Orientation - just fun or plain lewd

Actual article

By Shuli Sudderuddin When National University of Singapore (NUS) freshman Rachel Lee turned up at an orientation camp in campus last month, she got a rude shock. During one of the games, she was made to do a forfeit where the 'girls had to lie down and the guys had to do push-ups over them', she said. Ms Lee, 19, declined to comply - she felt the act was lewd. Another game she observed required participants to pass M&M chocolates to one another using their mouths. 'I left after the first day with five or six like-minded friends,' she said of the five-day camp organised by the NUS Students' Union. 'Lewd and improper' orientation activities were the subject of a letter by reader Soh Eng Phang, who wrote to the Straits Times Forum page recently complaining about this. In a phone interview elaborating on this, Ms Soh, who is in her 40s, said: 'They are totally uncalled for and give youth a very superficial idea about making friends and finding a partner.' Orientation is held at the start of a school year in July and August to welcome freshmen. This year, the three universities here welcomed 14,700 freshmen. Most camps are run by students and attendance at most activities is optional. In the past, the trend was to subject freshmen to humiliating treatment such as having one's head dunked in a toilet bowl or having to do chores at their seniors' bidding. Over the years, however, orientation has taken on a more sexual slant. Unlike Ms Lee, however, many other freshmen accept such games as a time-honoured ritual and do not find them objectionable. Ms Yvonne Ho, 19, a freshman at the NUS faculty of arts and social sciences, attended a camp run by Sheares Hall hostel earlier this month. Forfeits included touching the chests of males. 'I don't see a reason to get agitated. This is in fun and we laugh about it. There's nothing sexual,' she said. Students from NUS and Nanyang Technological University (NTU) said their orientation camps often included risque games and forfeits. At the Singapore Management University (SMU), students said games and forfeits were milder. Dr Carol Balhetchet, director of youth services at the Singapore Children's Society, said the young today are more confident. 'They are bolder and some set up situations to break social barriers, especially since those between ages 18 and 21 are beginning to seek partners,' she noted. Said Mr Sam Kuna, family therapist and executive director of volunteer welfare organisation Teen Challenge: 'Normal games and old-fashioned ragging just don't cut it anymore.' But sexually-charged activities can backfire if they are too extreme, he said. 'At least 70 per cent of students are conservative and these games could make someone more inhibited.' Universities said they put a firm foot down on any demeaning activities. Associate Professor Low Aik Meng, dean of students at SMU, said: 'SMU does not feel that ragging will help our students achieve the objectives of building collegiality, team spirit and a sense of belonging.' A spokesman for NTU said the university will take action against students who overstep the boundaries of decency. Over at NUS, a spokesman said that if the university receives complaints, it will investigate and counsel or discipline students. However, some students and organisers feel that activities involving physical contact are no big deal. NTU Cultural Activities Club camp programmer Choi Wen Ting, 22, said: 'These games are only small elements and can boost the spirit of the camp. University students are sensible enough to speak up if they are uncomfortable.' This sentiment is shared by Ms Nadya Huang, 20, who sits on the executive committee of the NUS Students' Arts and Social Sciences Club. 'It's just for fun and we're all adults. I've never seen people do anything against their will.' This article was first published in The Straits Times on Aug 31, 2008.

Orientation - just fun or plain lewd?

Once upon a time, orientation camps for Singapore universities saw freshman being bossed around by seniors to doing chores and other such activities. Nowadays, it has only taken a turn for the worse.

Orientation in the present day has come to see freshman being introduced to very sexual games and forfeits. Examples of such activities include:

• Passing food from mouth to mouth
• Pole dancing around someone of the opposite gender
• Transporting eggs together with someone else using only faces or chests
• Females licking off cream from a guy's chest
• Males doing push-ups over a female made to lie on the floor

These are just some of the named activities university freshman had to face with. Most of these orientation camps are organized by the student body themselves, and adults were unaware of such issues. Such an issue gets one to think, "Are university freshmen getting the wrong ideas about finding partners and friends?"

Pertaining to such an issue, a freshman at NUS, Rachel Lee, had refused to accept her forfeit having a male freshman do push-ups over her, leaving promptly after along with a group of disgusted friends. However, unlike her, most other freshman see this as a ritual into university life, and just accept the games as good fun. In my opinion, this is just a means of giving a false sense of belonging, and does not establish what orientations are supposed to do.

I find such a problem very disturbing, and it gives parents, teachers and society cause for worry. Parents would not be able to know what the students are doing in orientation and what they might already have done. Also, such activities might lead impressionable youth to engage in excessively promiscuous behavior as it is seemingly "endorsed". While the government is encouraging more babies, I doubt they wish to do so at the expense of the family unit.

Furthermore, it also surfaces other problems. 70% of the student population is conservative and such games could cause students to feel more inhibited. This can lead to students being uneasy about their school life, especially after experiencing such close contact with their as of yet not so familiar peers.

The schools have already begun to take action, reprimanding and counseling students who have been involved in such acts. But to what extent can they have control over these issues? I feel that the damage has already been done, and some things are difficult to change.

On the other hand, it is good to see that those who feel uncomfortable about these activities, have had the courage to decline having to comply to such audacious acts. In this way, those who do not wish to be a part of this would be able to stay away from such activities.

I believe that such activities, should not be tolerated, especially in an orientation camp. While orientation camps were meant to bond students together and allow them to foster friendships, I do not think that this was what was meant by fostering friendships. Hopefully, such sexual slants in orientation games and forfeits in all schools would be eradicated, as it would not only be promoting the wrong ideas, it also prevents those who feel disgusted by it to foster real friendships during this point in time.

Democracy Creates Stability in Society

Democracy can be described as a form of government that is elected by the people. There are two main ideas contributing to democracy, liberty and equality. Liberty is the concept of having the ability to act according to one’s own will. Equality is where everyone has rights. 

            In Singapore, democracy plays an important role in upholding stability in our society. Being a multi-racial society, democracy is very important so that everyone has equal rights, regardless of race, language or religion. If we did not practice democracy, and we were to a communist state, there would be tension between the races as our leader might probably only side with his race and/or religion, causing social inequality. Such a society would never be able to achieve stability, instead only resulting in other races being unsatisfied with that leader. This could result in dangerous revolts, such as riots and other violents displays. Our society would then be in chaos. 

            However, democracy can also result in the majority always having the upper hand over the minority, as the majority would always win in elections. In the USA, the supposed "Land of the free", there was the discrimination of the African-Americans. The whites in the USA outnumbered the blacks, hence policies favouring whites would naturally go through via the "majority wins" principle. It can thus be seen that democracy would naturally favour the majority, and this would result in instability instead. In such a case, the two main ideas of democracy, liberty and democracy are what protects the minority, allowing the minority to speak up for themselves, if the government were to put the minority down, it can be said that they are not following the concept of democracy anymore. The USA was thus seen to be hypocrites, not upholding the ideas of democracy, this in turn brought about a change, most evidently in the laws, minimizing discrimination in the USA to what is has become in this day and age. 

I feel that in order for democracy to be effective in a society, we need the following: 

Acceptance - If the people all from various roots are willing to accept each others' cultures and background as well as skin colour, it is possible to work harmoniously to build a stable society which can be very successful.

Cooperation - Working together is important for anything to succeed. A simple example would be our group projects. We all have to do our part for the project to be as good as it can be, the same goes for a society, everyone has a part to play in making it a stable, with a good economy and good living conditions.

Government - Having a government that is unbiased, and uncorrupted is very important for a society. If a government were to be corrupted, the rich would be able to pay their way out of sticky situations while the poor would probably suffer greatly as a result of the injustice that such a government can cause.

Law – Even though democracy works towards liberty, there is a limit as to how much liberty is allowed before crossing the line. Liberty without law would only result in crime being abundant, and this would lead to social instability. Thus it is important for there to be laws in our society to prevent such things from happening and to deter the people from committing such atrocities. 

            I can thus conclude that democracy does create stability, but only with the help of the above-mentioned factors, and can be considered a good form of government. 

Mas Selamat causes massive jams

I have just read about an article involving the infamous, Mas Selamat Kastari. This time, it seems that more problems have arose due to his escape just days ago.



The Immigration Checkpoints Authority (ICA) have begun conducting strict checks at the two border crossings from Singapore to Johor, causing massive traffic jams made up of up to 10km of lorries. Drivers have had to remain that way for more than 15 hours, yet they were still nowhere near the checkpoint.



Not only do they have to endure the poor living conditions with only instant noodles for food, a lorry to sleep in, and not having a bath, they also have to cope with pressure from their bosses to make the deliveries. Yet this is not causing the ICA to let up on the checks.



The question of whether to let people suffer and possibly lose their jobs in order to catch the terrorist arises. I personally sympathise with the poor drivers who have had to be stuck on the road for such a long period of time as i recently experienced the same problem in japan where it snowed heavily, preventing us from moving from the rest stop. Having to stay on a vehicle for long periods of time without moving much is really frustrating, but i feel it is the tension of trying to explain to bosses on the big delay and the possibility of losing their jobs would be a bigger issue altogether.



On the other hand, Having a terrorist on the loose, is something that would affect our whole society. The terrors of what may happen if he were to escape would be unimaginable. This time, he may not just target Changi Airport, but also the rest of Singapore. The safety of Singapore would be at great risk.



If I were to be stuck in the position of those in charge of the ICA, I think I would do the same. While people might lose their jobs due to this, I feel the safety of Singapore would come first. While jobs can be found, if Singapore were to be attacked, jobs would not even matter any more. I can only hope that the bosses of the drivers are understanding and hope for the best for the drivers and their families.