Silence of the howling gays

Once again, the sound of silence from the gay community is deafening. Whenever we have a report in the news about sex crimes against gays, the gay community will howl at the top of their voices that they are discriminated. Funny, but it really makes me wonder why the heck would gays be so passionate about fighting for criminals.

On 29 Jun 2009, there was a report in the Straits Times, pertaining to another sex crime. This time, it is a hetero sex crime. No prizes for guessing right that gays this time are dead silent.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking+News/Singapore/Story/STIStory_396874.html

Man jailed over oral sex

A MAN who allowed a 15-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him was jailed for eight months on Monday.

Shahrizam Mohamed Asri, 33, admitted to having unnatural sex with the underage girl at a multi-storey carpark at Boon Lay Drive in December 2005.

He was also given a concurrent sentence of seven months' jail for attempted sex with the girl that day.

A Community Court heard that the two became acquainted over the Internet about three months earlier and exchanged phone numbers.

In December, they arranged to meet. He picked her up near her house and drove her to the multi-storey carpark at Boon Lay Drive where the offences occurred.

In April 2006, the victim's aunt received a call from her sister-in-law that she had chanced upon a video clip showing the victim performing oral sex on an unknown man.

The victim admitted it after she was queried. She made a police report on April 12 that year.

A third charge of permitting a 14-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him at another carpark was considered during his sentencing.

He could have been jailed for up to five years and fined up to $10,000 for attempted carnal connection.

For unnatural sex, he could have been jailed for up to 10 years and fined.

Note that the criminal was convicted for unnatural sex and not sex with underage teen. Now if the victim had been a boy, for sure, the howls of the gay community will be heard all over the place. Gays would shout at the top of their voices, "Discrimination!"

They would say that on top of having to face the prospect of being charged with sex with underage teen, they will have to face S377A, which criminalizes gay sex.

Well, the above charge in the article is S377 in action and while the criminal could have been charged with sex with underage teen, he was charged with unnatural sex, just like what gays have been crying "discrimination"!

Many gays would like to believe that S377 has been repealed. Not quite so. I firmly remember that the court interprets that S377 as oral sex is allowed provided it precedes "natural sex", which is vaginal penetration. The above means that oral sex between male and female can be considered a crime, if it does not precede vaginal penetration.

I believe that the above is what the criminal is charged for. But he could have been charged with sex with underage teen. So why wasn't he?

More glaringly, why the total silence from the gay community? After all, they have always created a ruckus whenever a gay criminal is charged for "unnatural sex", which they always claim it is because of S377A. Never mind that the gay criminals in question usually could have been charged with sex with underage teens and/or sex in public places.

Funny how gays are so willing to defend criminals if they are gays.

In conclusion, I can say that there really is no discrimination meted out by the law against gays. Gays think that S377A has been used too liberally to arrest gays when other charges could have been used. But then again, when a similar incident happens and the criminal is a hetero, gays are totally silent.

The only discrimination that exists against gays are in the minds of the gays themselves.

France - Secularly unsecular

So exactly what is secularism? Separation of politics from religion or oppressing religion? If it is the former, I have yet to see France, the self-proclaimed secular state, practise what they preach. If it is the latter, France is the perfect example of secular state - by being unsecular and undemocratic!

Burqa not welcome in France: Sarkozy

PARIS: President Nicolas Sarkozy, wading into a potentially explosive controversy, said yesterday that the face-covering burqa worn by some Muslim women 'is not welcome on the territory of France'.

In an address to both houses of Parliament, focused mainly on economic issues, the President supported the recent demand of some deputies for a debate on whether to ban the burqa. The question is not one of religion, said Mr Sarkozy, but of women's dignity. He called the burqa a 'sign of servitude' that forced submission which damages the dignity of women.

France has one of Europe's largest Muslim populations. Since 2004, it has prohibited the wearing of obvious religious symbols in public schools and public offices. The law was aimed at Muslim headscarves.

The burqa question arose only recently, when a communist deputy from the city of Lyon introduced a motion to ban the garment, which he called a 'mobile prison'.

Now, I don't have a problem with banning of the burqa per se. I have a problem with the reasoning process. Banning the burqa because it "imprisons women"? What if the women wish to put it on? Wouldn't forcing them to take it off be oppressing women's rights to put on what they wish?

I find many so called democratic and secular nations very hypocritical. This is just one example. If they have a problem with immigrants in France because of their "overlax" migration policy, (which of late has seen many North Africans entering their country), then they should address that problem. But no, doing so would seem that they are racists against Africans and that would be politically incorrect.

But then again, Muslim-bashing somehow does not seem to be politically incorrect. Hence, banning the burqa and implicitly stating the need to stem religion (in this case Islam) in France is OK. Never mind that banning the burqa nationwide and the headscarf in schools and public offices is also infringing women's rights to dress as they please.

Let's face it. Most developed countries have "immigration problems". On one hand, the governments see the need to increase their population and workforce to remain competitive. Hence, by allowing immigrants to settle, hopefully, that would alleviate the manpower shortage.

The other side of the coin is that current residents (read citizens), will see that their jobs are taken over by cheap labour. Hence, a barrier is built and we now have an "us vs them" mentality. Since the majority of migrants are North African Muslims, what better way then to play the religion card of Islam (the religion that has been linked with terror, again by the media, for the last decade)?

Sarkozy, like many other leaders of so called democratic and secular nations, dare not say that immigrants are causing a social problem. No government would dare say that. Hence, the convenient way to appease the citizens is to show that something is being done - put a stop to "resurging Islam". At least, to the citizens of France, it would seem that he is doing something about the "immigration problem".

This is the ironic twist. First, say that the banning of burqa and headscarf is not targetted against religion (in this case Islam). Never mind that the headscarf is mandatory for Muslim women and the burqa is exclusively worn by Muslim women. Then say that the ban is to prevant "oppression of women".

So while pretending to fight for women's liberty, the rule actually targets Islam (isn't this against human rights?) and also forces women who wish to have it on to take it off (isn't the oppression against women's rights to dress as they please?)

At the same time, the real issue of increased number of immigrants, which is the citizens' grouse, is still not addressed. That's a true politician in action - appearing to do something about a problem without really doing something about it.

Anyway, back to the topic of secularism. So, is secularism truly a separation of politics and religion? Or is it the oppression of religion? If it is a separation of religion, then the banning of the burqa should be based on non-religious grounds - eg security, because it is a perfect concealment for would be criminals. That would be a more politically correct reason.

But since western democracy and secularism is hypocritical, banning the burqa (and headscarf) due to religious ground is acceptable - never mind it also transgresses another democratic and secular theme - the right of the woman to dress as she pleases.

So what have the pro-secularists and pro-feminists have to say about this?

Bias Reporting - Alternative Media vs Mainstream Media

We all know that the mainstream media is bias in their reports - be it local or the foreign media. What about the alternative media?

Twitter, a popular form of communication which has attained the status of alternative media, is the latest medium that has fallen to bias reporting. I have been reading news coming out from Iran regarding the elections. There appears to be very divergent reports.

Wayang Party has probably been following the elections too. Here is its report, pertaining to what has been going on at Twitter.

http://wayangparty.com/?p=10291

Social Networks Spread Defiance Online

As the embattled government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appears to be trying to limit Internet access and communications in Iran, new kinds of social media are challenging those traditional levers of state media control and allowing Iranians to find novel ways around the restrictions.

Iranians are blogging, posting to Facebook and, most visibly, coordinating their protests on Twitter, the messaging service. Their activity has increased, not decreased, since the presidential election on Friday and ensuing attempts by the government to restrict or censor their online communications.

On Twitter, reports and links to photos from a peaceful mass march through Tehran on Monday, along with accounts of street fighting and casualties around the country, have become the most popular topic on the service worldwide, according to Twitter’s published statistics.

A couple of Twitter feeds have become virtual media offices for the supporters of the leading opposition candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi. One feed, mousavi1388 (1388 is the year in the Persian calendar), is filled with news of protests and exhortations to keep up the fight, in Persian and in English. It has more than 7,000 followers.

Mr. Moussavi’s fan group on Facebook has swelled to over 50,000 members, a significant increase since election day.

Labeling such seemingly spontaneous antigovernment demonstrations a “Twitter Revolution” has already become something of a cliché. That title had been given to the protests in Moldova in April.

However, I have another link, which I bookmarked, a few days ago. I thought it was curious that Twitter was being used as a propaganda to discredit the Iranian Elections. Here is that link.

http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/proof-israeli-effort-to-destabilize-iran-via-twitter/

Proof: Israeli Effort to Destabilize Iran Via Twitter

Right-wing Israeli interests are engaged in an all out Twitter attack with hopes of delegitimizing the Iranian election and causing political instability within Iran.

Anyone using Twitter over the past few days knows that the topic of the Iranian election has been the most popular. Thousands of tweets and retweets alleging that the election was a fraud, calling for protests in Iran, and even urging followers hack various Iranian news websites (which they did successfully). The Twitter popularity caught the eye of various blogs such as Mashable andTechCrunch and even made its way to mainstream news media sites.

Were these legitimate Iranian people or the works of a propaganda machine? I became curious and decided to investigate the origins of the information. In doing so, I narrowed it down to a handful of people who have accounted for 30,000 Iran related tweets in the past few days. Each of them had some striking similarities -

1. They each created their twitter accounts on Saturday June 13th.
2. Each had extremely high number of Tweets since creating their profiles.
3. “IranElection” was each of their most popular keyword
4. With some very small exceptions, each were posting in ENGLISH.
5. Half of them had the exact same profile photo
6. Each had thousands of followers, with only a few friends. Most of their friends were EACH OTHER.

Why were these tweets in English? Why were all of these profiles OBSESSED with Iran? It became obvious that this was the work of a team of people with an interest in destabilizing Iran. The profiles are phonies and were created with the sole intention of destabilizing Iran and effecting public opinion as to the legitimacy of Iran’s election.

Sad, isn't it? So if the mainstream media is bias, and the alternative media is also susceptible to bias reporting, who are we to believe?

There is no such thing as fair reporting. Every report is skewed (including this blog if you don't already know it) to the writer's and/or editor's and/or organisation's views. You just have to be sharp and politically wary to know what is the real news and what is rubbish.

Old Man's mouth speaks faster than his brain can think

Talking without engaging brain is like revving engine without engaging gear - all noise and no movement. That must be MM Lee's motto whenever he travels overseas.

Now how many (countless) times has he made remarks that offends his hosts? The latest fiasco is reported over here.

Remarks spark reaction
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/6/14/nation/4117684&sec=nation

Excerpts:

GEORGE TOWN: Comments by Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew that Penang’s infrastructure is found wanting have led to the Chief Minister and his predecessor pointing fingers at each other.

“Lee mentioned that our infrastructure is inferior compared to Ipoh and Seremban.

“Perhaps this is a reflection of the ‘graceful decline’ that Penang has undergone over the last 18 years,” said Lim Guan Eng, who is also DAP secretary-general.

He said the state was willing to work with the federal government to carry out “necessary remedial measures” on Penang, especially in the areas of communications and transport.

Gerakan president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, who is the former Chief Minister, hit back claiming that Lee had focused on the condition of the state’s roads in his statement about inadequate infrastructure.

“Most of the roads in Penang are under the state (government) or the municipal council. It has been more than a year that Pakatan Rakyat has been administering them,” said Dr Koh.

Lee, whose last official visit to Penang was in 1989, met both leaders privately yesterday – Lim at about 12.20pm at his office in Komtar and Dr Koh at about 3pm at the E&O hotel where the Singapore entourage was staying.

Lim and Dr Koh said that Lee had inquired about the political change and situation in Penang.

Lee, who will conclude his visit tomorrow, declined to talk to reporters.

This is not the first time The Old Man has interfered in the internal affairs of a foreign nation. Here is another example.
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2008/02/mm-lee-should-stop-interfering-with.html

Lee has time and again stressed traditional Chinese Custom and values. However, one of the values of Chinese Custom is never to criticise your host. That is definitely forbidden. So what traditional Chinese Custom is this old man purportedly trying to propagate?

Imagine, a foreign ex-PM (eg, Dr Mad Hatter), comes to Singapore and criticizes Tanjong Pagar GRC for its management and names another GRC as a much better run GRC. How would our leaders in Singapore take that? Isn't that interference?

Old Man Lee should learn to shut up. He is causing Singaporeans an embarrassment. If he truly wants to improve bilateral ties with Malaysia, he should start thinking before talking. Otherwise revving engine without engaging gear will lead to all noise and no movement.

Raising a Family (Part 4) - The Teenage Years

Welcome to Part 4 out of five in this series. In Part 4, we will take a look at the issues pertaining to the Teenage Years - probably the most difficult years of parenting. Here is where suddenly everything changes. The little kid you have known all along suddenly turns into a nightmare.

Change is normal. Every child will go through this phase called puberty. Not only will the child face physiological and physical changes to her body, she will also face a host of emotional challenges. This is the stage where the child is most vulnerable. If there is no strong bond between parent and child, the teenager may be easily led astray.

Let's take a look at the issues a teenager faces.


Get to know their friends -
If you recall Part 3, it was stressed that parents should get to know their children's friends. While it may seem a trivial thing during the child's primary school days, the importance of knowing your teenage son's or daughter's friends now become apparent.

If you had not established that knowing your child's friends as the norm during her early days, she would definitely now object if you were to attempt to get to know her company of acquaintences. Hence, it is very important to establish that knowing who her friends are is what is expected, when she is in primary school.

The benefit of knowing your child's friends is that you know exactly the kind of company she mixes with. This is important because "friends" with not so good intention will be on the lookout for vulnerable teenagers. They know if these teenagers do not have a strong bond with their parents, they would be easy target.

It must be noted that teenagers, especially girls, need to feel accepted among friends. If there is no bond between parent and child, it puts the teenager in a very vulnerable position. In such a case, anyone who appears to be sympathetic towards the teenager, will be able to win her heart.

Needless to say, this teenager can be easily talked into having sexual relationship, be it with someone of the opposite sex or even of the same sex.


Get to know their teachers -
Like in primary school, all secondary schools have Meet the Parents Sessions. This is a good opportunity to know your child's teachers. If your child knows that you take an interest in her schoolwork, there is a higher chance she would behave and less chance she would mix with the wrong company.

Keeping in touch with teachers also gives you an idea of the co-curricular activities the school has. Unlike primary school where the parent is told what the child does in school, many secondary schools usually do not inform parents of every single activity that occurs after school hours. If you do not keep in touch with the teachers, your child may be able to "bluff her way out" where she has been after school hours.


The school authority and the law -
In Part 3, it is noted that if the parent runs down their children's teachers (especially in front of their children), that would severely undermine the school authority. The impact is more severe if this happens in secondary school. If students do not respect school authority, the next thing they will not respect is the law. This again is another area of social concern.

According to school counsellors I have spoken to, one big headache the police has is shoplifting - especially amongst secondary schoolgirls. It is not that these girls cannot afford to shop the honest way. It is the thrill involved in flirting with crime. Some of these girls are even from top schools.

There appears to be pressure among teenagers to conform to group behaviour. The most common reason for petty crimes committed by teenagers is due to peer pressure to conform.

Again, it can be seen that the teenager is very vulnerable to outside forces. If the there is no parent-child bond, it is easy for the teen to go astray.


Moral Education -
While the stress during Primary school years would be sex (and moral) education, the stress during the teen years is mainly moral education pertaining to sexual behaviour. Again, if the parent-child bond has not been established over the years, this is going to be one big hurdle.

The last thing parents need is to have an outsider who has no interest in the teenager's welfare, telling the teenager what sex and morals are about.

Let me be very specific here. Since this five-part series is about handling the challenges of the invasion of the gay pride into society, especially into schools, I will specifically mention Aware's CSE programme and the aftermath that followed it.

- Aware's CSE Programme
Teenagers are very susceptible. Again if they have not been drilled by parents what is morally right or wrong, they would take the facilitator's words for granted - in this case, homosexuality is neutral and anal sex is normal.

- Blogs that appear to endorse homosexuality
There are loads and loads of literature found in blogs which support homosexuality. Again, teens who have not been drilled at an early age what is acceptable or not, will be easily influenced to think that homosexuality and anal sex are natural.

- The Mainstream Media (MSM)
It is very unfortunate that the mainstream, especially the Straits Times, during the AWARE saga has portrayed the issue as Christian Fundamentalism vs Secular opinions. This gives teens the wrong idea that those who view homosexuality as unacceptable are extremists, while those who view homosexuality as OK as liberated.

However, as parents, we know that homosexuality is actually a deviant practice from the norm. If parents have not built a strong bond between themselves and the teenager, the influence from outsiders will be overwhelming.

Qualifying Statement -
Parents who do not approve the teaching that homo is natural need not discriminate gays. Just like we do not discriminate or hate chain smokers and leave them alone, parents have a right to teach their children that homo is a deviant practice from the norm and homosexuals should be allowed their private space.

Meal time is also family bonding time -
The real value and benefit of a family eating together is now apparent. While it may be just a trivial family affair when the child is younger, for teenagers this now has become a sacred family ritual - and it is the parents who hold the trump card.

Imagine this situation. The teenager says she has to be with her friends to finish off a project. This is a common "reason" teenagers give to be with her friends. She says that they have to work late into the night. What if this becomes so often and she comes home later than even working parents? What can you as a parent do?

If the family mealtime has been established as a sacred family ritual, it would now become incumbent upon the teenager to work out with her friends that the project work will have to be timed such that the teenager is home by dinner time! The hard work of convincing your teenage daughter to come home early is reduced to an effortless reminder that she has to be home for dinner!

Of course, there are times that your teenage daughter has to come late. But if your family mealtime has been established as a sacred ritual, that late night would be far and between, as compared to the carefree loving teenage girl who does not have this dinner ritual.

The benefits of being able to keep your teenage children (especially daughters) at home once the sun sets need not be stressed in detail. As parents, you know what the consequences are if you can't keep your teenage children home after sunset.


Holiday time is also family bonding time -
Again, as stressed in Part 2 and 3, this is a good family bonding time. Most of the time, teenagers will say they want to have their own company of friends. They prefer to go out with their friends than to be with their parents. That is normal.

However, the annual family holiday is still a valuable time for the family. Again, like family mealtime bonding, if you have established the annual family holiday as the norm, there will be little resistance from the teenager if you insist they follow you on your annual holiday.

Family holidays have far reaching and very long term effect. It is the norm to take pictures or record videos during holidays. As the years go by, when the teenager looks back at these photos and/or videos, they will be reminded subconsciously of the strong bond she has had with her parents and family. This again makes it easier for your child to continue the family bonding ways when it is time for her to start her own family, because she now has "proof" to show to her own children, what family bonding is about.


Husband-Wife Disputes -
As always, if the husband and wife have too many quarrels in front of their children too often, cracks in the family bond will start to appear and take effect.

While the primary school child may keep these family problems to herself, the teenager would be more willing to share it with outsiders - especially if that outsider shows interest in the teenager.

Feeling insecure because of frequent problems within the family, it would only be natural for the teenager to seek solace outside. This again is excellent opportunity for anyone who has ulterior motive to lead the teenager astray. This outsider could be a "boyfriend" or even a lesbian friend. For boys, it could be a gay friend. This also makes it easy for a gay/lesbian "adult mentor" to lead them astray.

Over and above all the potential social problems the teenager may face, these frequent disputes between dad and mum will also affect her studies. Things can go down the slippery slope from here.

It is important to know that husband and wife disputes should be kept away from children as far as possible. Again, it can be noted this is easier said than done. But the damage of such disputes cannot be under-estimated.


Children see, children do -
If you have a habit of doing something for years in front of your child, by now anything she does that repeats your behaviour is already more or less "her right". That is the reason why in Parts 1, 2 and 3, it has always been stressed that you should be careful with what you do. Hence, parents should never get involved in any vice like compulsive drinking, gambling or any other addictive behaviour. Womanizing is also considered a vice. So are other kinds of promiscuous behaviour. All these are forbidden to the married.

Once again, I would like to also stress that not only what you do is seen as an endorsement to what they can do, what you approve, will also be seen as an endorsement to what you allow them to do. This includes parents who are pro-gay and propagate pro-gay programmes. Your teenage son or daughter, after witnessing many years of your pro-gay propagation, will take that as your endorsement that he/she be allowed to engage in gay/lesbian activities.

Would these pro-gay parents, who have been championing gay rights for years, now accept if their children engage gay activities? What would you do, if your teenage son or daughter told you that you have always been pro-gay and now, you should accept what they do?

Worse still, what if your children decide to cross-dress or even change sex, because transgender issues are related to GLBT issues? What if they told you that you have always been promoting GLBT agenda and hence, you should accept their "transformation"?

Are you able to take that?

If the answer is no, then you should stop promoting the gay agenda immediately.

This ends Part 4. In Part 5, we will be taking a look at beyond the teen years.

Related links:
Raising a Family (Part 1) - Preparing yourself
Raising a Family (Part 2) - Looking after the preschooler
Raising a Family (Part 3) - The Primary School Years

Raising a Family (Part 3) - The Primary School Years

In this third part series of five, we will take a look at the issues pertaining to children during their Primary School years.

Boon or bane, the education system in Singapore is very efficient, systematic and intense. So love it or hate, if you are a parent, one of the issues that is surely to hit you is - how will my children do in school?

However, since my theme is to form a close bond between parent and child, I will instead concentrate on forming parent-child bond, rather than how to get your child to perform well in school. So here it is.


Get to know their friends -
Yes, get to to their friends, including their names. Better still if you know their friends' parents. This should not be a problem. Schools have Parents' Support Groups. You can join these groups and from there, get to know other parents.

The importance of getting to know their friends is long term. This is just a start. We will discuss more of this in Part 4 and 5. As for now, getting to know their friends is nothing more than symbolic. At this stage, it seems trivial. But this opens the door to get a foothold such that in later years, when you get to know your children's friends, they won't object that as you are interfering into their personal space. You have already established that knowing their friends as the norm.


Get to know their teachers -
Your Primary school child spends half a day, 5 times a week in school. That's a lot of time. The teacher has about 40 children in her class. If you don't get to know the teacher, she won't get to know you.

Teachers are important to parents. Their are the bridge between them and their child, as far as school activities are concerned. I have come across parents who know next to nothing what their child does in school. That is a reflection of the parents' aloofness.

If you get to know your child's teacher, she will alert you immediately if she feels that there is something that needs to be addressed. It must be remembered that teachers are humans too. If she does not know you well, she may be less likely to alert you. So which do you prefer? A teacher who alerts you or a teacher who doesn't?


Never rundown the school authority -
Some parents put down their child's teachers - in front of their child! This is a mistake. If you do that, they will not respect school authority. Then when they are caught breaking school rules, it makes it so much difficult for the school to discipline your child. This opens the door for more unacceptable social behaviour to creep in, when they go to secondary school.

If you have to disagree with the school teacher or principal, do it behind your children's back.


Get to know what they learn -
Primary school syllabus is not that difficult. If possible, put in effort to learn what they learn in school. Guide them in their studies if you can. Of course that is not possible in all cases. However, if you can guide them, it again serves as a bond between parent and child.

If you remember Part 2, it is advised that you teach your child to read early. From here it can be seen that learning and teaching between parent and child has blossomed into shared experience. By the time your child is in Primary school, unconsciously, she has accepted that learning from the parent is a natural thing to do. This makes things so much easier when you teach non-academic lessons in life - like who your child should mix with and who she should not.


Sex Education -
Parents, do you know that by Primary 5, your child would have learned about the human reproductive system in school? If you have been teaching your child all along, this is an excellent opportunity to teach them about the morals as well. Of course, you don't have to wait till they are in Primary 5. Some parents start even earlier.

Like it or not, if you don't teach them about sex, they will learn about it from other sources. Hence, parents should teach their children about sex - both the biological and moral aspects.

At this point, it is good to highlight the point I stated about teaching your child early. If you had taught your child since she was a baby, and continue to teach her in primary school, she would simply accept what you teach her about morals pertaining to sex. Excellent chance for parents who insist teaching moral values, pertaining to sex education!

By secondary school, these morals you have taught them over the years would have been entrenched in them, no outsider would be able to shake it from them.


The Internet -
Sadly, this is one area it is the children who usually are in a position to teach parents. Like it or not, we all have to move with the times. If you are not computer and/or internet savvy, you won't be able to keep abreast what your children are doing behind your backs. Hence, you need to keep up.

If possible, set up accounts like Facebook or other social connections and link up with your children. Again, this is to gain a foothold. If all along you are their friend in these social network, by secondary school, your presence in their social circle would be accepted by them. Of course, this does not mean that you can interfere with their personal and private lives when they grow older.


Meal time is also family bonding time -
Like in Part 2, I have to stress this again. Meal time is also family bonding time. By now, it is the norm that the family eats together. It has become entrenched such that the children see it as a duty to eat as a family. Again, at this stage, this is just symbolic. The real benefit of this meal time bond comes during the teen years, which you will see in Part 4.


Holiday time is also family bonding time -
Again, as stressed in Part 2, this is a good family bonding time.


Husband-Wife Disputes -
By now you will realise that certain issues that have been adhered to since the child was a baby is being repeated. Parenting is long term, so naturally these "rules" are also long term.

While parent-parent dispute may be traumatic to a pre-schooler, to a Primary school child, it may confuse her. So on one hand, parents are the authority and command respect. Yet, on the other hand, these figures of authority cannot agree what is right or wrong.

Again, keeping disputes away from children is easier said than done. However, it must be remembered that too many disputes too often would cause cracks in the family bond. When the child is confused, she would begin to seek outside help. This is where the problem starts. Hence, parents should try their best to keep their differences away from their children.


Never use money as a weapon -
It does get repetitive, doesn't it? But like I said, parenting is long term and so the "rules" are repeated over a long period.

If the father threatens to withhold money from mother when the child is a preschooler, only the mother feels threatened. The child is probably too young to know anything. But if the father does that when the child is in Primary school, the child is old enough to understand what the father says.

Again, this is going to be the start of a family breakup. That child may also feel threatened and insecure, unlike the preschooler. She may begin to form negative ideas about her dad and may for the first time, even hate her dad.

NEVER, NEVER use money to threaten. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should money be used as weapon - unless you want a divorce and/or family breakup.


Children see, children do -
Again! Repetition! This was discussed in Part 2. While the preschooler may mimic the parent, the primary school child will see that what the parent does, is an endorsement to what they can do! Please, PLEASE, be careful of what you do, say, or imply what you say!

I have said this before and I will repeat. If parents are pro-gay and show that they are pro-gay, your primary school kid will take that as an endorsement from you - for them to experiment gay lifestyle. You may think that they are still young. Wrong! Chances are that they know about gay and lesbianism more than you think they know.

Other things you need to be aware of is that if you drink, smoke or gamble, chances are that they will see that these vices are acceptable. Likewise, if you do not respect your elders, they will take it that they wont' have to respect others too. And you may be the one whom they won't respect when they grow older!


This ends Part 3. For those who think that parenting is a chore at this stage, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. The real test a parent has to go through is in Part 4 - The Teenage Years. That's when it can really get ugly if you don't get it right. But if you do get it right, the rewards of parenting are well worth all those years.

Related posts
Raising a Family (Part 1) - Preparing yourself
Raising a Family (Part 2) - Looking after the preschooler

Raising a Family (Part 4) - The Teenage Years

Yawning Bread, are you not astro-turfing yourself?

Astro-turfing, the latest word gays are using to rubbish parents' concern that gays are penetrating schools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

Astroturfing is a word in English describing formal political, advertising, or public relations campaigns seeking to create the impression of being spontaneous "grassroots" behavior, hence the reference to the artificial grass

It is not like gays can't see there are 7000+ signatories who petitioned to MOE to have AWARE's CSE stopped.

It is not like when Dana Lim said there was no gay agenda, gays could not see that parents kept slamming pies into her face.

It is not like that this blog is so well known that it can attract thousands of visitors day - yet on topics concerning the homo invasion of schools, the comments section in some posts have hit triple digit figures.

Are these all not evidence that there is concern amongst parents and other groups that the gay pride has intention to influence our children? Yet, gays deny there is such a concern!

The irony is that while gays allege that "anti-gays" are astro-turfing, they appear to do it themselves. By the way, note that I put up "anti-gay" in quotes because gays tend to brand anyone who does not support them as anti-gay. To them, there is no middle ground. Either you are pro-gay or anti-gay. No fence-sitter or neutral person.

Here is an article by Alex Au, a well-known gay activist.
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-1041.htm

I would like to highlightthat his article has elements of astroturfing.

The following can be found in the box column on the right hand side of his article.

The personality of anti-gay attackers
Four conservative personality traits reinforce each other to lead to attacks on gay people.
1. Seeing gay people as outsiders,
2. Seeing themselves (heterosexuals) as superior,
3. Great importance attached to conformity,
4. Respect for authority.
The attacker construes a right to go on the offensive against gay people because they are inferior outsiders who have committed the wrong of not conformity when they can/should, and since he sees himself as superior, acquires the right to as an agent of authority in order to enforce conformity on them.

Note the sweeping statement and lumping of heterosexuals as "anti-gay" without backing it up. There is no middle ground for the heterosexual who does not support gay cause.

Alex also puts up a table, juxtaposed against a pre-conditioning of the "us and them" mentality.

Excerpts:

Both these responses come out of a trait strongly associated with the conservative personality, and which a reader reminded me of in an email he/she sent to me recently. The word used in the email was "ethnocentrism", but the particular trait is not as specific to ethnicity as suggested. More accurately, it is a tendency to give heightened importance to the distinction between the in-group and the out-group. The conservative personality takes greater pride in, and exhibits greater loyalty to the in-group, while having a lower regard for the out-group. Sometimes, the out-group is seen as threatening, which in turn promotes aggressive behaviour towards them.

The in-group can be along the lines of ethnicity, race, religion, class, gender or even species.

Racial chauvinism, for example, is often associated with conservative personality traits. There is a tendency to frown on inter-racial relationships and a dismissive attitude towards the value of other cultures. It segues into racial supremicism

Religious chauvinism leads to a feeling of superiority -- sometimes sneeringly so -- over people of different faiths, and even more towards atheists. Because they see others as lesser humans, they can behave very insensitively towards them. There is a resistance to interfaith and ecumenical dialogue, out of fear of contamination -- and one can only be contaminated if the outsider is seen as unclean and unworthy -- but also out of a feeling that the other is not an equal.

What is considered the in-group is situational. A conservative person can think of himself as Teochew when dissing other Chinese dialect groups, or as Chinese when dissing Malays and Indians. A minute later, he may see himself as Evangelical Christian when dissing Taoists, Hindus, Buddhists (all "idolators" in their parlance), Muslims and Catholics, whose pope is often labelled "AntiChrist" by fundamentalist protestant churches.

......The conservative tendency to retreat into one's in-group, to display suspicion and distaste for out-groups, and disdain for the creative chaos, syncretism or whatever one might call the experimental and hopefully fruitful intermixing of different ideas and peoples, is actually inimical to our best interests.

How can we speak of racial and religious tolerance when the natural tendency of conservative personality types is to look down on and distance themselves from others? How can we speak of being engaged with an ever-changing world when they have an instinctive fear of both "destabilising" change and an uncomfortably different wider world?

Note the astro-turfing, putting up gays as victims in a majority heterosexual world? Note the subtle association of gay discrimination with race and religious discrimination?

As if heterosexuals have been discriminating gays to such an extent that they are suffering in pain and silence.

To the gay, there is no middle path. As long as the heterosexual does not support the gay cause, he is "anti-gay".

Gays have a long way to go before they get any sympathy, let alone respect from society if they keep playing the victim.