Are you tofu?

to the people who commented on my last post. i have no respect for people who comment anonymously. you are cowards to hide behind the facade of anonymity.

to the person who called me a fucker. my entry was not specifically about the case. it is about the attitude demonstrated by the student which i think is becoming increasingly prevalent amongst the younger proportion of the population. that being the case, then the case is far from over.

further, i know that not everyone likes me. and i don't care. i just need to get my job done. and i bet i have a far better life than you. a much more fulfilled and purposeful life.

finally, if that is all you can say, then you are pretty brainless. then you can stop wasting your time reading my blog because your miniscule brain capacity would not be able to begin to comprehend the depths of what i am saying. however, if you are capable of thinking clearly and putting forth lucid and coherent arguments and feasible suggestions, you are free to come and look for me anytime for an open discussion.

to the person who was a fellow camper. i will not apologise. the student is stupid. let's call a spade a spade. the P was crude. he knows that. he calls himself that. the reason why the student apologise was not because the P was not crude, but because the student made statements about the P that cannot be backed up. that is called slander. so. if the student can prove that he was not stupid, then i will apologise. however, by virtue of the fact that the student had already apologised, it means that even the student himself felt that what he did was wrong, i.e. stupid. so even the student accepts his own stupidity, albeit perhaps not in as many words. so if that is the case, why should i apologise for making a statement that i can back up and justify? of course, the student could have apologised because, for some reasons, he felt... intimidated (for want of better words). in that case, he is not only stupid for vacillating, but also a coward for not standing firm for what he believes in. don't you think so?

about calling the student stupid behind his back... i would call him stupid into his face. and then i would tell him what he could have done. i don't not disagree that his intentions were laudable. but he was fighting the wrong battle. worse. in completely the wrong way. i.e. he was being stupid.

out of curiousity, what do you mean 'underhanded'? the point of my blog was not to scold the student. it was to highlight the stupidity of the thing he did. sure. he might have the bravado to comment vehemently online. but has he spent time to think about what he wrote? to dig deeper? did he have the tenacity to find out more? did he tried to think of solutions to the problems which led to the P lashing out? should that not be his priority? to find the root of the problem? or was he so stupid to think that the root of the problem was the P? while i write on my blog about what i perceive as the problem of which the student's blog was a symptom of, i am also suggesting what i feel is the way to solve it. my method may not be right. it might be stupid. but at least i am doing something. you are free to comment on my actions. but offer alternatives that are reasonable and convince me why your alternatives are better. i don't even mind personal attacks so long as you can offer constructive feedback that you can justify. because i am willing to accept that i am wrong, that there is a better method out there.

thus, what i mean by 'softness' is not just about whether you dare to shout, whine, complain and grumble loudly. it is whether you are willing to go through the rigorous demands of thinking, of analysis, then the far tougher task of taking action and bearing the consequences of your actions, accepting critcisms, holding true to your believes when you know you are right, despite the criticisms, and having the humility of changing when you realise that you are wrong because of the criticisms. that is what i think is true toughness. not just complaining and grumbling loudly.

do i practise what i preached? yes. have i made the same mistakes that student made? hell yes. i have emailed Ministries, submitted papers to various departments of the Civil Service, written into ST Forum (of my letters, one got printed...), given feedback to P, spoken to Ministers. so. to your question of whether i 'stand up and question the head'. yes. i have and i do. all the time. and now i have added a new dimension of taking action, of doing something.

so. for the 2 of you who posted anonymously. i challenge you to reveal your identities on my blog. so that all who read my blog know who you are. show the world that you are not cowards. i challenge the 2 of you to then come and look for me and talk to me face to face. you can record every bit of our conversations and post it wherever you like. particularly the one who called me a fucker. if you dare to call me that on my blog, i hope you are not that much of a coward not to tell me who you are and then come and look for me, tell me that in person and then be prepared to justify why you call me that. but if you dare not, then you are worse than worthless scum that even slime would avoid.

the other person, my fellow family camper. i some respect for you (if only you had included your name...). for standing up. while i do not agree with most of what you said, i agree with your spirit. your comment was much more balanced with room for discussion and dialogue, showing intelligence and maturity. if you were the one who had blogged about what the P had said, i am sure you would have been a lot more successful in getting your point across and P would have been a lot more receptive. thus, there is all the more reason why i want to engage you in discussion. there is much i would like to learn from you.

so. a little experiment. if the 2 of you don't come and look for me, i shall have more evidence to conclude that my statements about the tofu generation in my last post are valid. if you do, then there is more credibility to your generation. so... are you tofu?