Sunday, August 19, 2018

Expectation vs Reality

I shall list down Expectation vs Reality for hoo-haa issues in our country.


No one hates the LGBT community anymore. All of us live together in peace now that the new government has won.

The war hasn't end.

My take:
There is nothing wrong with homosexuals. Things only start to go wrong when bisexuals come into the picture. In general, those people hate the homosexuals who had sex with similar gender because they might be the next person those said homosexuals have sex with. Then they felt disgusted. Then they began putting HIV into the picture. This I somewhat agree, but only to an extent. Why is HIV often associated with gay? There were researches (not going to quote, if you have doubts there's always google to verify but of course, know your sources) about chances of infecting HIV. I shall do a ranking here for a clearer understanding.

Man A (the infected man)
Man B
Woman C
Woman D (the infected woman)

Order from highest to lowest:
Man A had sex with Man B
Woman C had sex with Man A
Man B had sex with Woman D
Woman C had sex with Woman D

Why? It is easier for the virus to pass through and enter the body via bodily fluid from a bigger opening like vagina canal and anus. And since vagina has some self-cleaning fluids but not anus, therefore the chance for the infected fluid to enter the body without filter is higher. That being said, the ranking for Man A and Woman C would have increased should both of them engaged anal sex, but again due to the lower anal sex probability compared to Man A and Man B (almost certain they would engage into it), so the ranking will still be highest for Man A and Man B.


Just because it is easier to infect gays does not mean that LGBTs should be entirely blamed. It is the non-acceptance of LGBT that they were not aware of sex education and protection. If LGBTs were treated equally like their heterosexual counterparts, then the risk of HIV infection would definitely reduced twofold or even tenfold.

Acceptance is important before everything else comes in.


Finally Malaysian education have hope. We will soon be on par with our neighbour Singapore. Who knows, one day even Singaporeans came flocking into our country to have a piece of our education.

Shoes changed to black.

My take:
Education is a lifelong battle. There are always root causes to be addressed. To me, solutions are more important than everything else because without solutions, even thousands of root causes do not matter. Form 5 students still could not do proper multiplication. University students still could not string a proper sentence in fluent English. Root cause? Bad environment. Bad education standard. Exhausted teachers. Burned out teachers. Corrupted MOE. Etc. The list never ends. Then what are we going to do with these?

I applaud and admire people like Jarrod Yong and Liew Suet Li who gave their lives into improving children's education. This is something which I would like to contribute to one day if I have the resources and the energy. I, unfortunately, have none.

But actually to be honest, there is one simple solution to improve at least 50% of education level in Malaysia. Eradicate poverty. Then those children (both rural and urban poor) can freely study with no burden. As for troublesome rich urban kids, well I have no solution yet (that is why I said at least 50% as that is one of the major reason for low education level in Malaysia).

Please Dr Mazlee, at least come up with a draft on making Malaysian education a better one. Not just changing shoes from white to black.


Pedophiles be put to jail and/or castrated. All children in Malaysia are now protected.

Child marriage is more welcomed compared to LGBT. Ministers kept mum when the issue of 41-year-old man with two wives married an 11-year-old girl took over headlines.

My take:
LGBT is a conscious choice made by human beings and they are responsible for anything that happens to them (HIV, heartbreak, STD). Well, actually the risk is the same for heterosexual people as well. What is there to shout about?

As for child marriage, these men took away the freedom of children who were unable to make proper, conscious decisions on their own. Children, who were supposed to be allowed to grow at their own pace while still continue being children, were forced to grow up way earlier than intended by being married to older men. Children, who should spend their lives receiving education (including sex education LOL) and playing games and toys were forced to spend their lives having sex and becoming a parent. They were not mature enough to even took care of themselves and now they have to be parents. Great.

To make things worse here, those supposedly "religious" pedophiles used their religion to defend their actions on child marriage. Based on how wise and mature Aisha was, she seemed to be in her early teens when she married Prophet Muhammad. And let's not forget that Prophet Muhammad was a wise man who focused on spreading the word of Allah in Islam so he would definitely need a wise, mature woman who has the energy. Aisha was all of those mentioned. She was married for a noble cause.

Then what about the 41-year-old man with two wives?

He was just a rubber trader who did not even take care of his own wives and children.

That speaks a lot about someone. So yes, it is normal for us all to question his intention on marrying the 11-year-old girl. If Malaysia supports this marriage, then that would mean Malaysia is supporting pedophilia.

Sometimes, we need nothing else other than common sense to run a country. #sorrynotsorry

I can go on forever but I am too lazy to type anything else for now.

Sunday, May 20, 2018

Problems Malaysians Have (or Are Being)

I am having an annual assessment for my current occupation this Wednesday, so I am supposed to study. I can't. I just can't. I need to write this. Well, due to Tun M's recent fever, I can safely quote him on writing more because he loves to write.

Here goes. I shall write this in a most reflective manner possible, mainly because it involves each of us Malaysians. If you're not a Malaysian, just read this to kill time.

Problems with Malaysians today.

Blame the parents. Or blame the previous government for the last 61 years. Malaysians only know how to ASK. LIKE A BEGGAR. There I said it.

Do you know why Malaysians remain as a developing nation despite our rich source?

Corruption? Partly.

We can't conveniently blame our current nation's state to the corrupted officials. Yes they are the ones who openly stole our money. But they would have never been able to do that if we did not allow them. We were the ones that allowed them to do so.

Yes, it is us Malaysians. We are at fault.


Because we only know how to sit there and expect people to give everything to us. We depend on the government for everything. From 1957, we depended on the British to give us independence. It was only an effort from the late Tunku Abdul Rahman's side to fight for independence. From the very beginning, the people there already had it easy. Independence without shedding a blood and sweat.

Over time, Malaysians (I shall use Malaysians here so as not to incite any racial hate) became so dependent on handouts that the corrupted government decided to use this to their advantage. The previous wins for BN was mainly due to government giving handouts (cash, rice, water supply) to the people, making them believing that there is such thing called free lunch in this world. They, citizens of Malaysia, were reduced to being beggars, believing that they exist just to exist unless some Good Samaritan in the guise of a government gave them something out of the ordinary. As the result, they felt that they do not have to work hard because they will be fed by the government. Such is past.

Due to this "give me" mentality, Malaysians here were so lazy to do blue collar jobs that the government decided to hire foreign labour instead. This is why nowadays in KL we see Bangladeshis, Indonesians and Burmese as cooks for local cuisines. They were the ones preparing Malay food, mamak food, Chinese food etc. We see Nepalese working as security guards in commercial buildings and banks. Our safety were in these foreigners' hands. Why? Because Malaysians are too proud to do those jobs. They do not want to work hard for their own nation yet want to reap all benefits. I can safely say that the foreign labour are the main contributors to building MRT, LRT and high-rise buildings. Oh and roads. For us spoilt Malaysians to drive onto, and then contribute to accidents due to their own lack of common sense on the road.

In Malaysia, we have cleaners in fast food restaurants who clear our tray. I think this only happens in Malaysia. In first world countries like Taiwan, Korea, Japan and Australia, customers clear their own trays. In Malaysia also, we have grass cutters and plumbers attending our households and gardens. You don't see this in developed nations like Australia or England. Your house, your responsibility. Each resident of a household is responsible for cutting grass, while the other person is responsible for fixing a blocked sink. Again, this is apparent that Malaysians are too lazy to even cut grass or clear up their tables in a fast food restaurant.

Need me say more?

Yes, of course.

I find being a Malaysian pretty shameful lately. We want a 93-year-old old man to implement abolishing GST, yet we do not do something to contribute to this. As Malaysians, I believe our role is so much more than just colouring our finger with indelible ink. We do not need to wait for a group of elders to help us abolish GST and clear off RM600 billion worth of debt. We do not just sit there and complain to a 93-year-old man regarding the expensive price of goods.

We can do much more than that. Malaysians good in economics and finance, contribute. I do not know how to contribute as I am not an expert in this, but surely there is something I can contribute to. Malaysians having abundant knowledge on technology, be part of digital advancement of the nation. Malaysians well-equipped with education, contribute to education paradigm shift.

Maybe I should reconsider taking Masters. Just maybe.

Malaysians, please walk the talk. Work, not complain.

Saturday, May 12, 2018

Why Malaysians Forgive Tun Dr Mahathir (TDM)

"A pen is mightier than a sword."

One of the reasons why Tun Dr Mahathir (TDM) was so articulate and eloquent (he still is) is due to his excessive writing habits in the 70s, as claimed by his truly in his Instagram account. If he was able to write so many despite being a busy doctor, there is no reason why I could not get up and write this piece of essay.

Now, as the title goes, I believe that there are still some individuals out there who still could not forgive TDM and wondered why majority of Malaysians did. They could not understand why Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (DSAI), the man whom TDM sent to jail decades ago, decided to forgive him and let him anchor the party he led during his tenure in prison.

But why?

After all, TDM was the one who started the racism shit, taking away rakyats' (Malaysians) freedom of speech and then oppressing them over the years (Ops Lalang, ISA, DSAI scandal etc), mega corruption and mostly just himself being power hungry. Najib just continued his legacy right? Melayu mudah lupa ke? (Do Malays forget easily?)

Yes he did.

And now he is paying the price of it. He became Prime Minister twice in Malaysia, but under different circumstances. When he first took over the role in 1981, Malaysia was in good hands under Tun Hussein Onn, who was Bapa Perpaduann (Father of Unity) back then. The value of MYR was almost equal to SGD during that time, and was trading steadily around 1:2.5 for USD:MYR. One can own a house with only RM10k needed. Of course one may argue that there was recession in 1980s during his tenure, but at least that happened DURING his tenure, not inherited by previous ruler. At present, Malaysia has a total national debt (not including gross external debt) of RM648 billion. And to whom Malaysians owe the most money to, among the RM648 billion? EPF (Employee Provident Fund) and PTF (Pension Trust Fund). In layman's terms, our future money. Government owes us Malaysians money. It makes sense if government is borrowing Malaysians' funds for development of the country. But, what type of development does our country experience? For transportation, we have inconvenient railway lines of which majority of Malaysians prefer to depend on their own vehicles due to convenience. Going digital? Long way to go, as compared to our tiny island neighbour. Health? Using others' technology. Oil and gas? Mostly dependent on contractors (no offense really). So where does the money go to? And now TDM had to lessen the huge debt which was not in balance with our country's treasury. A huge headache for him to inherit.

Then again, why was he willingly taking the trouble to inherit the shit (which people might argue that it was caused by him at the first place) at an age of 93? Malaysia might be the next Greece if he didn't do something, but why him?

Some time ago, TDM apologized after years of criticizing Najib's shortcomings in administrating the country. To me, it began to hit him that his past doings of corruption and money laundering (with his minister friends whom I shall not name) for decades finally took a toll in the hands of greedy Najib. He began to see the rotten side effects of corruption. Malaysia, a country with high potential of development and success, is currently a laughingstock, with its economy slowly being penetrated by PRC investors. Malaysian pride were all flushed down the drain. No one cares about Twin Towers anymore when there were news of 1MDB scandal everywhere, which even involved international celebrities (Leonardo diCaprio, Miranda Kerr).  And he could see Malaysians' spending power decreased significantly every year, to the point of resorting to #2kerja (doing 2 jobs) just to cope with increasing daily expenses.

Honestly, I was doubting his intention in apologizing and him re-entering politics. But if you actually used your brain to think through, it does not make sense for him, a 92-year-old retiree, to shoulder the responsibility while trying to correct the wrong. To someone like him, it is not worth going through all the trouble wasting energy and brain cells to take over a country full of debts and lost confidence. With millions of eyes (especially MPs in the cabinet from his own team) watching him, it doesn't make sense for him to try to embezzle government's funds. For his son? Perhaps, maybe 20 years down the road which was a very uncertain thing so there is no way for him to put on such a huge risk for something uncertain. Any possible agenda? I honestly do not know. He may have some agendas that you and I cannot think of, but to me if it does not concern us rakyat, then why should it matter?

I only know that he walks the talk. He wanted to bring down Najib and the totalitarian government, and he did. He stepped up into politics, joined the campaigns, faced snide remarks and humiliation by Malaysians whom he used to serve for and gave endless talks in an opposition party, of whom those people used to hate him to guts. He walked through the fire and went through all the trouble, just to keep his promise to the rakyat. And he did. He worked immediately after having his Prime Minister post officiated just to keep his promise to the rakyat. He immediately requested for Royal Pardon towards DSAI by Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) right after becoming the Prime Minister, just to keep his promise to DSAI and Pakatan Harapan (PH) members.

He is a man of his words. So there is every single reason why we can take his apology, word by word to heart.

Now that I see glimpse of hope in Malaysia, I wish to be part of the contribution towards advancement of Malaysian economics. I wish. I wish. I wish. I believe there will be opportunities.

Thank you, TDM for restoring faith towards Malaysians. Thank you, TDM for keeping your promises.

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Significance of Good Friday

Lent is ending and Good Friday is approaching.

For a person who got closer to the world of Christianity (and still attempting to get even closer) only years after baptism and rigorously memorizing Bible verses, I find that people somewhat glorified Christmas more than Good Friday, which was the very reason how Christianity existed. I received snide remarks regarding Christians as sadistic hypocrites who glorify a man's death. Little did they know that the death was birth of everything else in this world.

Allow me to explain, so please hold your guns. For non-believers, I always believe in freedom of will, so you can always choose to disagree.

Throughout the stories in Old Testament, we read stories about the vital characters, themselves and nothing but themselves and how much God gave them (wisdom, wealth, kingdom, power, life, miracles), only asking for His people to glorify Him in return. These were the typical stories of what God can give and how much can a person take but not give in return. How people sin and become greedier and greedier despite God giving everything they asked for. Human nature. In fact, all God have ever asked for in return was obedience.

Then enter Jesus. He was just like any other man out there. Born in a manger out of wedlock by a Mary who claimed to be virgin. A plausible story could be her stating that to avoid being stoned/ostracized as she was engaged to Joseph, as she was possibly raped and at that time, the society was a full-fledged misogyny to the core so regardless of whether she was raped or not, no one there was to save her. It could be God's way of creating such way to give birth to Jesus. Then again, we cannot deny that God is capable of creating miracles (Sarah giving birth to Isaac at the age of 90) so she really could be conceived as a virgin from a holy seed planted in her womb.

Then the story started to sound different from here. Suddenly, the story focuses on how Jesus gave everyone else without asking for anything in return. He performed miracles out of the blue like walking on the water. He fed five thousand people with a few small fishes and several loaves of bread. He healed a blind man by simply spitting on the soil and rubbed it into the man's eyes. He taught people the proper God's teachings on how to become a better person instead of embroiling themselves deeper into a pit of greed and all other deadly sins because I lazy want to list them all here. He healed a man with leprosy while others avoided him like a plague. And the list goes on. Long story short, the story of a man named Jesus focused on how much He gave the people instead of how much God gave Him.

While He was alive, He taught us unconditional love. He taught us on values to become a better person and to be closer to God. He healed the sick and fed the hungry. He defended a woman who was accused of adultery when everyone else condemned her for it, by reminding us that all of us are sinners and we are no less better than her. He washed His disciples' feet and fed them with bread and wine, when it was usually the other way round.

Yet, people still sin. People still stray away from God.

So, Jesus ultimately gave us His final gift because all us humans were stubborn creatures. He gave us His own life. He gave us His own life in a most degrading manner possible, which was to die as a criminal. Jesus was wrongfully framed by the Pharisees for a crime He did not commit and was sentenced to death unjustly. I know, at one part he cried out, "Father, why have you forsaken me?". This was from someone who gave and gave and did nothing but giving everything yet God allowed Him to die.

Jesus died because of a crime He did not commit. It was how He died without committing a single sin. Jesus was born as a perfect man without sin. All He did was to give. Yet God did not perform miracles on Him when he was unjustly sentenced to death, by crucifixion. Why God gave everything to those characters in Old Testament when all they did was to take, but did nothing to save Jesus?

Because Jesus had to die. He had to go through a life as a perfect man, only to be killed for a crime he never commit. Ladies and gentlemen, this was how Jesus died shouldering all our sins even though he never commit a single sin throughout his life. It was a painful decision for God to make. To ultimately create a man in a most perfect form. Since men are created based on mirror image of God, then Jesus must be created based on mirror image of perfect God. Therefore, whatever He did was whatever exactly God himself would do should he be a human instead of a god. That was how a human being, although looking like all of us, was capable of giving and giving, be it miracles or valuable teachings, without asking anything else in return. Jesus was God Himself in the form of a man.

Alas, men being men, were too self-absorbed to see all these. They were so focused on themselves that they could not see that God was with them all the time, or more specifically, God's son, since that said son was born out of a normal human being's womb. God, not knowing anymore what to do, had Jesus carrying out His final mission, which was to sacrifice himself. By letting Himself being unjustly sentenced by the Pontius Pilate, who was afraid of the people out there, God was essentially letting us see how human beings were so afraid of losing their own side of humanity - sin that they abandoned God. Pontius Pilate's action was what most of the people did, which was to abandon God so that they can remain humanly and full of sins. Jesus, a perfect man, who had zero sin in him, had to bear trillions of sins so that the rest of the human beings are free of sins. That way, they can only find their way back to God.

The part where Jesus cried about being forsaken by His father showed us the consequences of sin. By allowing ourselves to be filled with sins, we are getting further away from God. Because Jesus had never sin before, He have always been connected to God. However, right before He died, God left him because of all the trillion sins He was bearing.

Needless to say, Jesus died. I do not know why He died on a Friday. Based on my own theory though (can always disagree with me!), since God created the world in six days, I assume that man and woman was created on the sixth day. So Jesus died on the fifth day, the day before man was created. Jesus had to die on the day before man was created so that a new, sinless man can be created and reborn again. And this is baptism, to die as a sinful person and reborn as a sinless person who accepted Christ as his/her saviour. I am not sure on the auspicious date for baptism though, as I am not entirely knowledgeable regarding the timeline and all.

I believe as a Christian, Jesus has already created the bridge between us and God. And that is when us Christians can feel God's presence around us. As a Christian, it is important for us to recognize the sins and avoid it however possible because sin is what drives us away from God. Never let Jesus' sacrifice be in vain, so that is why Good Friday is so significant to every Christians.

Of course, there are times when we question our faith, with myself included. We are after all, just ordinary human beings who wants to receive. Like how in relationships where a man and a woman need to voice out each other's insecurity, we should voice out our shaken faith to God and pray for Him to guide us back to Him.

Throughout this essay, the one vital drive that brings Good Friday is none other than love. Quote 1 Corinthians 13:13, "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." Jesus was an embodiment with these three things; love overpowers the other two though. Jesus had faith that human beings will someday turn back to God, which was why he never stopped giving and teaching. Jesus often hoped that people will acknowledge Him as God because clearly He was made in the image of God and performing miracles as a God. But most of all, Jesus loved us all that He had to die for us so that we finally notice Him and go back to Him.

Because nothing speaks louder than love when someone keeps giving and being taken advantage of, yet continues giving without getting anything back in return.

And this is Godly love.


Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Penning Down 500 Days of Summer's Thoughts

Watched and rewatched 500 Days of Summer at different phase of life. I did not like it previously because it strayed away from the happily-ever-after usual. I like it currently though, because it reflects a part of growth in our lives.

We have been Tom before. Undeniably, we were also Summer. Let me jot down what I thought about both of these characters and why we could be either one of them, or both in many cases.

1) Tom

Someone who believed in true love and The One, which was greatly influenced by skewed idealism of a movie and pop songs. Someone who was in denial and often brushed off the bad things in life so that they remain happy by focusing only on the good things. Someone who believed in fairy tales and going against all odds so that he could finally reap the reward - together. And Summer fitted all these perfectly in his book. Why?

Summer was very beautiful.
Summer did not believe in love.
Summer was adventurous and daring. She brought out the dreamer side in him.
Summer constantly reminded him that they were never exclusive for each other.

Sounds familiar? It was similar, if not identical to fairy tales and hopelessly romantic novels. Two people who were completely opposites and were not supposed to be together due to internal or external issues, but ended up together anyway despite all odds. Like Romeo and Juliet (they died together so it counts), who were not supposed to be together because of societal pressure. Then again, how well did Romeo and Juliet knew each other? How sure were they in love? They just knew they were attracted to each other and they wanted to be together, against all odds. This was what was instilled into Tom's fragile mind. Romance, and happily ever after. Summer had the "not exclusive" barrier and Tom decided that it would be him to break the barrier, and who knows, one day the barrier will be broken and they would end up together. Very romantic. Besides, someone shy as Tom were taken aback by Summer's advances, which perhaps was never experience before. Similar to a pampered princess who never experienced adventure until she met a peasant. A great modern fairy tale to write on, except it was not a fairy tale in reality.

We were like this.

It took Summer and heartbreak for Tom to realize that love did not happen like fairy tales. We have to work for what we want. What if Tom was more assertive and made the call in their relationship? What if Tom went for his calling and decided to be an architect because he knew that was what he was good at? What if Tom was more confident in himself and made it clear with Summer from the start that it was either labels or nothing? What if Tom man up and told Summer he wanted to be with her as his boyfriend when she asked him whether he liked her or not?

Would it make any difference? Perhaps Summer would still reject Tom regardless. But at least there was a closure from the start, and therefore there would not be a need of 500 days so that he could finally see Autumn (pun intended).


We never know. And this is life. Full of uncertainties. And opportunities seldom come twice. So we either wait for the opportunity, or we create it.

2) Summer

Summer was one screwed up individual. She was a confused lost puppy, who did not have a good childhood to begin with due to her parents' divorce at her very tender age. As a result, she created a barrier in her heart to prevent anyone from hurting her.

Somehow she believed in love though, as much as she denied it even from the start. Her previous relationships and how she mentioned "life" when Tom asked about how her relationships ended. There was a melancholic look in her eyes, indicating that as much as she loved her exes, they did not end well. It was probably because she did not want them to end at the very first place.

Throughout the course of the series, it was clear that Summer was attracted to Tom, and still attracted to him even after she was married. We could see that Summer tried. It was pretty obvious when a girl opened up her vulnerability to a man. Sadly, Tom did not, I repeat, DID NOT listen to her. What a woman wants in a man is for him to listen to her. Tom did not truly get to know her as a person inside out. Perhaps this was why Summer would never be sure of him.

So she did get married in the end. Was the marriage happy? Perhaps. Was Summer happy? I personally do not think so. She was hung up with "what if" with Tom so hard for her to wait for him at his favourite spot. Good for Tom because he finally had his closure. But good for Summer? No happily married woman would wait for her ex-fling at his favourite spot and held his hand after. Was Summer impulsive when she married the man? Perhaps. Perhaps she was brought upon the idea of love by Tom so much that she carried it with her and married herself to a man who asked her about the book. It could be Summer who ended up in love with the idea of love because of Tom's influence, not so much on the man himself.

I realized a pattern of insecure people. They would very much push away someone they deeply cared a lot about, in fear of getting hurt in return. Summer was one of them. She was impulsive and acted without thinking beforehand. Then when she stopped and thought back she decided to protect herself by fending off the people who made a huge impact in her heart. She was hurt before, and she would not allow herself to be hurt anymore.

I was both Tom and Summer. Not that I was exactly them, but there were pretty much similar in both aspects.

From this movie and my experiences though, I learned that love was not enough to keep a marriage. Love was never enough to keep two people together. There were too many things to consider, especially when we are looking for lifetime commitment. For those seeking thrill and excitement, go ahead and date as many as you want.

So, which one are you? :)