Re: Emma Watson equality is your issue too

Emma Watson equality is your issue too (UNWomen)

As I’ve mentioned previously, feminism is a word corrupted by overzealous and oversensitive zealots contaminating the true ideal and struggle of the movement, with sadly extremism. Whenever there is hate, it won’t work. I wouldn’t say all feminists hated men, but I would say that any movement (led by extremists who are just handful) are hateful. How could a beautiful ideal be successful if led by (or transformed into) hate?

I will reiterate that gender is not equal (full stop). I strongly believe that we should respect and appreciate such “gender inequality”. It is only when we learn to appreciate the diversity in genders (including homosexuals), that we can appreciate and preserve such qualities.

Take for example,

  1. We can’t expect men to deliver babies.
  2. We can’t force women to work in construction (or as lone night watchmen) just because they wanted “equality” in profession.
  3. We can’t place a quota (e.g. 1-to-1 ratio) on every profession in the world just because women wants “fair share” to professions, because this is illogical. Gender differences in physique and “mental” capacity (used in a positive way), would preclude such scenario.
  4. We can’t expect men to have same amount of maternity leaves as women (employment rights), because of the differences in dads’ role over moms’ (exceptions are single dads or moms in which case, they have no choice).
  5. Everyone in this world wants a fair amount of salary for the same amount of work/time at work. Construction workers in some countries are underpaid and their job is undeniably dangerous and important. Domestic helpers are underpaid considering that their responsibility is no less important. Men of different skin colours want equal footing in promotion opportunity and salary and not to be biased. There are so many people of different makes (be it gender, age, race, physique, hair colour, political ideal, etc) who constantly think that they are being marginalized. If we think that we are being marginalized, just move on to better companies because bad companies that prefer sycophants rather than gems, will fall because they can’t identify gems from junks in the company. But to associate all inequality to gender bias is really unhealthy! If it is a government, then use your power to vote against the political party. In my opinion, the struggle by women (and men, especially caring dads) for equal rights to vote by women in general elections is one of the most successful healthy feminism in action, not to mention rights for education.
  6. Men and women are different. A struggle to abolish gender based product or packaging by overzealous feminists is unhealthy. Being oversensitive and constantly suspicious of campaigns by manufacturers or advertisements to undermine females is unhealthy. Being defensive over normal conversations with friends or family members is unhealthy. Being too proud to be labelled a feminist is very unhealthy! Feminism is a means to a cause, and not a prestige (or exclusive club).

Again, feminism is an unpopular word because their struggle was narrow (not sure about it now). However, as Emma Watson pointed out, if men are involved and their struggle be heard too (especially considering men and women make up family units), it would be a more holistic approach to fight for inequality.

Correction to current perception

  • Do men and women behave the same? No, men and women don’t behave the same. If you thought that men don’t talk emotionally just because they were programmed by how they were raised, you were wrong. Boys as young as 2 to 3 years old are not as proficient in expressing themselves as compared to girls and such gender differences should be studied scientifically, rather than “force” boys to be expressive. The sexes are wired differently!
  • Aggressive behaviour (inquisitive, daring, etc) is hormonal (or biological) and is neither deliberate nor resultant from child abuse (although abuse is a contributing factor). Males should be recognized positively for this tendency (but not biased); but don’t get me wrong, any behaviour can be conditioned/regulated by the mind. We are primates after all with higher mental capacity. Note that aggressive behaviour is used to be a survival instinct.
  • Similarly, girls will be timid and cautious (and some boys do that too, not because they are sissy, but rather it’s a survival skill). So please don’t demerit them for such behaviour because such quality is a survival instinct.

What we can do though

  1. Equal opportunity to lead not based on gender, but capability and support (in democratic society).
  2. It’s alright to have a skewed numbers of gender representative in professions, e.g. more females in teaching profession, medical, administrative, whereas more males in other callings.
  3. Education for all, which is a success in most countries but again zealots in religion/politics are preventing this in some countries.
  4. “Skewed” benefits for women in workplace is okay, considering that they have a complex role in society. Hence, more maternity leaves, health benefits, flexible work hours etc. should be encouraged. A reciprocal treatment for men in other aspect should not be seen as less acceptable.

Just a thought


Pistorius case and what I gather

If an intruder is in someone’s house in South Africa, it’s negligent lethal force if he/she ends up being shot dead (or killed). So, if you are invited to someone’s  house in South Africa, be sure to ask for a black and white proof of invitation.
It’s absurd. If indeed Pistorius suspected that there is an intruder in his house, and being holed up in the toilet. A normal sane person would have called the police. But no, he had the time to grab his illicit gun, moved towards the bathroom, and then fired four shots.
Probably he “forgot” that he invited his girlfriend over, and thus regarded the person “hiding” in the toilet as an “intruder”.
The legal system is fair. It couldn’t prove that Pistorius knew then who was in the toilet. There isn’t proof beyond reasonable doubt, so he is found guilty of a lighter “negligent”/culpable homicide charge. To Pistorius family members, just shut the hell up, and be happy that he’s not convicted of murder. Don’t try to sugarcoat him anymore because (it’s futile and) you are agravating the pain that the victim’s family is going through now.
“A rotten core is rotten no matter how you try to package it”.

Nearly 5 million Google email accounts & passwords exposed, how?

These accounts were hacked because users tended to reuse their logins and passwords on other sites that had no automated anti-hijacking systems (or security features), e.g. extra loading time for login attempt (i.e. time delay increases total guessing time that will hamper the hack), locking accounts for failed login attempts, token requirement, login only from certain IP addresses, mobile phone authentication code, two steps authentication, and many more.

Parking such sensitive information in unsafe sites will allow hackers to initiate Brute Force Attacks such as password-guessing attack, and the time hackers succeed in their unrestricted attempts depends on the strength of the password (you can predict the amount of time it takes to guess a password [by Gibson Research Corp.]), e.g. stronger password such as: T_*1s+pq9_1 takes approximately 1.83 years to figure out if the guessing attempt is unrestricted by the server.

Fortunately, Google does invest significant effort to ensure user accounts are not compromised. That is why I prefer not to share my Google account and password with other service providers.

However, it’s really difficult to find out what are the security features provided by service providers, e.g. Yahoo, Facebook, Blogs, Forums, etc. There is no standardization of security requirement for service providers, and thus it’s difficult to decide which sites should be avoided.

The expectation that users are the ones who should constantly increase their password strength and frequently change them is flawed. It’s very improbable to change passwords frequently and increase the complexity of passwords. Human brain is not programmed to be that “dextrous”. There should be a better way to authenticate user identity. That will be the million dollar question.

Just a thought.


  1. Brute force attack (by System Administration Database)
  2. WordPress – All in one WP security and firewall

Conflict of interest in dental hygiene and cosmetic dentistry

Ever wondered what is the primary role of your dentists when you visit their office? To me, I used to think that visiting the dentist would either mean extraction or filling when I was a kid. It’s a luxury to visit the dentist for regular clean up or check up in Malaysia. I guess I was poor. Toothbrush and paste was my guarantee for good dental hygiene.

I had a bad malocclusion and required orthodontic treatment. I had mine done at subsidised rate but had to be placed in a waiting list. I had mine done by three orthodontists. The first one was a male orthodontist who was frequently missing in action (MIA) and appointments were delayed. The second one was a female orthodontist who was very impatient and rough (I was always surprised by her crude way of treating me). I had on several occasions ended up with bleeding lips because she was so rough on the wires that the ends would accidentally cut deep into my lips. She was also the one who left two scratch marks on my molar that later deteriorated into cavities (after several years) by using her dental pliers with brute force during removal and re-fixing of the dental brackets. Suddenly one day, she left to work in private clinic without a word. The third was also a female orthodontist, and after the latest experience, she seemed way too gentle. She was the one who removed my braces.

Although my teeth was aligned, it had lost its function. The molars were not aligned as neatly as before, my jaws were way too inside my mouth as compared to previously. It’s noticeable when I try to bite an apple or something larger. The “backward pulling” of the jaws during the treatment was meant to align the teeth and also to close the four gaps (where four molars were extracted; e.g. two upper molars and two lower molars). The pull retracted my jaws into my mouth, and thus I have smaller jaws than previously.

Now back to my main purpose for this article.

When I approached the orthodontic clinic, my thought was to get a treatment to correct my misaligned teeth/jaw (aka malocclusion). But what the orthodontists were thinking was that “this patient” is here to get a “good looking” teeth. Good look over function? If you think about it, sometimes, dentists also play a role in (or provide) cosmetic dentistry treatment, e.g. dental implants, crowning, bridging, and among others. In my opinion, the latter treatments are mostly costly and surely will be more profit generating than that of patients coming in just to get their teeth cleaned. How then will this arrangement not provoke a sense of suspicion, especially considering that there is a direct conflict of interest? On one hand, dentists play a primary role in treating patients in order to preserve healthy teeth, while on the other hand, dentists gain profits from selling dental cosmetics. Put it simply, to have more patients with rotten teeth will be profitable as compared to have patients who have healthy teeth.

In my opinion, there shouldn’t be “amalgamation” of dental hygienist role with cosmetic dentistry. Dental hygienists should strive to preserve healthy teeth (full stop). They should profit by the sheer amount of patrons (what am I saying?). But I guess if that’s the case, there won’t be many dental hygienists, especially considering that the amount of time they spent on a patient would yield much lower in returns than cosmetic dentists earn from the same amount of time.

All in all, to me, visiting a dental clinic that also cater for cosmetic dentistry treatment sometimes make me uneasy, especially considering the conflict of interest involved. But I guess, any profession will have that one way or another. It all depends on professional ethics, and finding one dentist who are trustworthy is the best way to get a win-win situation. So, start making friends with dentists because you might need to visit them soon.

Just a thought.

Killing someone you loved, Oscar Pistorius, she had no chance to survive your shots

Oscar Pistorius will not be found guilty for murder (or premeditated murder) of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. He was found (1) to act negligently when he fatally shot Steenkamp, and (2) acted hastily & with excessive force. Culpable homicide normally carries five years in South Africa.

Well, although Pistorius will escape the murder charge (normally 25 years behind bars), he won’t be able to commit the same atrocity again without raising red flags. That fact is consolation for the lost of life and the light sentence that will be meted out for the murder (whether intentional or not). It’s unfortunate that Steenkamp had to die the way she did. The killing was clearly not in self-defense and I can never accept/tolerate that (even though it’s classified as culpable homicide) especially considering that deadly weapon was used.

Steenkamp had no chance of surviving the shots (four shots were fired), even though prosecutors failed to prove that the shooting was premeditated. Just look at the toilet space (it’s a dead end that fit a person). To shoot four times around the middle of the door would be very likely to hit the intended target. If he had no intention to kill, he could have aimed up at the door and opened fire at the ceiling. It was rage with intention to kill when he fired those shots (rather than to warn/frighten). Well, that will be the last person he will be able to kill and get away with a light sentence.

Bathroom and toilet layout; the spot where Pistorius fired the four shots

Bathroom and toilet layout; the spot where Pistorius fired the four shots (Figures taken from

Sequence of events and the spot where Pistorius fired the four shots

Sequence of events and the spot where Pistorius fired the four shots. Figure taken from

I don’t know Oscar Pistorius really well to be bias against him. I’m writing this piece as reminder that although justice might be lenient at times, it does hamper murderers like Pistorius from repeating the offense. He could escape with lighter culpable homicide this time, but if he ever commit the same crime again, previous conviction will weigh in on him.

Just a thought.