Pornography

A stereotype way of looking at “pornography” would be that it has negative influence on the people that watch it and that it is extremely derogatory on women. Many schools tell their students to steer clear of pornographic material as it is very explicit and could be detrimental to their mental health and development. Many religions also tell their followers to avoid pornography at all costs. Many people condemn it and say that it insults and degrade women heavily and that women are portrayed as “slaves” for men in pornographic material. It also gives people the wrong idea that sex with anyone is okay. Pornography also trivializes rape. On top of that, they also state that it is “morally objectionable”. They degrade a person’s mind, giving them evil thoughts.

On the other hand, pornography is not entirely bad or negative. Most of the time, it is because of the stigma attached pornography that has caused many people to shun it. Furthermore, some people see it as a form of art. You can see many examples of porn art in many famous museums. A famous quote, “Pornography is human imagination in tense theatrical action” shows that artistic features of pornography. In addition, it also serves as a good replacement for people who are not able to enjoy sex because of a specific reason.

Now, I would like to touch on two issues: 1. The nature of pornography. 2. Reasons to why we should or should not exercise any form of censorship in this area.

The orthodox way of looking at pornographic material would be that it is extremely destructive. The destruction unleashed by pornographic material is mostly on males. When they are addicted to pornography, they become very callous with women, engage in many perverse things and have a mind which is twisted and filled with evil thoughts. Many people who commit rape usually start from watching pornographic material. Pornography is also extremely addictive, which can be compared to the addiction to heroin. People who are heavily addicted to pornography have altered thoughts which can cause him to do foolish actions to satisfy his sexual desires. This again emphasizes the adverse effects pornography has on society. In Christianity, God has disapproved of anything defiling or degrading in marriage.

Pornography can also be seen as a weapon of mass destruction. If everyone in society gets addicted to porn, they society would be bound to break down. Another major factor why pornography is extremely destructive is that it massively degrades women. Many websites online have stated how pornography degrades women. Pornography can be seen as the subjugation of women. A definition of pornography on the web was that women are presented dehumanized as sexual objects, things or commodities. Many definitions of pornography show how women are shown as “sexual objects”.

Due to the destructive nature of pornography, we have every good reason why we should exercise some form of censorship on it. Many of the reasons why we should censor pornography are given above. They main reasons are because it breaks down society (increases crime rate and breaks down marriages), adversely changes human behaviour (gives people the wrong idea about sex) and ultimately degrades women.

However, there are two sides to a coin as there are two ways to view pornography. Another way to interpret pornography is that it boosts the sexuality of women. We still cannot deny that pornography enhances the sexuality of women. Furthermore, pornography serves as another form of art. Last but not least, for those people who are not able to enjoy sex, pornography will prove to be a very good substitution. Hence, we should not exercise heavy censorship on pornography. We should exercise just enough censorship so that we can have a very brief contact with it; know about its positive and negative sides and how we should go about dealing with it.

President’s Star Charity Show- is there a need for artistes to perform stunts to milk the public’s compassion for more generous donations?

Charity shows have been all the buzz a few years ago. You can hear people on the streets talking about the stunts someone performed during the show. You may also hear some asking other people how much have they donated. On the other hand, many people also criticise charity shows saying that all these stunts were unnecessary and an ultimate waste of time.

Personally, I think that these stunts are just gimmicks to “compel” people into donating. The stunts give people the wrong mindset. They let people think that “in order to donate, I must see someone in peril or doing something dangerous” or “when I see someone doing something dangerous, I must donate more”. Why put someone to risk just to ask for a “fatter” donation? I think that for those that really have the heart to donate, they will donate with or without the stunts. They will even donate without the shows. I think that compassion should come from the bottom of someone’s heart and that the amount one donates does not matter. A right mindset should be instilled in the people. The people should know that we should not hesitate to help others who are in need regardless of any return. We should help them because we feel that we really want to help not because we feel compelled because of the stunts.

Furthermore, there are overhead expenses to run the show due to advertising, stage setup, on air fees and so on. On top of that, a large amount of money is needed to invite extremely famous overseas celebrities over just to appear in the show. All these will add up to a sizable amount of money and it is a total waste of resources. The organiser can put this large amount of money to better use by handing out the money to more needy people. On top of that, instead of having artiste pull of stunts, why not call them to engage with the poor and needy which is more meaningful?

Next, I think that instead of having artiste performing stunts, there should be more focus on the charity organisation’s transparency. After the recent embezzlement cases including the CEO of Ren Ci Charity and the former NKF head, many people have second thoughts about donating money to charity shows. What the people really need to see is the operations of these organisations. They also need to see exactly where their money goes to. When there is no transparency and people suspect that something is amiss, they would rather hand money to any random beggar on the street instead of dumping their money into a bottomless pit. Furthermore, we can see many students holding tin cans at public places like MRT and orchard road. This will cause us to ask ourselves: “we have donated so much yet there is still a shortage of funds. Is there something wrong?”

I think that the charity organisation should show people who they tie up with and how the cash that the public donated is used. They must also account for who is directly benefitting from it. These way people are more likely to donate as they know that their money would not be embezzled by anybody. Until full transparency can be achieved, everybody can’t help but have this burning question at their back of their head: “Where does my money really go to?”
In conclusion, I think that the charity should focus more on clearing the many doubts of the mass public first instead of trying to achieve more and more dangerous stunts, so as turn gain more donations. Compassion is also something that is self-initiated and should not be milked.

Regulation of political commentary on the internet in Singapore

There is much heated debate on the topic of freedom of speech in Singapore, especially in the area of politics which is an extremely sensitive topic in Singapore. Although Singapore’s government restrict online political movement, there are still many websites which comment on the political scene in Singapore on the internet, with the likes of talkingcock.com, mrbrown.com and so on.

People who post political commentary in the form of blog posts, podcast or videos will be governed under Singapore's election advertising regulations. Many political website are also required to register with the Media Development Authority. During election period, tensions are high and many people are easily influenced by information they read and hear. Hence, people who post political commentary on the web during the country's general election can face prosecution. However, during non-election period, regulations are as tight as fines and jail terms are still handed out when people cross the boundary. That is when they post things that are highly sensitive which could potentially spark trouble. Hence, it can be seen that Singapore’s government is very concerned about this matter and will not let things lie around ungoverned. On the other hand, these blogs, podcast and videos were well received by the general public. Furthermore it has become a source of entertainment for many.

Now, I will have my take on this issue. Personally, I think that we cannot condemn or stop people from airing their views on Singapore's politics. For Singapore to uphold herself as a democratic country, freedom of speech should be allowed to a certain extent. Firstly, we all must acknowledge that these political commentaries are not entirely harmful but instead, it is healthy to the society. These political commentaries give many Singaporeans who do not catch up on local politics an interesting insight to what the political scene in Singapore is all about. It also gives many Singaporeans another way to look at many of the governments’ policies. Hence, the government should not be too tight on their policies restricting online political commentary.

Secondly, I think that the regulation on political commentary is also because of some irresponsible people who do not know their limits. These people normally hide behind the mask of anonymity and are always the black sheep of our society. These people are either totally ignorant to these regulations or just wanting the push the limits. They post harmful and explicit material on the net and influence others in the wrong way. Hence, without regulations, these people would not be stopped and harmful messages could make their way into many peoples’ minds within a few seconds. This is also why regulations are made so blatant in the online world to remind people to act responsibly.

Lastly, we must not neglect the government’s views. The government’s main aim is to ultimately keep peace in the society. That is why there are so many laws; it is for the greater good of society. The government knows about the prowess of the internet and how it could spark unrest in just a few seconds. Therefore, they must step in before something devastating happens. Hence, we must know that in the government’s eye, this regulation on political commentary is mandatory if peace is to be kept.

All in all, there must be some form of regulation of political commentary to filter out the harmful comments so as to ensure that the public are not negatively influenced. Ultimately, these regulations protect the citizens. On the other hand, those commentaries which are not harmful should not be filtered but open for all to view as they are a good source of information and entertainment.