Why do you care about architecture?

"Why do you care about architecture?"

I think it's a genuinely, absurdly difficult question to answer.

I can tell you why I care (or at least should care more) about any other pursuit like physics, space exploration, medicine or even freaking video games. But I cannot come up with a convincing answer for architecture.

I can tell you why we should care about building properly. About the necessity of providing quality buildings for work and play. But not architecture specifically.

I think sports and music are sort of in this category of barely relevant but I assume that I'm simply not involved in it enough to give you a good reason. I mean I can give a good reason for video games, something society deems just as frivolous, if not more so, simply because it's a medium and a subject matter I'm deeply involved in, at least as a consumer and an observer. So it is possible to argue that given enough immersion in perhaps music, someone could give a impersonal response.

But not architecture. Almost a year and a half and I still don't quite get why people care about architecture specifically. Why is the design of buildings important to people? Why should it? Because not caring about it makes life hard? That's not a reason to do something. That's a reason not to do the opposite. That's like saying you should eat more veggies because eating Macs everyday is bad for you. That's just a reason not to eat Macs.

I think perhaps on a more enlightened note, what if this is not a question that needs an answer?

Name: R. Rogers

The man who made this:

and this:

once got this:

NOT Recommended for Year 5 next term

How awesome is that?

Ashley Madison and the Singaporean reaction

Long time no write. Anyway, opinion piece.

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/mda-bans-extra-marital-dating-website-ashley-madison-20131108

MDA bans extra-marital dating website Ashley Madison

Quick update for those of you who don't know. Ashley Madison is one of the many websites out there which actively promotes "affairs" between married couples. Why AM is specifically targeted is because they have chosen to announce their intention to market towards Singaporeans specifically. And you know what happens when someone outside our little speck mentions Singapore by name. We react, and we react in droves. Anyway, people found out what they actually do and decided that it is immoral and should not even exist here at all. Apparently enough of a reaction to get the government and MDA to "take a stand" and ban the website from ever coming into our interwebs.

My opinion will not focus on the morality of what AM does. It's about the Singaporean reaction and more importantly, the Govt's reaction.

One recent event that nicely contrasts this is a few months back when they (somebody at least) decided to ban the selling of condoms in NUS (and possibly other schools) because they didn't want to "kids" having "sex" in "school". I really enjoyed that news cycle because it felt like Singaporeans would finally have the maturity of tackling an adult issue with an adult conversation. We, as a group, acknowledged that "kids" (who are barely even kids anymore, they're 19 at the least, too old to be tried in the Juvenile Court) were going to have sex whether we like it or not, and we would rather give them condoms (implicitly acknowledging that authorities have no control over it) than let them do it without it. If you are in the shoes of a "moral watchdog", it's incredibly difficult to accept that someone is doing something against your will and let it go when you have the power to stop it. It's really a temptation to abuse the power, especially if you genuinely believe in the principle.

Our Govt has always enjoyed the role of being a morality watchdog. This is one of those issues that are not only supported by the judges of morality in MDA but also the people as well, so it happens to be a win-win for them. I'm not fine with someone else deciding something for me, especially when it's such a blanket response. It's like banning handphones in camp. I don't think I need to say anything more than that really.

I think this response has 2 effects. It proliferates the idea that some authority or any authority has a say on what and how the Internet works, at least for a particular demographic. The other effect is the idea of Govt as moral guardian. I personally feel like I have more stake when it comes to the Internet, not only because I live and grew up in the Internet but also the fact that the latter has always been around in Singapore since freaking bubble gum, just that this time, much less people are against it. The internet does not function properly unless nothing is censored. Its fundamental achievement of connecting people is cut short when you literally disconnect people from things like AM. I think there is a certain beauty in being confronted with something outside your comfort zone (in terms of social issues) and really questioning your response to it. I love moments when racists are being defended by black people and church pastors are touched by the stories of gay couples (that sounded wrong). Such moments have always happened in the past but the internet destroys any sort of geographical (or any other) barrier that may have existed before and such measures only serve to rebuild those same walls to cut us off from each other. 

It's also really hard to argue against this because anyone who does will INEVITABLY be compared to supporting adultery. Which is bad. Singapore is conservative. At least enough to hold off allowing gay sex despite an equal if not more passionate response during the Pink Dot every year. The Government clearly does not treat us as adults and feels a moral imperative to stop us from hurting ourselves. I have grown up in this environment and I'm genuinely tired of this. And even more so is the cherry-picking of issues to tackle when it comes to social issues. Poverty isn't addressed so we assume everyone is doing well because no one is living on the streets. This "I don't see them so they don't exist" mentality of everyone, including the general public, is the reflection of an unsympathetic society, which lives off the back of those committed few who spend their lives, time, money and sometimes their soul to redeem us from what truly is an inhuman existence. People love teachers and nurses and social workers until they come in the way of annoying you in some way. Guess what, it is their job to teach your kids and stop you from killing each other and care for the banglas, and they need that basic acknowledgement and courtesy for you to get out of their way and keep your mouth shut.

Oh my god, I just realized this issue has so many other sub-issues to unpack. The first line of every paragraph has the potential of being a full-on essay by itself. But to sum it up, here are my opinions, AM: morally neutral, leaning towards bad. People's reaction: Kneejerk, immature. Govt's reaction: Bad. Adultery: Bad, but unavoidable. Govt controlling Internet: VERY BAD. My opinion: scary when people agree with govt but I disagree with them.