the displeasure of losing time
i found out that blogger lets me post pictures when i use IE to browse blogspot. otherwise on Avant, it doesn't matter how many times i beg, pray and threaten, the pictures will "load'" but not display. such a wonderful idiosyncrasy of technology/software programming.anyways, am heading in for my first-evet ICT tomorrow at Nee Soon camp, located in the, i swear, most ulu-fied part of the island. transit road. even in naming the road, the powers that be knew it would probably move. it being the camp. the move being 20 years too late and still counting.
as you can probably tell, i am neither excited nor enthusiastic about having to once again "book in" to a camp, or to have to listen to someone that i do not know order me around, or even to have to rush 'urgently" to make sure i do not have my weekends "burnt". my time in the army serving national service was barely tolerated because of the uncontrollable situation, at that time, of having been born a Singaporean citizen. having wasted 2.5 years of my life, i can now vote for my government as well as choose whether i want to remain a Singaporean. such joy.
of cos, the government moved me from a voting constituency to a "walk-over" one this time around, but they can't keep doing that. i will have my vote in 2011. if not i will move to potong pasir.
wherefore stems my pleasant disregard for the time spent in national service? let me say it once more, the role of serving in a military agency for the purposes of national defence isn't a wrong one. the distinction and my unhappiness lies in the fact that the Singaporean male isn't probably compensated for sacrificing the best foundation years of their lives.
a higher initial pay...in the civil service? the "faster" promotions...again in the public sector? the ideal that the male will possibly triumph despite the disadvantages is such a crock of bull.
the above-benefits are to be weighed against the fact that the singaporean male will start his career at least 3 years after his female counterpart(if he is a graduate), and at least 5 years after his American/European males finish their final year in college. by the way, the above benefits to do carry as much weight in the private sector.
"you served in the army when you were 18? tough luck" said the Australian senior manager.
are we possibly progating a colonial mentality when we see young American managers leading a pack of older Singaporean male executives? or when an European female senior executive chalks up 10 years of experienece in her field at 29 when some singaporean males have just been promoted from "worm" status in their organisations at 27? what a great chasm to leap across...
and don't get me started on Singaporean males vs. females...one recurring symbolic example i have is a 24 year old becoming marketing manager of an int'l brand when her male counterpart starts his career in a job in the same industry at 23. are males really to blame when they have not reached their peak when they reach 28?
again, a caveat. i am not dissing the system to ask for change. if time must be spent serving the nation, then let it be. if the only way for this system to work is for a nation to let their young serve during the foundation years so be it. but this gripe remains debatable.
can national service be re-adjusted, re-looked at to help the youth aim higher, and faster in an increasingly international private sector? can the Singaporean male serve differently? or the government increase minimum wage policies to suitably compensate the transaction? something tells me that when i finally ROD, these issues will still be out there being spoken about by some other 26 year old male.
posted by inspirethereal @ 9:45 PM
0 straight, not straightened:
Post a Comment
<< Home