perfect model of ASIAN Values

During the 1990s, we heard a great deal about the veracity and peculiarity of Asian values.

Various politicians, especially those predisposed to authoritarian and dictatorial methods, found in the ‘Asian values’ rhetoric a convenient basis for_

• rationalizing their hold on power,

• their disregard for human rights and civil liberties,

• along with their contempt, among other things, for a free and open press.

As I recall, Myanmar had an especially vocal dictator who found much refuge and cover in this Asian values rhetoric.As most who are familiar with the lively conversations and debates of the time surrounding the Asian values issue, you will recall that there are various permutations, versions, and variations of what became known – under the Asian values umbrella label – as a critical basis for distinguishing Asian cultures from non-Asian (mainly Western) as embodying unique traits that render our societies different from non-Asian societies.

In a political context, especially crucial was the argument that our cultural heritage and uniqueness made us more inclined to appreciate collective stability over individual rights.

Along these lines, Asian values prioritised greater state control and valued more centralised power in place of checks and balances in the political system.

Indeed, in some quarters, espousing civil liberties and human rights were dubbed as ‘luxuries,’ or even worse, non-conducive to achieving the kind of economic progress Asian societies had embarked upon. Of course, the Asian economic crisis was a wake-up call to many about the precariousness – if not the shallowness – of this ideology which dictators across the region, and especially Malaysia’s own, were only too enthusiastic to peddle to the public.

The apparent years of abuse of power by the regime – ranging from the serious crisis of confidence in the judiciary and the criminal justice system

, and even the apparent lack of competence in the SPDC leadership – sure does provide a fascinating prism to revisit this much forgotten ideology of ‘Asian values’ we heard so much about some years back.

Now, I wonder, what exactly are we to make of our apparent unique Asian values that supposedly predispose us to prefer dictators and authoritarian rule, to forgo civil liberties, and suppress human rights?

And also, how then would we explain the deep and widespread public sentiment for such, so called, ‘western values’ as greater government accountability and transparency? Oh, and don’t even get me started on the craving that millions of Myanmars seem to have for free speech and a credible press as opposed to the lame, stale, and former Soviet-style controlled news reporting we get daily from the SPDC regime’s print or broadcast mouthpieces.

I hope events of recent weeks – if not recent years - make two things very clear with respect to the Asian values propaganda. There is nothing about our Asian values that would make our so-called ‘leaders’ inherently capable, competent, or even legitimate to lead. That propaganda worked brilliantly for some time to give various dictators the camouflage to concentrate and abuse power. Second, there is nothing about our Asian values that predisposes us to accept the kind of failure, abuse and arrogance of a morally, ethically and, arguably, legally bankrupt regime. On the contrary, if there is anything to be said about Asian values, it is that arrogance and abuse of power is loathsome, abhorrent, and vile; not worthy of respect.

Whether it’s, among other things, the abuse of so-called Asian values, exploiting power, apparently committing crimes, and ultimately destroying the public’s faith in government, the 'regime decay,' to borrow an expression from R. Thakur, is fully evident. The SPDC regime could learn from an old saying often attributed to Abraham Lincoln (pardon the use of a Western reference): ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.’ Interestingly enough, even the arrogant, fumbling, and inarticulate George Bush’s mis-speak and decimation of Lincoln’s quote would apply to this Barisan regime: ‘You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.’

G. Krishnan 

 

Condoms are back in the news again. I was writing about the Durex balloon-figure campaign in Singapore late last year, and it seems a delayed public-complaint has set the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore off on a bit of a crackdown. At least I think it's the Durex series. It couldn't be the Okamoto banana could it?

The authority has come out with new guidelines which state that:

"Such ads should focus on its protective rather than the pleasure-enhancing aspect and be "in good taste", not promoting promiscuity. Photographs of the packaging are okay provided they are not "suggestive or offensive".

The previous out-of-bounds marker, like the revised one, was fairly vague and open to interpretation, but the over-riding principle in the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice is:

• 1.1 All advertisements should be legal, decent, honest, and truthful.
• 2. Decency
• 2.1 Advertisements should not contain anything that is offensive to the standards of decency prevailing among those who are likely to be exposed to them."

At first, like a lot of people I spoke to, I muttered to myself about how the announcement was reflecting a screwed-down, repressed society, but I've let it gestate in the back of my mind for a day, and now I'm not so sure.

OK, it's just a bit of sexy fun with balloon-sculpture, and I do like the campaign, but maybe the complaint that they're too explicit for an MRT train does hold some water.

I'm feeling a bit conflicted about it. Based on years of experience (with advertising, with condoms, just in general) I truly believe that enjoyment-positive advertising is the most effective way to get people to use them. Today's Straits Times noted that STDs in teens has consistently risen in the past few years and we all know that HIV is also on the rise, so rising sales of condoms is not just important to Durex. Love-Box and Okamoto, it's important to our community too.

On the other hand, Grey's recent Eye On Asia survey (in their news section) found once again that family values are incredibly important in Asia (somewhere around 90% answered that it was the most important thing in their lives) and 78% thought that modern living is breaking up close neighbourhood communities. A similar survey in 2006 found that condom advertising, specifically, was a major issue for many Asians.

So I thought I had a strong opinion about this, but the more I thought about it the weaker my opinion got.

I was intrigued by one sound-bite in the newspaper article though. Personal assistant Eunice Lim, 26, said:

"There are reasons condoms are used other than for protection, but I guess parents don't want the young to start asking awkward questions"

Spicy! I'm busting to know what Eunice knows! What mysterious kama-sutric practice am I missing out on? Please... if you know leave a comment... it's killing me!

I'm also curious. The balloon ad doesn't offend me, but does it offend you? Would you be worried about letting your 5 year old son/daughter/nephew/niece see it?

I probed deeper the reasons these two are getting married and my teenager said that both sides of the parents have agreed to this arrangement. It seems that the girl's parents have deemed her "spoilt" and thus it is apt enough for her to be married off to the boy who did her. As for the boy's side, in their mind, this arranged marriage with the girl will curb his naughty ways.

I like to look from a different perspective on this issue. Not necessarily from religious point of view as every religion will eventually preach you on sex before marriage. No, you will get that from everyone else. I am thinking of how these two will have to brave the world, in all their young ages and not even equipped to even fend for themselves. What sort of life would this marriage will bring to these two?

The boy is hardly a man himself and considered not so "up there" academically. He failed in his last SPM results and is now jobless. I have a term for this phase - "he cant even pee straight yet" phase, which is true. How can he be in a committed marriage like this, a partnership that even he cant understand and hes being thrown into a situation where he doesnt even know where he is heading?

Could the girl's parents decided to throw her into this situation as to "saving face" because now she has become "a spoilt good" and that she has no value as a person? As a minor who is hardly 17, she cant even vote yet, cant even make a proper decision for even herself and her family is practically putting her in a situation where eventually, I feel, as if washing their hands and turning away from the real issues.

Saving face is pretty much part of being an Asian but here we are talking about the future of two teenagers who just did what teenagers do.

Dont the parents have some concious as well as these two are their own products?

All in all, she's absolutely upset with me and the fact that I'm moving out with Kit soon - because she has to face social pressure from those who conform to traditional conventions, much like herself. She is unable to reconcile the present era of high modernity and the past of pious, prim behaviours. It is of utmost concern to her that she preserve her austere and morally righteous appearance and to never ever forsake the proper impression she creates, even at the expense of her children's happiness. Basically, she cannot stand the idea of having her daughter move out and get married before graduating from university (Asian values. Pfft.) Yet, I perceive it as a normal course of life. Lots of people get married when they're still in university. Her insistence on conformity has caused me such grief, due to her fear of being ridiculed and being criticized for her inability to assume the nurturing role of a mother and to provide for her children adequately. Superficial.

I told my father, all the obstinate pride in the world isn't going to save her now, because she has lost her only daughter. First, she lost her to anorexia and depression; then it paved way to alcoholism and self-destructive hedonism. Now she lost her to self-cultivated independence and deep-rooted resentment. It doesn't take a lot to reconcile our differences - all she has to do is to apologize for every darn thing she has done to me. All she has to do is to admit that she did it all. So why is our relationship irreparable? Simply because doing so will greatly damage her self-perception. She will lose herself if she ever did admit her mistakes. Even if she did admit to all of it, our relationship will be ever more constrained, for she will perceive the admittance to a submission to humility - something she hasn't quite grasped in life. (Whatever happened to Asian values... Pfft.)

For someone who spends all her time watching TV and gossiping about other people, it is quite a miracle that I haven't laughed into her face. Respect does not accompany seniority. Respect has to be earned, and she never earned it for herself. Not from me, anyway.

Pardon me for being so young and being so vain.

Anyway, I was supposed to have better news today. Finally, ALAS, I have my driver's licence! I am a qualified driver, so no fear! You will not suffer from heart attacks when I'm behind the wheel (okay, you just might). It was my first attempt and to be honest, I was really very nervous and flustered. I'd only attended one revision lesson yesterday, and prior to that, I haven't driven in a month. So naturally, it was a nerve-wrecking experience. The grumpy, thunder-faced tester who kept pointing out my mistakes didn't help much either. Not to mention the fact that he looked so bored throughout the test and didn't bother marking much or even finish up the course, such that I was so convinced that I'd committed a mistake that constituted immediate failure.

Fortunately for me, (and maybe not many others), I passed!

Today, after Kit's exam, we went for a food festival and sale. Didn't manage to get much, except some really good vegetarian wrap and soy yoghurt. Besides, Kit managed to get some work shirts and pants. Those will come in handy, in the near future. I got a red top and I realized that I bought a red top too yesterday. Oh well. Both tops were 10 dollars and below. Irresistible. Kit also got an interview coming up. This has to be a good week. It has to be. Exam results are out on Friday - 2nd freak-me-out of the week. Pfffffft.

As San Oo Aung in Burma Digest 

Most of the western countries had progressed from the struggles to just meet their biological needs of food, shelter and security to the social progress to meet their psychological needs of social values such as Human Rights and Individual Freedoms.

“ASIAN VALUES” apologists claim that certain values and liberties must be compromised for the sake of growth and progress so that most of the citizens are housed, clothed and fed. They claimed that social and political stability for the whole country is more important than individual Human Rights and liberties.

Even US and some developed countries are in reverse gear by saying that sacrifices in certain individual freedoms must be made for the safety of the country and to fight terrorism.

In Japan, Singapore, Malaysia and other Asia countries, there are substantial economic and social progress and could move into the better intellectual, social values, individual values of freedom, justice and equality. These could be called the Universal Values but the Asia Governments just labelled and smoke-screened them as "Western Values” just to scared off their citizens’ desires to adopt them.

In the advanced countries, according to "Western Values": the fight is no longer over who gets what economically and who dominates who culturally; but over the value systems for rights of the individual; beyond race and religion.

But when we look at the SPDC Junta, no doubt they are valueless according to "Western Values" or Universal Values. They even do not have “ASIAN VALUES” as they could not fulfil the biological needs of food, shelter and security for all the citizens of Myanmar.

Although they are Buddhists, they have NO BUDDHIST VALUE. They rob the country from the people and NLD. They are killing, jailing and torturing innocent people and committing rape etc. against the Buddha’s teaching.

Last of all, the SPDC Generals even do not have the MILITARY VALUE according to the International Standard or even the TATMADAW VALUE according to General Aung San’s standard.

As Senior General Than Shwe’s children are becoming second illegal wives and Daw Kyaing Kyaing’s marriage to Lu Min although both of them are legally still married to their spouses, SPDC Generals also could be labelled as people with no FAMILY VALUES.

The Alexandria The Great was retorted by the pirate that he had a small ship so was labelled a pirate, but as The Alexandria The Great got a fleet of ship and plunder the world and was called the King. During the ancient time those who killed the king became king. Now the world had changed and the whole world, from the Myanmar Citizens to all the governments up to UN knew that SPDC is the ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT. So even if we gauge the SPDC Generals with the pirate’s and Pagan Dynasty rule, nowadays SPDC Government have no value and is an ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT.

San Oo Aung

To support his claims, he reiterated the stance of former South Korean President and Nobel Peace Prize winner, Kim Dae- jung, who, "argued that although social order and economic development are important to the protection of human rights, maintaining them at the expense of individual freedom and personal integrity would violate the essence of human rights."

It is however his research and take on Confucianism that shatters to pieces the hypocrisy of Asian autocrats who uses the excuse of 'Asian values' to justify the death penalty.

Citing from Confucius’s Analects, she described the man's conversation with Ji Kangzi, ruler of the state of Lu,

In your governing, Sir, what need is there for executions If you desire goodness, then the common people will be good.

In another instance, Confucious had also said,

If excellent people managed the state for a hundred years, then certainly they could overcome cruelty and do away with executions’ – how true this saying is!

The writer also cites the 'Buddhist duty of non-violence and harmlessness (Avihimsa)' to further support the argument.

In conclusion, the writer concurred that the death penalty did not arise from a 'deterministic culture, but from acts of political will' which is the oft misrepresented belief.

Following his line of argument, Asian anti-death penalty advocates could further explore and craft their awareness campaigns by highlighting the fact that some of the best Asian historical values or ideologies such as Buddhism and Confuciansim, is in fact, against executions.

==

References:

1. Bae, Sangmin (2008) 'Is The Death Penalty An Asian Value?', Asian Affairs, 39:1, 47 - 56

2. Confucius, Confucius’sAnalects, trans. Edward Slingerland. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett PublishingCompany, 2003

Don't get me wrong, I'm not entirely pro-liberal, neither do I blatantly condemn all values that are inherently Asian. In fact, I am truly proud to be Asian whatever that might mean for a rootless vagabond like myself.

Yet, I'm fed up to the teeth about this deliberate social engineering that constrains, represses and perverse our society. Phenomena that occurs with such regularity and certainty (like sex, alcoholism, homosexuality) that it simply cannot be labelled a phenomena anymore, still persists as taboos. It still remains associated with a social stigma and ostracism. Yet, both you and I know of its existence, its commonality, its prevalence, its acceptability in other nations, yet both you and I will never admit it, will we? We still struggle to hide our actions, we're still laced with guilt at the prospect of getting caught, we're still paranoid in the face of potential labelling and condemnation.

The worst thing is when the people who appear to uphold these social conventions are also guilty of the very actions and ideas they want to keep out of sight.

This society is highly perverse. Asian values, my ass. Truly.

The most ironic thing is that I cannot possibly imagine myself leaving, say, condoms about the house, even if the house is mine and I am the sole occupant. Ironic, isn't it, how the society leaches your personality.

(Photo by comatosed)

Spending most of my undergraduate days either writing essays on the fallacy of the notion of "Asian Values," or trying to pick up women at Amnesty International by joining their protests about them, then I completely disagree with Peter's culturally-relativist sentiments that it's inapproprite to judge this from his own US world-view. I do think that being a housewife is a waste of an intelligent woman's abilities, particularly after 10+ years of career in a field that they enjoy, but notice that I didn't say "raising children," because yes, despite what I just said, my own wife is also a housewife and mother.

Why the contradiction? Well, we've decided that with the expense and widespread concerns over standards of childcare in Korea that this is best for our daughter (and our next child), but from what we've learned about childcare availability in Australia or New Zealand, then she would definitely work again if we lived there (which is...ahem...all I can really say about that online). Despite the boredom of being at home all day, she loves raising Alice of course (although it certainly helps that I'm doing much of it until I go to work at 1pm every day), and I'm reminded of a decade-old column I read in the New Zealand Herald about childless, soon-to-be (then) prime minister Helen Clark's visions for childcare, which according to the columnist were based on an assumption that more women wanted to work but inadequate childcare facilities were the only reason preventing them from doing so, which the columnist, who was a mother, argued wasn't quite the case. Somewhere in my possession I also have an Economist magazine article from 2000 or so that argued that the concept of going off to work and handing your children to complete strangers for the day was a recent anthropological oddity and hardly natural, and that thus, however cliched it sounds, "reconciling women's roles as mothers and workers is one of the prime concerns of our age."

I will try to find both articles if anyone wants to know more. In the meantime, I recommend you read this and then this article on the related subject of evolutionary psychology from Time magazine, both of which had a great influence on me at the time, and which briefly discuss the "naturalness" of modern-day childcare arrangements in passing (on pages 2 and 4 respectively). And if you haven't seen it, then Mona Lisa Smile is a great movie dealing with all the themes above. It's set in 1953, and if accurate, shows an environment clearly ripe for Germaine Greer's The Female Eunuch in 1970. I haven't read it, but I've heard that it discusses "Housewives Syndrome," a term used by family doctors in the 1950s and 1960s to describe the physchological and physiological problems many women were developing because all they were expected to do with their university educations was cook, look after children, and clean the house for the remainder of their lives.

But despite all that, regular readers will not be surprised to find that I still think that the expansion and increased availability of childcare is by no means the only, but still the best route for the advancement of women in Korean society at the moment. To take a leaf from the 18th Century "Mother of Feminism" Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Women, where she counters arguments that women are inherently mentally inferior to men by pointing out that such comparisons couldn't be made until women received the same education as men, I'll accept that women instinctively want to stay home and only be mothers only once they have all options available to them. Until then, gynocentric feminists can just STFU.

But all this is not going to happen without the political will in Korea. So far on the blog, I've repeatedly mentioned that it is because of this lack that legislation is not enforced, but in hindsight discussions of where it is supposed to come from have been suspiciously absent. Maybe it's because it obviously must come from Korean women themselves, whom I am not imposing my own worldview on when I say that intelligent and ambitious women happily giving their careers up upon marriage is wrong, self-defeating and basically, just, well...pisses me off.

That may sound too strong, even for a geek like me, but placed in the context of my Korean female friend that complains that Korean men refuse to wear condoms, to which I reply that I'm pretty certain that most Western guys pretended to be happy to suit up only once they were given the option of doing that or not getting laid...do Korean women really need to be told to demand the same? Then there's the Korean female friends with great bodies who just whine that they're fat all the time: they'll dutifully nod at my pointing out how healthy andattractive they are, but will still starve themselves at their next meal. Naturally I just loved having my opinions so completely ignored, one reason why I'm not friends with anyone like that anymore.

(On a side note, unless the recipient is clearly anorexic, then literally telling a woman that she looks healthy in Korean "넌 건강에 좋아보여요" or "You-health-goodlook," actually means "You look fat". What is wrong with this place??!)

Regardless of how universally applicable the points in my rant are, a fellow blogger has pointed out to me that there is no greater indictment of a society than its members' refusal to continue it, and I'm concerned that once my daughter starts school here then she too will indirectly learn there that it's possible for a women to have a career, or to have children, but unreasonable to expect to have both. Needless to say, most Korean and Japanese women are choosing the former, and the results speak for themselves:

(Photo by ichico)

New Adults Fewer Than Ever

The number of people who reached the legal age of adulthood was only 1.35 million last year, which is the lowest number on record and 40,000 less than the previous year, the Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry said Monday.

The announcement came on the national holiday Coming-of-Age Day, held annually on the second Monday of January, as most new adults participate in Coming-of-Age ceremonies, women traditionally in expensive "furisode" kimonos and men in suits or dark kimonos with hakama.

Of the new adults, 690,000 are men and 660,000 are women, according to a Kyodo News report. Percentage wise, the new adults constitute 1.06 percent of the total population, which is down 0.03 points since the previous year.

The legal age of adulthood is 20 in Japan.

The previous record low, 1.36 million new adults, was recorded in 1987.

Thanks to Edward Chmura, again at Japundit, for bringing that article to my attention. Finally, here is some still woefully inadequate, but rare encouraging news from the Korean Times on the Lee Myung-bak's Administration's measures for dealing with the low birthrate in Korea:

Home Buying to Become Easier for Newlyweds

Newlyweds may see themselves a step closer to becoming homeowners by the year's end, as President-elect Lee Myung-bak and his transition team is actively reviewing the ins and outs of his proposed housing policy for just-married couples. The policy is to take effect in the second half of 2008.

The Ministry of Construction and Transportation said Monday that the modified housing system is set to allow married couples of less than three years, who successfully pay monthly installments of 50,000 to 100,000 won into a housing savings fund, to get long-term home financing with low interest rates. However, couples must take the benefit within a year of having their first child.

The plan, which was one of Lee's flagship campaign pledges, has been welcomed by young couples as buying a home in Korea is widely known as a cost-burdening and time consuming, but a must-do task for married couples.

A recent Kookmin Bank survey said that the average period it took for a couple to buy their own house after marriage was around 9.4 years, up two years since 2005, as local home prices have consistently been on the rise. Therefore, the initiative of the president-in-waiting is seen as a springboard for financially weak, just-starting couples.

The ministry said that the incoming government has plans to inject 4.1 trillion won to supply homes for the low-income newlyweds. It forecasts that the fresh policy will feed about 120,000 homes, each less than 80 square meters, into the market.

It added that the transition team is considering expanding the system to those who are eligible, but are already paying into a housing savings fund, to enjoy the same benefits.

Earlier, the president-elect said the reformed policy was ultimately drawn to encourage young couples from having more kids, as many are known to refrain from giving birth to a second child due to financial instability, including not owning a house.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::