautiful blonde and replaces her with an old hag.”

Perhaps its nature. Men are supposed to be providers and a man is supposed to be at his most attractive when he’s at the peak of his earning/hunting powers. A young boy of 17 may be physically fitter than a 30-year old but hey, he’s just a boy. By contrast, nature says women are supposed to be fertile and nature is such that a 17-year old girl is fertile and desirable whereas a woman in her late thirties is less so, even if the 30-year old woman is better educated, more mature and earns her own keep. My late Uncle Richard went as far as to advise me, “Make sure your next wife is half your age – no point having a girlfriend unless she’s very young and there’s no such thing as a good-looking woman over 25.”

While I have come to accept that I may not be expressing pedophilic tendencies every time I look at a woman 12-years younger than me, I have a lot of sympathy for men who like older women. I was one of them and I have to thank two ladies who touched my life.

One of them is around 12-years older. We met when I had came back from England for military service.  I was 19 going on 20, while she was 32. The fact that she’s black was probably a bonus (Chinese guys and black chicks is something that really happen in Asia). The point is this, the relationship made me feel like I had something special on the rest of the guys. I was 19 and there was this worldly-wise woman who thought I had something special to offer the world and wasn’t afraid of letting me know.

The other is someone I met when I came back from university to serve an internship in Citibank Singapore. She’s 6-years older, Malaysian Chinese girl. She’s a beauty of the highest order, sweet and mild mannered yet strong. She’s worked most of her life and when she first approached me, I was thrilled. It really felt good that she had an interest in me and I saw her pretty much as everything a woman should be. My tag line with this particular lady is this – she turned an old nightmare of “settling down” in an HDB flat into a dream to work towards.

Neither relationship turned into anything concrete but I’m glad to say that I’m still a friend to both ladies, even if it’s mainly on Facebook.

Both of these ladies set a special tone for me. An older woman was the way to go. Sure, a younger one might be fresher to look at but if you’re looking at life-long commitment, you really want someone who will be like a good bottle of wine and gets better with time.
It’s like this, a younger girl may look prettier and fresher but young girls want to be adored. It’s easy to impress a young girl. Spend a bit of money on her, show her you can resemble whatever fantasy she may have and she’s yours. 

An older woman on the other hand, is more willing to accept you for who you actually are and somehow, when you have one in your life, you get driven to do things. To get an older woman to be interested in you is also more challenging because she’s been around. It’s easy for a woman to impress a man as long as she’s got tits and not obese.  It’s more challenging for a man to impress a woman into talking relationship, especially when the woman has seen more of the world.
Although I’m far away from my late teens and early thirties, I still take this view. Getting a worldly-wise woman to give you two looks is a challenge.

Hence, I hand it to Mr. Marcon. He met the Mrs. When she was his teacher. He was a mere 15-year old boy and yet he managed to find something to impress a decent looking woman, who had everything a woman could want. She actually gave up her life to be with him (and that’s with parents warning her to stay away until he was 18).

What I’ve said about an older woman having the ability to drive a younger man is very true for the Marcons. Prior to running for President, he was actually a minister and before that, he had a very successful career at Rothschilds. He’s actually credited her as the reason for his success.

By contrast, the Trump marriage is boringly obvious. When the current Mrs. meet Mr., Trump had been an established brand name for decades. The signs of luxury and luxurious living were all there. On his part, she had a nice pair of tits. There’s nothing to suggest that either of them have created something more an interesting than the old-fashioned trade off that women have made for the last thousand years – financial security for their bodies.

I used to be very proud that I would never have anything to do with a younger woman and for quite a few years, I actually stuck to that.

I’m a little less adamant about my no younger women rule. I was involved with an older woman who was a nightmare to hang around and expensively boring. I’m married to a younger woman who is level headed and very sharp.

Having said that, I still maintain that the best option is to go for a woman who wants to make you a better man, despite her age. Perhaps I’m the wrong person to give relationship advice but a man who can look beyond what makes his loins stir and goes for the woman who makes him special, is someone worthy of respect.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Did You Think the Devil Would Look like the Devil?

You got to hand it to Marine Le Pen but she stands out by looking good. Unlike Trump in the USA, you don’t find anyone talking about how she’s artificially enhanced herself (Orange Tan) nor does she exaggerate things about herself (think the hair of Trump or Geert Wilders in the Netherlands). Every shot of Ms. Le Pen is well thought out. She looks elegant and when she speaks, she is well spoken and on the surface sounds exceedingly reasonable. While Ms. Le Pen is past the age of being a “sex-bomb” she could easily pass off as someone you could consider growing old with.

Unfortunately, everything that I’ve just said is precisely what makes her perhaps the most dangerous of all the demagogues who have risen to prominence on the global political stage. While people like Mr. Trump in the USA or Geert Wilders in the Netherlands are larger than life characters who make outrageously outlandish statements about this and that, Ms. Le Pen is attractively normal and sane.

As much as I dislike Donald Trump, I give him credit for being able to stir passions and to get people talking. Some of my blog post have been Trump inspired and I’m not alone. While Mr. Trump may rile against the media, his very rise to the presidency has been exceedingly good for the media, especially the newspaper business, which has been facing something of a decline.

Mr. Trump had a genius for saying things that upset or emboldened people. If you consider the fact that we live in an age where people around the world are pissed off with the way things are, Mr. Trump managed to push all the right buttons by riling us up against the things we were pissed off by. I like to think of voting for Mr. Trump and his policies as going for a binge drink because you hard day. Dealing with Mr. Trump’s attempts to run the country is the hangover that you get from binge drinking.

To be fair to Mr. Trump, he is what he is. His message is vile and his delivery is just as bad as his message. You could call Mr. Trump a rabid dog that you bring home just to piss off the rest of the family. A rabid dog is obviously rabid and anyone who touches it without gloves is pretty much responsible for whatever happens to them.

Ms. Marine Le Pen is a different kettle of fish. If Mr. Trump is a rabid dog, Ms. Le Pen is the loveable pooch that you bring home because you think that she’s going to make the kids happy. Then, once you’ve brought her home, she attacks everyone who tries to visit you and pisses all over the furniture.

This is precisely something Ms. Le Pen has devoted her political life to doing. Her predecessor as President of the National Front, her father John-Marie Le Pen was one of Europe’s crazy racist politicians, who was right wing to the extreme and proudly racist (he once promised to deport France’s winning football team because they were of Arab and Negro decent).

Le Pen senior said outrageous things and he was a rabid dog. While he had an appeal to certain segments of society, the majority would never have voted for him because – well would you give the car keys to a rabid dog? The old man managed to stir strong emotions, while 22 percent of people in France had a favourable view of him, 63 percent had an unfavorable opinion of him. You’re talking about a man who was accused of torturing people during the Algerian Wars and was persecuted for assaulting someone (note – Mr. Le Pen actually got involved in the doing of awful things, unlike Mr. Trump who talks about it).

Mr. Le Pen had one fluke back in the 2002 Presidential Election, when he made it passed the first round, beating the Prime Minister Lionel Jospin. The French electorate quickly came to their senses and ensured that Jacques Chirac (Not known for being the most honest of politicians) had a crushing victory.

Ms. Le Pen understood that the harsh far-right policies of the National Front made them unvoteable and has devoted her life to “De-demonizing” the party. Today’s National Front is not the “anti-Semitic” talk shop that it used to be. The “softer” image of the National Front under Ms. Le Pen has made it vote-able. In the 2011-2012 Presidential Election, she managed to come in third behind Nicholas Sarkozy and Francoise Hollande and ended up with more votes than her father did in his best showing of the 2002 election.

Today, Ms. Le Pen enters the second round of the Presidential Election with a very realistic of becoming the next French President. In 2002, when her father made it past the first round, it was a sign that the election would go to Jacques Chirac. Today, Ms. Le Pen trails her rival by a mere two percent in the polls and given that her rival is an inexperienced outsider, her chances are realistic.
How did she do it? The English comedian John Oliver says, “She has dangerously normalized the National Front.” People who would never have voted for her father because they thought he was a crazy old man, have happily voted for her. In many ways, her father was easier. He was a devil that who looked like the devil – admitting anything positive about him was an endorsement of being a racist thug.

Ms. Le Pen is different and more dangerous. Papa Le Pen was obviously the worst in us and in rational moments, we would never want him around us in a bar let alone in the seat of power in one of the world’s biggest economies. His daughter by contrast has made it such that we find that thinking at worst is perfectly normal.

If you look and listen carefully to Ms. Le Pen, you’ll realise that her message is essentially the same – racist, protectionist and nasty. Yet, its packaged better. You’ll never catch Ms. Le Pen saying revolting things like the Holocaust is a “mere detail of history.” But she’ll convince you, a well-educated person, that it’s perfectly normal to hate black, brown and yellow people.

The other area where Ms. Le Pen presents a danger is the fact that she has a reasonable image of competence. Mr. Trump made his inexperience in politics an electable strength and glossed over his business failures. However, once in power, the Trump administration has proven to be spectacularly incoherent.

By contrast, Ms. Le Pen has succeeded in running her party and instead of citing mad ideologues like Steve Bannon as an inspiration, Ms. Le Pen has paid tribute to credible people like the late 1988 Nobel Laureate, Maurice Allais. It makes her less frightening to a rational person, which in turn should make her terrifying.

We live in an age of instants. We like instant food, instant gratification and instant information. On one hand, we should celebrate technology and the way it makes life easier. On the other, we should worry that life isn’t encouraging us to think and analyze. Anyone with a brain cell should be able to recognize the faults of a Donald Trump. His appeal may resonate with some. He may touch us at the right moment, when we’re feeling down. However, a right-thinking person will see that Trump’s message is essentially faulty and in many ways, morally wrong. He is an obvious snake oil salesman who sells by bringing out the worst in us.

Ms. Le Pen is more frightening because she isn’t obvious. Instead of getting us to do something for the heck of it, she slowly persuades us to think that out worst qualities are actually perfectly normal.  Whether she wins or loses this election, she has already done damage by making the worst instincts in any society normal and acceptable. I can only pray that the French electorate prove more sensible than the British and American ones and reject her at the polls. A racist thug in a pretty face is still a racist thug. 

Monday, March 20, 2017

The Christian Beast

Last Thursday the Evil Teen decided that she wanted to watch the premier of Beauty & The Beast, which was a Disney live adaptation of its famous animated classic.

The movie had a boost of popularity thanks to a round of protest by the National Council of Churches (NCC), who had protested the movie having a “Gay Moment.” I posted something to the effect that the obsession with “Gay Moments” and “Gay Agenda’s” was a sign that Singapore has a large population of repressed homosexuals who hate themselves for being gay and therefore become extremely homophobic. My comments drew a few laughs but offended a friend of mine who admitted to being an “ex-homosexual.”

With this bit of background in mind, I went to see movie and true enough, I actually noticed the “gay moment” when one of the characters seemed to have an unhealthy devotion of his more outgoing male friend.

While, this was probably a “Gay Moment” (which someone else told me I only noticed because I was psychologically conditioned to look out for it), no rational person can say that it “promoted” the “homosexual lifestyle.” If anything, it should have been the “sensitive” homosexuals protesting about the stereotyping of the “LGBT” community as being effeminate and a group deserving of ridicule.
What’s even more interesting about the movie was the fact that it was filled with what one can call good Christian values. The so called “Gay Moment” was such a minor part to a film that was the living embodiment of Christian teaching.

The premise of the story was simple. A handsome and wealthy prince who screwed his people would not give shelter and food to an old, ugly hag who offered the one thing she had – a rose. Feeding the poor and giving shelter to the needy is right at the heart of Christian teaching. Christ tells us the parable of the widow’s mite – saying that God valued a single coin donated by an old widow than the vast riches donated by the wealthy. The teaching is simple – God doesn’t value the absolute amount but what you give from your heart.

The Prince finds damnation when he’s turned into a Beast. It’s always winter wherever he is and his only companions are his possessions (the servants got turned into possessions). The moral of this story is obvious – wealth can be a curse if all you have are possessions. When you lack love, you realise that having a lot of things is meaningless.

In the end, there is redemption. The Beast becomes tender and learns to love when he meets our heroine, Bell. This feisty young girl is cowed by his hideous appearance and sacrifices herself so that her father can have his freedom. In the end the Beast accepts that part of loving someone is learning to let them go. He recognizes that he needs to let Bell go to her father when he sees how much it torments her that she’s not able to be with her father in his hour of need. He lets her go with the full knowledge that she may never come back to him and he’ll be damned to live out his days as a Beast and even more friendless than when he was before (the talking objects become inanimate ones if he’s damned to be live out his days as a beast).

What is more Christian than that? Doesn’t the Bible say, “Man hath no greater love than he who would lay down his life for his fellow man.” This is what the Beast risk when he lets her go. He has learnt to love something greater than himself.

Perhaps the only thing more Christian than learning to sacrifice for the one you love but showing love and mercy to someone who not only hates you, but tries to do you harm. He practically allows “Gaston” the show’s knave to murder him, until Bell comes back and he fights back. Then, at the point when he’s in the position to deliver Gaston’s just deserts, he shows mercy and allows him to live.

Again, Christ is very specific on this. In both the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, he tells people to “love your enemies as yourself,” to “bless those who curse you.” In that very moment of giving mercy to the man who would destroy him (Christ behavior), the Beast becomes more human than the entire village of people who followed Gaston on their quest to murder the Beast because ….well that’s what Gaston told them.

It’s funny how the National Council of Churches never wanted to talk about Christian values like mercy and love. Somehow an insignificant moment of what they deemed unnatural was more important than the overwhelming theme of giving undeserving love and mercy. How funny that Christ who said far more about sheltering the poor and blessing those who sought to do you harm was something that the churches didn’t want to talk about.

What a shame that our men of God don’t want to talk about love and compassion when these are central of God’s teachings. 

Friday, March 10, 2017

Killing the Golden Goose to Stay on the Yellow Brick Road

Whether you like him or loath him, you got to hand it to Donald Trump for his genius for creating great talking points. Whenever Mr. Trump’s fingers hover above the tweet button, the world’s journalist start to salivate. Mr. Trump has made “Old Media” sexy again. The “dying” newspaper has had a fresh lease of life and television is booming. By being “politically incorrect,” Mr. Trump manages to stir passions on a whole range of issues like sexism, racism, immigration, taxes and so on.

Despite the obvious signs of chaos and incompetence from the White House, Mr. Trump’s supporters continue to love him. In fairness to Mr. Trump, the reason is obvious, he’s trying to keep his promises. He’s actively tried to bully companies into keeping the old-fashioned manufacturing jobs in America and he’s actively removed bits and pieces of environmental legislation to get oil pipelines 
moving through whenever they were supposed to go to – damn the environmental consequences.

 Mr. Trump’s supporters are thankful to their man for trying to restore things to how they used to be.
Unfortunately, Mr. Trump’s supporters have forgotten one basic point in life – namely the fact that change is inevitable and industries will get disrupted. In each instance of disruption people get thrown out of work as old industries die but many more people get employed in better paying jobs as new industries take their place. Think of what happened when we moved to the motor car from the horse drawn carriage. People lost jobs as grooms, stage coach makers and so on but many more people got employed in car factories.

Anyone who is gone past primary school would realise that disruption and change are part of life. Businesses and people that acknowledge disruption have a way of hanging around and thriving for a very long time.

I think of my own little nation of Singapore. We were built by a leader who was able to handle disruption. Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, our founding Prime Minister, started out as a loyal colonial subject. He took pride in the fact that he didn’t speak Chinese and spoke English of the English as opposed to this bastardised thing called Singlish. Mr. Lee was educated in the finest of English schools and was destined to be a glorious and grateful servant of the colonial master. However, he grew up in a time when people of colour didn’t want to be ruled by the colonial power and, more importantly, Mr. Lee quickly found out that it was not his people, the prim and proper English educated that moved things. It was the rough and ready Chinese speaking that caused revolutions. What did Mr. Lee do? He and his band learnt how to speak Mandarin and Hokkien, the language of the streets in a mere 6-months. Harry Lee became Lee Kuan Yew and the rest is history. Mr. Lee didn’t fight disruption – where possible, he tried to anticipate and prepare for it. He went into China, anticipating China’s rise and he even checked his own emails until his final days.

Singapore has thrived because we had a leader who understood that disruption was a fact of life. There are other examples.

The two examples that come to mind are Shell, one of the largest oil companies in the world and Phillip Morris International, the largest cigarette company in the world Both Shell and Phillip Morris are global giants. Both are leaders in their fields, which contain vast pools of money. While oil prices took a tumble in 2014, “big oil” remains just that – “Big.” The same for Phillip Morris. The tobacco industry remains buoyant despite the vast taxes levied against cigarettes and the various limitations placed on the industry anytime soon.

Nobody would imagine oil or cigarettes going out of business anytime soon. Yet, Shell isn’t sitting in a shell. If anything, Shell has decided to prepare for the future. On 15 May 2015. Shell announced that it was setting up a “Green Energy Division” to invest in low carbon and renewable energies like wind. Nobody imagines oil going out of business anytime within the decade. Yet, here you have one of the major oil companies, a company that has a turn over comparable with the GDP of many countries, setting up a business that many imagine to be the antithesis of its core business.

Phillip Morris has also done something similar. In its newly relaunched website, the world’s largest tobacco company declares, “Designing a smoke-free future” and asks the provocative question of “How long will the world’s leading cigarette business be in the cigarette business?” The world’s largest cigarette company, which owns the top brands in its market, has decided to find ways to kill its golden goose to create its future.

Both international giants are trying to behave like the start-ups of Silicon Valley. How successful will they be? What Shell puts into its renewable energy business is still a drop in the ocean in its overall turnover. The cynics, which include many government officials, remain skeptical about Phillip Morris’s claim that is researching ways to make its products less harmful.

However, the fact that the international giants are trying to anticipate and prepare for disruption to their very core industries is a sign that they want to continue thriving for a very long time. Shell wants to prove they can be a player without oil. Phillip Morris is promoting a future where is doesn’t need its golden goose.

Giants take a long time to adapt because the need to do so doesn’t happen until it’s too late. However, here you have an example of two giants trying to disrupt themselves before the forces of economics do it for them. These are giants that have the foresight to acknowledge reality and prepare for it.
If huge corporate giants with huge bureaucracies can make the effort to anticipate the end of the golden goose, surely someone on an individual scale should be able to do the same. Focusing and preparing for a future without your golden goose is surely a better activity than listening to the likes of Mr. Trump and their promises of restoring a past that wasn’t quite there.

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

American Incompetence May be Good for the World

I’ve decided that I am going to attempt to be nice about the new US President for a change. No, I haven’t become a rabid dog of the Republican Party’s worst aspects but I think its high time that I sit back and try and say something nice about a public figure I can’t stand.

Mr. Trump has shown that he has a talent for bringing out the worst in people. He campaigned on platform of racism, homophobia, sexism and hypocrisy. While he indulged in calling every one of his opponents “corrupt,” he himself was indulging in practices that would make his opponents looks saintly (think about it, the Clinton Foundation isn’t perfect but at least some of the money goes to causes – the Trump Foundation raises money for the good cause of buying more portraits of Mr. Trump to be placed in properties owned by Mr. Trump.) Once in office, Mr. Trump has not disappointed those who despise him and those who loved him.

 In a Presidency, less than a week old, he’s already picked fights with the media over the size of the crowds at his inauguration, made moves to criminalise abortion and to increase trade protectionism by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP.

Coming from a small trading nation in the Asia-Pacific region, Mr. Trump’s speed in killing the TPP has been viewed a major worry. We, the small Asia-Pacific nations are terrified at the implications. We grew our economies on American investment. Our prosperity for the most part depends on the willingness of the American consumer to buy the goods made in our part of the world. Suddenly, Mr. Trump has thrown a spanner in the works. What do we do?

While the prospect of a more protectionist America may seem gloomy, the rest of the world actually has an important opportunity to do something very important – develop independence. In just about every way, America has been the “vital” nation that underpinned everybody’s social and economic well-being. America was not only the crucial market for many companies, it was also the “policeman” of the world, ensuring that neighborhoods stayed safe. US troops have kept the ASEAN region stable and Singapore, my home remains a safe and prosperous haven for the world to do business and prosper because of it.

So, without America or American involvement in world affairs, what can the rest of us do? I believe the answer would probably be to increase trade and cooperation with other people. The Chinese for one have relished Mr. Trump’s rants about protecting America from the forces of globalization. While Mr. Trump ranted on about the size of the crowds at his inauguration, China’s President Xi Jinping was making the right noises about avoiding a trade war (nobody wins) and how globalization for all its faults has in actual fact been a force of good to the world’s most prominent investors at Davos. The comparison could not be more stark. Mr. Trump looked like a petulant child begging to the smacked while President Xi looked like a statesman.

There’s no doubt that China is a “must-be” in market for businesses around the world. It’s not just the number of consumers in China but their spending power is increasing. One only needs to look at where luxury items are being sold these days to understand the power of the Chinese consumer.

However, as many of us in the small Asian nations can testify to, the increasingly powerful China plays by its own rules. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Seas ruled against China and in favor of the Philippines. The Filipino’s found that their victory was hollow – nobody was going to enforce it on China. More recently, Singapore learnt the same lesson – we sent military vehicles from Taiwan via Hong Kong and hey presto, the said vehicles got held up in Hong Kong customs.  The Chinese hadn’t forgotten how our Prime Minister decided to crack jokes about the pollution in Beijing to an American audience. We trumpeted our “legal” rights over the terrex vehicles and the Chinese gave us the middle finger.

The realities of big power politics will become starker. The Americans like the British before them made a pretense of playing by some sort of rules. The Chinese have shown that the only laws that matter are the jungle variety. Think of what happens in the jungle when the elephants decide they’re going to throw their weight around – there’s not much anyone else can do.

The world will need to accept China’s rise and adapt to it. The most sensible way would be to trade heavily with China and to offer the Chinese the things they don’t have (clean air would be a good start), but to look for and build up alternative markets.

In Asia, the most sensible alternative would be to build up India. The Bloomberg Columnist, Andy Mukherjee argues that Japan should use its technology and wealth to invest in India – something that seems to be possible given the close ties between Narendra Modi and Shinzo Abe.

However, as many business people can attest to, dealing in the India market makes dealing with the Chinese look like a walk in the park.

Still, this is something that needs to be done. The admittedly few parts of India that work, work exceedingly well and what sensible business person does not want to be in two-billion consumer markets.

Asians, Africans and even Europeans need to understand that dependence on one particular market is no longer enough. China and India are two exciting possibilities but there are others. Eastern Europe and Latin America come to mind as do places like the Middle East.
Aside from trade, America has also been the source or the inspiration of ideas and innovation. First it was manufacturing, then it was in IT. America comes up with the revolutionary ideas and the rest of the world eventually gets a share of the pie by trying to do it cheaper. This has especially been true in Asia where we’ve prospered by taking American ideas and doing them cheaper – Chinese manufacturing and Indian IT come to mind.

With Mr. Trump actively making America more isolationist, the world can no longer depend on America as the hot bed of revolutionary ideas. Innovation must come from within the various countries of the world. It’s time to build up our people at home and at world class levels.

I remember explaining the Singapore Scholarship system to an Englishman. He said that he was surprised that we sent our best to the West instead of building up our own institutions to challenge the West. Well, I guess it was easier and quicker to send someone to Cambridge in those days than to build Cambridge or Harvard, but now thanks to Mr. Trump, we need to build our Cambridge’s here.

There are some encouraging signs. Pollution in China is pushing China to do more to move away from heavy manufacturing. In fact, China’s wealth is increasingly being built Silicon Valley style – While the State Own Companies have the size, its companies like Xiaome and Alibaba that excite the world. Chinese innovations like WeChat may have yet to reach beyond the China but as the Economist pointed out, they are beating the likes to Uber and WhatApp in the products and services that they offer.

The smaller Indian Companies are also recognizing that doing things cheaper than the West will not be enough to ensure their survivability. I remember 3i-Infotech and Polaris stressed that they were “product” companies (so much so that Polaris’s service business got sold off to Virtusa and the products remain under a Company called Intellect Design Arena). Raymond, who was my main supporter at Polaris explained it this way – “Services means we think like an IT guy helping make the certain functions for the banks cheaper – Products means we think like bankers and use IT to improve banking.”

The signs of hope are there but Asians, Africans, Arabs and so on, need to effectively grow up and fly the nest provided for by the All Powerful American parent. Mr. Trump has made it clear, he’s not interested in supporting the world. It’s time that the world took the bold step and tried to support itself.

Friday, January 13, 2017

Be like an Ape In Heels

In less than a week’s time, the world will see the end of the Obama Era and welcome the Trump Era, when Donald Trump is sworn in as the 45th President of the USA. Much has been said about the difference between the two men. The rabid right wing of American politics is celebrating the end of what they have termed the “worst” presidency in history, while the rest of us are left, perplexed by how the American public ended up voting for a man who found a genius in bringing out the worst in people.

Much has been said about the contrasting character of the two men and nothing better illustrates the contrast in character between the two than in their families. Even discounting the presidency, the Obama’s are exceedingly successful professionals (he was Professor of Constitutional Law and she was a partner in a law firm) with very quiet personal lives. The Trumps by contrast are exceedingly colourful. Donald is on his third marriage as is his first wife, Ivana.

You could say that my sympathies should be with the Trump’s. Most of my friends would describe my family as being colourful. My late theology teacher once told me, “Dear boy, you collect fathers like most people collect postage stamps.” He had a point. My mother is on husband number three. I’ve also collected mothers in a similar fashion, my dad got married two years ago to his third wife. My siblings and I have not escaped the “curse” of unusual relationships. I am on marriage number two (I am also on husband number two to my wife.) and my sister has a same-sex relationship. The only one of my siblings who seems to have something resembling a “normal” relationship, is my brother Max, who got engaged to his long-term girlfriend, over the Christmas holidays.

My family is a “patch-work” family and as my sister wisely said so many years ago, “I wouldn’t swop it for anything in the world.” Despite all the various breaks and reattaching of relationships, I like to think that all of us have turned out quite alright (My sister and I used to get very impatient whenever the excuse of he/she is from divorced parents so he/she behaves like this because we were from ‘broken’ homes and were nice). Likewise, you could say the same for Eric, Donald Junior and Ivanka. Despite the very public divorce of their parents, the three eldest Trump children look like normal guys who actually had to work for a living.

While, I should have every sympathy with the patchwork nature of the Trump family, I have one very serious objection to the Trump family – his choice in wife number three, Mrs. Melania Trump.
Let’s make it clear, I have no right to be judgmental about a person’s private life as my own is far from perfect. However, when that person becomes a public figure, like the President of the Most Powerful country in the world, then it’s a different story because that person’s life story becomes a story for everyone else to emulate.

On a very personal note, I’m all for being a lad. If the Donald at the age of 70 has the means of getting a much younger woman with the “assets” that all men seem to value in a woman to want to bed him, then I’d say good for him or I think – hey, when I’m 70 and a young girl wants to jump into my bed, I’d be very happy.

But as my mother reminded me this holiday, I’m not just me anymore. There’s a teenage girl, whom I have chosen to take responsibility for. The job of father is an interesting one in that it contains two elements. There’s the basic every day element of making sure there’s some food on the table. Then, there’s the element of what you want your child to be. It’s easy job when you are father of a son – you want the little bugger to be an improved version of yourself. When you’re a father to a girl, things become a little more complicated, because you want her to be better than you and probably to end up with someone not like you (especially if you happen to be a rascal.) You want to be able to look at her and tell her to be like so and so and not like so and so.

In the case of the Obama’s, there was an exceptional role model for what every woman should want to be in the First Lady, Michelle Obama.

Let’s start with the most commonly said thing about Mrs. Obama – were she not First Lady, she would be an exceedingly successful corporate lawyer in her own right. She is a graduate of Princeton University (not the easiest place to get into let alone graduate from) and Harvard Law School. By the time the young Barak Obama went to work for Sidley Austin, the sixth largest corporate law firm in America, as a Summer Associate, certain Michelle had become a full-time associate (guess who reported to who?). Mrs. Obama was also an Assistant Dean at the University of Chicago.
In the 8-years of the Obama Presidency, Mrs. Obama found herself become a champion of a variety of causes that people cared about without becoming obviously politically ambitious in the way that Hillary Clinton did. Michelle was the champion of this cause and that cause without shoving it down to the public that you were getting two for the price of one.

There were no scandals in the Obama White House. The President came back to his wife every night. Somehow, they made sure that the camera caught them giving each other loving glances. The woman also protected the family by doing what she could to keep the kids grounded – it seems Sasha Obama had to get a Summer job.

Let’s leave out the fact that Michelle always took care of her appearance. She never made it obvious to be the stuff of ones’ “wank fantasies.” Instead, she made it a point to be presentable and to ensure that any man would be proud to bring her out and present her to the people he cares about. In short, this is the woman who makes a man.

It’s easy to raise a daughter with Michelle Obama as First Lady. You can just say be like her – smart, beautiful and happy. She’s got enough in life to be with a man for the sake of love. She’s with Barak Obama because she wants to be with him not because he’s the source of her fortune.
Different story with the current Mrs. Trump. I have to confess, she is the stuff of “wank fantasies,” in as much as she’s good a well-endowed chest and a “come f** me look that appeals to men in a “wow, here’s an easy lay,” way.

But here’s the problem with fantasies, particularly “wank” ones – if there’s nothing beyond the “come f** me” looks, the reality is rather disappointing. I ask every male reader to think back to the time they’ve lost all interest (including doing the deed) with the girl you admired from afar, then got turned off when you finally spoke to her.

Apparently, the current Mrs. Trump worked as a model and there have been plenty of her half nude photos going around the place. During the campaign, Mr. Trump said that there was nothing to be ashamed about. He’s right, she looks nice on the covers of a “Man’s Magazine.”

However, her inability to come up with anything original to say during the presidential campaign leads one to ask – do you want her off the pages of the mens mags? It’s all very well to have a tart that the lads will be jealous of but there has to be more to the woman by your side when you are arguably the most powerful man in the democratic world. American elections are brutal on the spouses of presidential candidates because we want to know who the guy we’re trusting our lives to has as a bedrock of emotional and intellectual safety, not because we want to jack off over her. Nancy protected Ronald and took care of the finer touches in the White House, Both Michelle and Hillary were smart enough to challenge their husbands intellectually. Barbara and Laura Bush provided stable homes for the family. Hard to see Melania providing any of the above.

Perhaps Mrs. Trump does offer something to Mr. Trump that we’re not aware of. However, even that doesn’t seem likely. Mrs. Trump is not moving into the White House, while daughter Ivanka and husband are moving to DC. It’s most likely that Mr. Trump will use daughter as the woman by his side rather than wife, which really doesn’t say her much about the wife.

Now that Melania is going to be the First Lady, I suspect that father’s of teenage girls are going to be in for a tough time. Try telling her that going to school is important. Try telling her that its important to achieve things on her own? Why bother when all you have to do to ensure you have a lifestyle few could dream about is to look good enough to get onto the cover of a wank mag and hope that one of the reading wankers old enough to be your grandpa but with plenty of money will marry you. The main role model has done precisely that.

Thursday, January 05, 2017

The World’s Biggest Shopping Mall – Boring Sia….

The Evil Teen and I just returned from a holiday in Germany, where she got to meet her new grandma, auntie and uncle. It was her first experience of life in Europe and as things would have it, she ended up getting a bonus experience of the Middle East when we had a 20-hour layover in Dubai.
Personally, I like Dubai in as much as it’s as close as I’ve gotten to the Middle East region since I worked for the Saudi’s in 2006. I like hearing the sound of the Arabic language and there’s something special about seeing people wearing their traditional robes amongst the ultra-modernity of an airport. 

I don’t feel alien when I deal with the Middle East and dropping the various Arabic terms for the Almighty in everyday conversation come fairly naturally.  I believe that if anything decent is going to happen to me, it will probably involve the Middle East and Arabs (the group that will do me a good term is likely to be Indian).

You should say Dubai fits nicely into my world view. It’s easily the most “open” place in the Middle East. When I first went to Dubai in 1994 to visit my stepdad who was living there, everybody outside the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC consisting of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman) needed a visa if they were to move beyond the baggage claim in the airport. The GCC has remained fairly closed to the outside world. In 2006, the Saudi government even insisted that those traveling on United Nations passports had to apply for a visa before entering Saudi soil.

So, my first experience of the new Dubai on this recent trip was a wonderful change. Dubai has become the shinning exception of openness in a region known for being closed. They have a “smart gate” system, where people from certain countries (namely those countries that may produce tourist) may waltz in and out of the city as and when they feel like it. Thankfully, Singapore is on that list and so, instead of spending my day in the airport, I actually had the chance to visit Dubai properly. The immigration officer, who was a UAE National, was the friendliest one I’ve encountered – ever. So, much so that I believe that the USA needs to send its immigration officers to Dubai for training.

The day was spent in the Dubai Mall, which is attached to the Burj Khalifa. The Dubai Mall is probably an expression of Dubai’s ambitions. This four-story mall is the world’s largest by gross area, covering an area of some 500,000 square meters and doesn’t include the hotel complex next to it. There’s an ice rink and a four-story high aquarium that has proudly been named as an “underwater zoo.” Despite the various economic calamities, the Mall has seen a steady increase of visitors since it opened in 2009. The mall even has its own train station (I actually had to double check that the stop for the Dubai Mall was called – Dubai Mall.)

You could say that the Dubai Mall is a microcosm of Dubai itself, which is pretty much Singapore on steroids. I come from Singapore, which is practically a giant shopping mall of a nation and it’s got to say something when someone coming from Singapore is actually impressed by shopping mall.
If one takes the Dubai Mall as an extension of Dubai itself, you’ll end saluting the Al-Maktum family of Dubai for creating prosperity without oil in a region where oil is pretty much the only economic activity around.

How did they do it? Well, for a start, Dubai is exceedingly open to foreigners. If you hang around the Dubai Mall, you’ll realise that its exceedingly cosmopolitan. The work is done by Filipino’s and Indians with a sprinkling of Caucasians from the West. The customers come from all over the place. You’ll see Westerners mingling with Indians and Orientals in the shops. Apart from the men and women in Thobe and Abaya’s, the only sign that you’re in the Middle East are the odd announcements in Arabic and the call to prayer.

The Dubai Mall provides a home away from home for the well to do. Well to do visitors at the Burj and the adjoining hotel come to shop at the mall. Likewise, visitors at the mall can visit the Burj and stay in the hotel. Dubai as a nation tries to be pretty much the same to the neighborhood. Two of the largest investors are Saudis and Iranians, who also treat Dubai as the place to go to for fun or the things they can’t do at home.

The mall isn’t cheap either. I guess you could call it a case of prosperity breading prosperity. Well to do tourist and shoppers are supposed to spend money to keep the local economy ticking. Cheap back packers need to visit. I changed 70 Euros thinking I’d had more than enough and ended up worrying that I might end the day without – when I heard the price of a travel adaptor, the Evil Teen decided that we could do without charging our phones….

There’s much to like about the Dubai and the Dubai Mall. It’s capitalism at its best and everyone around the place is happy making money. You’re not going to get an Arab Spring in Dubai because as far as Dubai is concerned, it’s already summer.

And yet, I can’t get the feeling that there’s something lacking in Dubai in the same way that there’s something lacking in Singapore. I think of my first encounter with my former editor-in-chief, Mr. Khaleed Al-Maeena, who told me, “You in Singapore, stop being an ape to the West and start respecting your own culture.” I probably say those words were most apt when it comes to Dubai. Nearly every brand known to man is in Dubai. Short of starting an Islamist plot against the government, you can probably do pretty much what you want. Yet, and yet, I’m do ask myself – what is there especially unique to Dubai. I often ask the same question about Singapore.

In Singapore, the answer for most people is to head to the food court and to grab a prata or a plate of char kway teow – which are incidentally not unique to Singapore, you can get it in Malaysia too but these are things that remind you that there is perhaps something in Singapore that isn’t an imitation of somewhere else.

In Dubai, I didn’t get anything that was authentic to Dubai or the Arab world’s culture. There was a food court with plenty of burgers or fried chicken but I didn’t see “Kapsa Rice” or “hamoor” (fish unique to the Arab/Persian Gulf waters). One can only take so much of shopping and big brands (and that’s coming from someone who spent a good portion of his life building brands). In the words of the Evil Teen, after we couldn’t find a local version of the kway teow – “Borings – sia”

I understand the drive to modernity and I applaud places like Dubai, Hong Kong and Singapore for prospering in tough regions. These places have made it by being open to the world – you could say they true meritocracies.

Yet, there’s something missing when the drive to modernity comes at the expense of your own soul so to speak. Hong Kong has a special culture. Wan Chai is as much a part of Hong Kong as the Peak. I feel a sense of culture when I speak Cantonese to people from Hong Kong. Apart from street food, Singapore has that special version of English – Singlish.

To be fair, I didn’t have a chance to get to know Dubai the way I know Singapore and to a lesser extent, Hong Kong. So, I hope Dubai, in its hyper drive to modernity remembers that it needs to keep something of itself. The thobes and abayas are probably the greatest relief I see on the streets of Dubai – it’s a sign that people In Dubai and the rest of the Middle East keep their culture and show that their culture can exist alongside the “international” global order. Contrary to what Donald Trump will tell you, you can be unique and global at the same time.