Commentary

During recent years, we see a sharp increase in the number of people going under the knife to improve their physical appearance due to the advancements in technology and the fact that such treatments are much cheaper. Previously, botox treatments or liposuctions were only meant for the wealthy celebrities. However, there has been a shift, and such treatments (even the more complicated areas such as a nose job) are now commonplace and even teenagers as young as thirteen are going under the knife.

From a personal point of view, I cannot help but feel sad that plastic surgery has regressed from a state of restoration of disfigurement/dismemberment to a tool to attain ‘beauty’ in one’s own definition in any sense.

Resorting to plastic surgery is an unhealthy option as it may cause one to become permanently attached to such procedures as they go for more and more surgeries just to satisfy their desire of attaining ‘perfect beauty’ by their own definition. However, this only means that they will never be satisfied, as how does one really put a definition to ‘perfection’. It is also unhealthy in the aspect that it imparts the wrong values. For teenagers, it only encourages them to pay too much attention to their physical appearance as they become obsessed with finding faults and then going for plastic surgery to correct these flaws. Situations of which teenagers comparing their physical appearance would arise and the ‘ugly people’ (as defined by the good-looking ones) would be further ostracised, which could be detrimental in their psychological and emotional development.

Furthermore, this also tells the young that physical appearances are extremely important and that they should go for plastic surgery if they have average looks or do not have double eyelids, too big a nose and too thin lips. We are inculcating the wrong morals if we promote the usage of plastic surgery.

Plastic surgery though cheaper, it can still cost several thousand if one was to look for a reputable doctor. Hence, only the well-to-do families are able to afford, leaving the less privileged families out of the race for perfection. This only widens the rich-poor gap as the rest will be labelled as ‘average lookers’. Based on a United States Federal Research study, beautiful people command higher wages and if this was true, those ‘average lookers’ would have to contend with being at a losing end if they were also not as well-educated. Would it even result in some form of discrimination?

If almost everyone sports model good looks on the streets or even a famous celebrity look-alike, it would be disappointing that we have lost our uniqueness. Imagine a country with most people looking as good, how then we can differentiate one from another. Moreover, having a pretty face will not mean anything if one has bad attitude and personality. He/she will still not be attractive to others.

We are certainly downplaying the role of inner beauty and the importance of personality if we were to emphasize so much on physical appearance. Although there is no doubt that physical appearance is important, I believe that what matters most is our inner beauty, our character and personality that will ultimately shine through and make us attractive. There is no need to chase the never achievable sense of ‘perfection’ as men are generally insatiable.

31 March 2008
Today Newspaper

“Aesthetic medicine: How youth face up to the question”
YouthInk writers debate whether cosmetic surgery is really necessary

We all lie for vanity's sake
THE next time you judge someone going for a cosmetic procedure, consider this: everybody lies. Heels make us look taller; make-up hides blemishes; contact lenses give the impression of perfect vision.
We mislead, misrepresent, conceal. There is no denying we do a lot for vanity's sake. But there are others who have pragmatic reasons for wanting to undergo a cosmetic procedure.
A United States Federal Reserve study in 2005 suggested that beautiful people command higher wages. There was a similar study reported last year in The Independent, a British newspaper.
Cosmetic procedures provide a quick, long-lasting, and effective means of correcting physical flaws.
It is no surprise, then, that time-starved and impatient Singaporeans are flocking to have these procedures done.

Andre Oei, 21, is a final-year government and economics student at the London School of Economics

Minor procedures okay
THE question at hand is not whether cosmetic procedures are taboo. We live in an age of self-expression, and are big advocates of free will on many fronts.
Why be ashamed if you have a prettier - albeit artificial - nose than someone else?
Why should lines be drawn to say how much one can, or cannot, change their physical appearance?
It's all up to the individual.
Personally, I would seriously consider the costs involved, be it monetary or in terms of physical pain. If both aren't excessive, I would consider undergoing minor procedures such as for collagen fillers.
However, major surgeries like tummy tucks are a no-go; I believe in improving appearances, but not in re-making a body.

Danielle Hong, 20 is a recent Communications and Mass Management graduate from Temasek Polytechnic

Consult the professionals
THE idea of improving one's looks has tempted many.
Advancements in medicine have allowed people to choose from an array of procedures, ranging from botox injections to liposuction.
Some Singaporean general practitioners (GPs) have turned to the lucrative, but risky business of cosmetic procedures.
The convenience and cheaper fees, compared to what specialists may charge, has led many Singaporeans to seek cosmetic treatment from neighbourhood GPs.
But some may not be adequately qualified to perform these procedures. Complications in cosmetic surgery could be irreversible.
Consult the professionals. Do not be penny wise, pound foolish.

Tabitha Mok, 21, is a fourth-year medical student at the University of Western Australia

Beauty needs personality
I SEE no real need for aesthetic procedures, because looks don't matter.
Sure, everyone cares about how they appear to friends and strangers, but is it worth spending thousands of dollars just to make that nose sharper or that chin more angular?
I have a beauty alternative which is free.
Open up to others, smile more and laugh out loud.
Cosmetic procedures enhance one's powers of attraction, but that attraction stays only if one has the dynamic personality to boot.

Eisen Teo, 23, is a third-year history student

Natural beauty is better
MUCH as I have to admit that I am tempted to sharpen my jaw line, I will never resort to plastic surgery.
There are various reasons for this - money, courage and 'face'.
As a student, I lack the financial means to approach a reputable doctor in aesthetic medicine. I do not trust GPs, who may charge less, but are not specialists.
I also lack the courage. If I like the 'new' me, great. But what if I don't?
I would never forgive myself for turning my 'average' face into a semblance of Frankenstein.
I would rather remain a natural beauty than be labelled an artificial one.

Stephanie Song, 21, is a third-year psychology student at NUS

“Democracy creates stability in a society.”

Stability in a society can be defined as the country having a widely respected government, and a maintenance or steady growth in economic areas, people have stable jobs and law and order prevails with minimal conflict, hence producing a desirable environment for anyone to live in.

For the above to happen, we would require the underlying variable – political stability. With political stability, conflicts would be at its minimal and research have shown that political stability is paramount to achieving economic growth, as quoted from ‘American Journal of Applied Sciences – Political Stability and Economic Growth’, 32.35 scores increasing of index of political stability leads to one percent increase in economic growth. With a steady progression in economic, we are safe to proclaim that the citizens would certainly benefit, as more jobs would be created and citizens would enjoy a steady income. Countries facing unrest now such as Burma, does not have the political stability, and riots occur to seek the right form of government. As such, we can see the importance of political stability in the overall stability of a society; it is of little possibility to enjoy economic and social stability without achieving political stability first.

Hence, the main thrust of the argument would be focused on whether democracy could create political stability in a society, as with political stability, it would lead to an overall stability and progression of the society. Political stability would be a government in reign that rules the people well, caring for their welfare and benefits, and allows the citizens to peacefully select and replace those in power.

Democracy is a system of government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and either exercised directly by citizens or through their elected representatives. The basic fundamentals of democracy are to ensure the equality of citizens, economic freedom, individual rights and citizen participation in the political arena. To put forth simply, democracy allows the people to take into hands their own fate and how they want their lives to be governed.

Democracy gives a voice to every single individual citizen of the nation as everyone counts, this sense of equality enforced allows everyone in the society be it multi-racial or multi-religion and etc, to not be discriminated. Democracy aims to move towards a public consensus towards how the country should be run and who should run it. There is an accountability of the government to the people as it is ultimately the citizens who make the final choice (by voting). With the majority of the people’s support, it is undeniably better for the government to proceed on with their actions in no matter what areas of focus.

Majority consensus settles on making peace and contentment among the people, and riots and protests are least likely to break out as compared to governing forms such as Aristocracy. Thus we can see that, democracy allows citizens to peacefully select and replace those in power.

Furthermore, with democracy, opposition parties are present to serve as a check and balance for the ruling government, and this in turn spur development for the nation. For political stability, overlapping ideas is a necessary prerequisite, as it is a form of healthy competition. This pushes the ruling government to work harder and provide more for the people to win support for the next election. Hence, democracy spurs development of the country, making the government rule the country well, caring for the people’s welfare and their benefits. This appeases people, thus fulfilling the criteria of political stability.

It is arguable that if 51% of the nation wanted Political Party A and 49% of the nation wanted Political Party B, there would be a major clash of interests, and through democracy, Political Party A would be elected government incurring the wrath of 49% of the people. This hence, does not create political stability, but political divide. Although there may be such a case, but it is also arguably noted that 2% of a population of any society suffice as a rather large amount of people. In a small nation like Singapore, 2% would probably mean an 80, 000 man strong contingent supporting Political Party A. That is undoubtedly a huge difference, considering societies with bigger populations, therefore there will not be a significant political divide, and it is impossible to satisfy every citizen’s interest.

Some may argue that majority consensus may lead to scenarios that are detrimental to the nation as democracy is the "tyranny of the majority". A majority group may use democracy to oppress the minority, the minority would find it unfair, and when they cannot settle the dispute peacefully, violence ensues, disrupting the stability of the society.

During the conflict between the Sri Lankan Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, democracy was used as a tool to discriminate against the minority. In an effort to prevent the Tamil political parties from gaining control in Tamil-dominated regions, the government broke these regions into several parts to be roped into Sinhalese-dominated constituencies such that the Sinhalese still had the majority in elections. This kept the Sinhalese in power. The LTTE retaliated with violence against the government forces, disrupting the stability of the whole country. One would see democracy fail in creating political stability, and the stability of the society.

However, we must see that democracy in their form is essentially tweaked to the ruling government's benefits. This is thus not what the ideal principals and fundamentals of democracy wanted. Furthermore, this problem can be solved by representative democracy in which the minority has an equal say in politics. The right ideals of democracy is not one which the government seeks to deny rights and destroy opposition, in doing so, they destroy the fundamental principal of democracy, and thus destroy democracy itself.

Hence, we see not a loophole in democracy, but rather the misuse of it.

People, are undeniably imperfect, the nature of most men are arguably of self-interest. As such, they would find means to protect their own power and authority with little or no regard for others. However, if we were to judge any political system with the human factor, it is impossible to find the best form of government to create stability.

Democracy fulfils the yardstick for political stability, while we must still acknowledge the misuse of democracy though it cannot be use as an evidence for democracy not being successful for creating stability. As such, I conclude to say that if the fundamentals and ideals of democracy are acted upon to the optimal, it is definitely true that democracy can create political stability, and in so doing creating stability in the society.

In conclusion, I agree to the statement that democracy does indeed create stability in a society.

"Engaging Students beyond the Classroom"
By Jane Ng

Commentary:

In the article, “Engaging students beyond the classroom”, Jane Ng touches on the idea of teachers breaking century-long traditions of simply being the educator and having lessons being restricted to only curriculum time. It is stated in the article that more teachers have been engaged in activities that have greater customisation, catering more towards the individualised interests and learning needs of their students.

These learning experiences run the gamut from gaming and jamming to anime. Science Teacher Ms Ang Shu Hui, 25, the lead singer of the Ping Yi band, explains that these new experiences strengthen teacher-student relations and students now are more willing to take instructions from her.

What I find heartening to note is that the teachers also broaden their horizons and pick up many new skills. For example, teachers are now more well-equipped with IT skills. With that, they are able to challenge the physical boundaries and limitations of a classroom. Mr Low, a maths teacher, never hesitates to offer his mobile phone number, e-mail address and MSN address. As he says, students have no qualms in approaching him, and he would go all the way to answer their questions.

Although it is beneficial to the students, I feel that it may cause a change of the traditional dynamics between teacher and student. From the perspective of a student, I know there would be some students who might misinterpret Mr Low’s actions and start perceiving him as a friend, a buddy. This would certainly have implications on the authority of teachers.

Currently a 15 year-old student myself, I have seen such similar trends. Teachers who are able to relate well with our generation, are generally more popular. Apart from that, lessons are less “sleep-inducing” as they are able to evoke interest since teachers now have a better understanding of us and how we learn.
Research has shown that our generation is increasingly becoming a group of youths with short attention spans, we are highly resistant to pedagogies that require us to just absorb information. Learning for us has to be experiential and made relevant. Subjects, like Physics, may prove to be rather “dry” at times if students are unable to see how they are applicable in the real world or unable to see the theories in action. The ideas would remain abstract and inaccessible to us. That is why I think Jane Ng’s article is very encouraging. I hope what is happening in these schools is the norm rather than the exception.

Based on my years of classroom experience, a conducive learning environment would be one which the teacher is able to relate well with the students, and there is a common understanding between one another. Recalling back, my teacher makes it a point for students to take a short break and have a small “chit-chat” session whenever work gets too dull.

Perhaps we should be taken out of the classroom! Let us learn in fun and exciting environments! I really hope teachers will find inspiration in this newspaper article and see the merits of innovative teaching methods and reach out to the needs of youngsters. Make school both fun and meaningful for us!

Nonetheless, we as students must also be responsive and appreciative for what our teachers have done for us.

As society changes and the world continue to evolve, I believe the way we learn and the way we are taught must adapt with the times. Teachers now are all responding to these changes; let’s hope more will come on board.

Quek Hao Zhi (22)
3B

"Engaging Students Beyond the Classroom"
by Jane Ng

3 March 2008 The Straits Times
Page 1,2

http://newslink.asiaone.com/user/OrderArticleRequest.action?order=&_sourcePage=%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fuser%2Fsearch_type_result.jsp&month=03&year=2008&date=03&docLanguage=en&documentId=nica_ST_2008_8250335