Eh, my grandfather was no beggar lah!

Just when you thought it was safe to go into a restaurant again, Chinese New Year (and its accompanying excesses) is upon us once more. Following on the heels of Christmas and New Year’s, one feels almost a little ashamed to be “celebrating”. Again.

I don’t know about you but I am already suffering from... how shall I put it? Celebration fatigue. Yes, Chinese New Year falls on Feb 14 this year but already I have had yee sang three times already.

So is it me or we are just overdoing this celebrating thing? I remember a time when I looked forward to Chinese New Year. It meant new clothes, angpows and mandarin oranges.

All those three things only ever happened during Chinese New Year. That’s why they were savoured, looked forward to... and yes, appreciated. These days when we have so much, we forget to be grateful for the fact that we can and do have so much.

I like to think that both my grandfathers who came here from China will be happy with how well we are doing now. After all, they both came here hoping to create better lives for themselves and their descendants.

My story is not unique. The same story of migration, hard work and dreams make up the personal history of many millions of my fellow Malaysians. So when I heard about the prime minister’s former special officer Datuk Nasir Safar’s comments at a 1 Malaysia event in Malacca on Tuesday, I was appalled.

He was reported to have said “Indians came to Malaysia as thieves and beggars and Chinese especially the women came to sell their bodies.”

Since then he has resigned and apologised to all Malaysians for his insensitive comments but the hurt is still there. Are there people out there who are like him? Who thinks our forefathers came across the seas to be thieves, beggars and prostitutes?

I have always thought that it is this very story of migration so many of us share that makes us appreciate our country so much more. Our fathers, mothers and grandparents CHOSE to come here because they dreamed of a better future.

Many of us are now living that future. Are we grateful? Yes. But not to those people who think we should be grateful to. No, we are grateful to our parents, our grandparents... those who have gone on before us to carve a life out for us in this country.

I remember interviewing Ashwin Valiram who is the director of the Valiram Group a little over two years ago. He told me about his grandfather Utumal Valiram who came to Malaysia — or then Malaya — in 1912.

He started a sundry business here but travelled back and forth between here and India until 1947 when the state of Sindh, where Utumal was from, became part of Pakistan after the Partition of India.

“That was when he moved his family here. And this has been home since,” Ashvin told me then.

Today Ashvin and his brothers run the Valiram Group which is one of the biggest luxury goods companies in the country. Think Coach, Giuseppe Zanotti, Shanghai Tang, Tumi, Godiva chocolates, and so on.

Now, you go tell him about Indians coming here to be beggars and thieves. By saying something like that, Nasir Safar disrespects the many, many migrants who came here and worked awfully hard to make a future for themselves and their families.

Even worse, he — and anybody who thinks like him — diminish our great collective history. And makes less of this country.

Well, I for one am not going to let him and others like him make me appreciate this country less. This Chinese New Year, I will remember to be grateful for all the excesses of eating, drinking and celebrating. My grandparents dreamed of this.

Note: Joan Lau has worked with words all her life – whether as a journalist, copywriter or even editor – and would love nothing better than to live between the covers of books.

A small gift on Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman’s birthday

I am now in Taipei attending the executive committee meeting of the International Democrat Union (IDU), chaired by the former Prime Minister of Australia.

The schedule here is quite tight. But I cannot avoid thinking about Feb 8, which is this coming Monday. This is a date we must celebrate.

On Feb 8, 1903 Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj was born in Istana Pelamin, Alor Setar, Kedah. This Monday is the 107th anniversary of Tunku’s birthday.

Tunku was the twentieth son of Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah. Tunku’s mother is Che Menjalara, the daughter of Nara Borirak from Thailand.

Almarhum Tunku received his early education in Alor Star, Bangkok and Penang. He then continued his studies at Cambridge University, graduating with a bachelor’s degree in 1925, before returning home. He later went back to England and completed his legal training in 1949.

It is impossible to repay Almarhum Tunku’s service to this country. As the very person who led our independence negotiations, the Bapa Kemerdekaan peacefully secured Merdeka for us to inherit.

The Pemasyhuran Kemerdekaan is a document that outlines the foundations for the birth of sovereign and independent Persekutuan Tanah Melayu on 31 August 1957. The Pemasyhuran records Tunku’s vision that this country should: “be forever a sovereign democratic and independent State founded upon the principles of liberty and justice and ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people and the maintenance of a just peace among all nations”.

Inspired by Tunku’s vision, we feel there needs to be a body that researches and conducts public education about the principles of a free society he envisaged.

We have therefore chosen Tunku’s birthday, this Monday, Feb 8, 2010, to launch a new think tank called the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS).

IDEAS will take over what we started under the name of Malaysia Think Tank. IDEAS is Malaysia’s first think-tank dedicated to promoting market-based solutions to public policy challenges. Our purpose is to advance market-based principles, and we are not bound by race or religion.

With very kind help from Arkib Negara, the official launch of IDEAS will take place at Memorial Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Kuala Lumpur. There will be presentations from Sharyn Shufiyan (Tunku’s great-granddaughter) and Tunku’s friend and ally Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. YAM Tunku Zain Al-’Abidin ibni Tuanku Muhriz, Founding President of IDEAS, will give a keynote address.

The philosophy of IDEAS is rooted in Tunku’s vision to see our country prosper based on “the principles of liberty and justice”.

Four concepts drive our work – rule of law, limited government, free markets, and individual liberty.

These concepts are not new to our country. The seeds have been planted in our tradition and heritage since the time of Batu Bersurat Terengganu. The elaboration of each of these principles could be lengthy. But Tunku, in his wisdom, summarised them extremely well in the Pemasyhuran Kemerdekaan.

As an independent not-for-profit think tank, we will work across the political spectrum, free from the influence of any one political party.

To ensure cross-partisanship, our advisory group consists of leaders from six political parties, three from Barisan Nasional (Umno, MCA and Gerakan) and three from Pakatan Rakyat (PKR, DAP, PAS). We have also invited party leaders from Sabah and Sarawak to join our cross party advisory group.

Our independence is our greatest strength. We can research, propose, and speak without fear or favour, holding true to our ideals.

We have ambitious plans for 2010. Among our main activities will be a series of workshops with political parties at state level on state-federal relationship as defined in the constitution.

IDEAS will also be running a study to explore how market-mechanisms can help transform our schools.

And we will also conduct research, publication and public education activities to explain how and why market solutions are better than government interventions.

As a new independent free market think tank – and I believe we are the only one – I am well aware that we will have to face many hurdles. But this is our small gift on Tunku’s birthday and we are determined to make it work. Do pray for us!

If readers would like to attend our official launch ceremony on Monday 8th February 2010, please send me an email ( wansaiful@ideas.org.my This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ) with your contact details. We have invited Almarhum Tunku’s family members from three generations. We have even identified a caterer who can prepare Tunku’s favourite meal for the launch event. Attendance is free but places are limited.

I do hope you can join us.

*Wan Saiful Wan Jan is Chief Executive of IDEAS (formerly known as Malaysia Think Tank). Wan Saiful Wan Jan ialah Ketua Eksekutif Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) dan juga editor AkademiMerdeka.org, sebuah platform yang mempromosikan idea-idea libertarian.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Ladies, how about four husbands?

JAN 13 — Recently, an article written by Nadine al-Bedair My Four Husbands and I created a furor among the Saudi conservatives. The said essay was picked up by the English media, though it hardly mustered a mention in Malaysia.

Reading it, I thought Khaled Diab’s analysis of al Bedair’s prose as honest, practical and that Bedair put forth her arguments wittily.

Diab commented, “Nadine al-Bedair quite sensibly posed the logical question: if Muslim men are entitled to marry up to four wives, why can’t women, in the spirit of equality between believers, have four husbands?

“I have long questioned why it is men have a monopoly on this right. No one has been able to explain to me convincingly why it is I’m deprived of the right to polyandry,” she complains.

The outspoken Saudi then goes on to deconstruct and question the traditional justifications for polygamy, including that, in a traditional patriarchal society, it is a shelter for widows, divorcees and women who can’t find a spouse; that men have greater sexual appetites than women and get easily bored; that women can’t handle more than one man; and that, if women could have multiple husbands, determining paternity would not be possible (an excuse made obsolete by modern science).”

“They tell me that I, as a woman, can’t handle more than one man physically. I say that women who cheat on their husbands and the ‘sellers of love’ [ie. prostitutes] do much more,” she counters.

I have to agree: what makes people think that women are truly the weaker sex and can barely handle one man’s ferocious appetite for sex?

Because I know many women who play out of their relationships and marriages, and there’s a growing number of polyamorous types walking and living in this city.

And do think about it: with women being more educated and financially independent, what can ONE MAN offer her? Not all men are good in bed, you know.

One man for love, one man for money, one man for sex and one man for great deep meaningful conversation.

And before you boys get riled up and start waving your er, ‘keris’ to prove your manhood, observe the more up-market hotel lounges and coffeehouses. Those ladies who lunch and look like boiled eggs? You think the boys with them are their SONS?

So. Let’s say we want to halalkan zina. Perhaps by legitimising the affairs, women too should be allowed four husbands.

“Ha? You dah gila ke. Laki satu pun dah pening, nak empat lagi?” A friend was incredulous.

Ah, ladies. This is where we err. Allow me to quote a good friend who is KL’s style maven: Dzireena Mahadzir. In her last column she told us to think like a man. And to think like a man is to compartmentalise. Remember!

One man for love

One man for money.

One man for sex

One man for great deep meaningful conversation.

You repeat all the four lines 1,000 times a day in front of you mirror. InsyAllah.

I have this friend who’s a Shiite and she’s younger than me. Devout, she has had six husbands already.

“Oh my God, you’re only 30 and you’ve had six husbands?!”

“Dina, I kahwin mutaah! We Shiites can do so!”

“What on earth is that?” Kahwin lari I had heard. Mutaah no.

According to the Jakim website: “Nikah Mutaah (kahwin kontrak) iaitu meletakkan syarat untuk menjadi pasangan suami isteri buat sementara atau beberapa tahun sahaja.

Para fuqaha’ telah bersepakat telah menyatakan bahawa kahwin mut’ah hanya dibenarkan pada awal perkembangan Islam.Kebenaran pada masa itu adalah dengan tujuan untuk memperkembangkan Islam dan setelah hari pembukaan Mekah perkahwinan seperti itu telah diharamkan dan pengharaman tersebut adalah selama-lamanya. Ia bukan suatu yang bidaah atau yang baru diada-adakan cuma ada antara mazhab dalam Syiah yang membenarkan perkahwinan tersebut.

Dan pada masa ini, berlaku juga persetujuan bersama pasangan suami isteri tentang tempoh tertentu sebagai syarat perkahwinan untuk kepentingan peribadi, harta benda dan sebagainya samada disedari ataupun tidak bahawa meletakkan tempoh tertentu sebagai syarat itu pun menyebabkan tidak sah akad. .” [1], [2]

Wah, I also want la. I want to be Malaysia’s Elizabeth Taylor! I want I want!

Now what is the argument against polyandrous women?

The very enlightening and humorous book on genetics and evolution Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters by Alan S. Miller and Satoshi Kanazawa explains what monogamy, polygyny and polyandry are. Monogamy is the marriage of one man to one woman while polygyny is the marriage of one man to more than one woman.

Polyandry is the marriage of one woman to more than one man. Polygamy is the more popular term for polygyny, though the term refers to both.

“Now, the fact that polyandry is very rare in human society decidedly does not mean that married women have always been faithful to their husbands and mated with one man. On the contrary, human females have been promiscuous throughout their evolutionary history.”

The issue of paternity arises as men decide to stake claims on their progeny, and while polygynous men would be able to discern whose child is whose (which wife), with polyandrous women, it would be much, much harder. Sperm from different males have to fight with each other to impregnate the female.

Which is why the human penis is shaped the way it is.

The book quoted Gordon G Gallup and his collaborators. “The shape of the human penis… is shaped like a wedge.”

When a human male and human female copulate, the thrusting motions the penis makes “would be to draw foreign semen back away from the cervix…

“So in the case of polyandrous females, their males partners will be competing to scoop out rival sperms.

“In other words, the human penis is a semen displacement service.”

It’s a shovel.

So there you have it, my dear readers. The scientific reason behind the move against polyandry: safeguarding your progeny. Me Tarzan you Jane and this is my monkey.

Truth is, at least among my women friends and me, fidelity and monogamy are the most practical options. I quote another friend, “Aiyo, kalau one man dah berapa round, ni nak empat, mati keras aku woi…”

Readers with no sense of humour are not allowed to read my column.

Readers who think they are smarter than everyone else who reads TMI are not allowed to read my column.

Readers who think they are the next Messiah and already have a place in Heaven definitely CANNOT read my column.

[1] Note to readers: you are all Malaysians. If you can quarrel about the Allah issue, you can translate the above into English yourself.

[2] Note to readers II: yes, I am too lazy to translate it for you.

Dina Zaman writes so she can find answers. A lot of times, she doesn’t. When she has free time, she reads literary fiction or very trashy magazines. Her pet causes are Tony Leung, children’s rights advocacy and HIV/AIDS issues.

Till debt do us part?

The long school holidays are over, and with that, the flurry of weddings. Makeshift placards by the roadside directing wedding guests to the venues of celebration are all that remain as evidence of the concluded ‘wedding season’.

In this age of e-mails and e-greeting cards for everything from birthdays to Hari Raya, I derive great pleasure in receiving tactile wedding invitation cards in the mail.

And my, what beautiful wedding cards they have now.

Premium quality paper, classic designs and fonts — a visual delight. Some don’t even look like wedding invitations but more like little presents themselves, encased within a stylish cardboard sleeve and tied together with crisp taffeta ribbon.

A judgmental notion this may be, but more often than not, the wedding card’s design and presentation will give you an idea as to what type of wedding ceremony to expect – (1) a ‘mat salleh’ style private affair, held in the beautiful gardens of some secluded hotel or spa retreat with just family and a close circle of friends, or (2) a simple ceremony with the prime intention of announcing the wedding to the masses by inviting anyone and everyone to attend the kenduri (banquet) which offers an endless serving of food at the newlyweds’ parents’ home or at a community hall, or (3) a grand royal do requiring nothing short of the most beautiful baju kurung/kebaya you have in your closet (or can afford to buy, if you have the money) and to put on the biggest baubles you own (or need to borrow).

Most of today’s weddings are such wonderful displays of taste, colour and design that they simply take your breath away. The bride’s wedding dress is made from expensive material and cut in the most exquisite design, the painstakingly-taken wedding pictures drives you to effusively ooh and aah over every shot, the pelamin (wedding dais) resembles an ethereal throne where only angels tread.

It tells you how painstaking the preparations for the entire ceremony(ies) must have been, and oh, they definitely employed a wedding planner to help organise everything because no ordinary human being could have done that all by himself/herself!

Another fact that we are also alerted to is that these weddings surely do not come cheap. Curious, I recently stepped into a shop which specialises in wedding cards and nearly fainted when I saw how much some of the nicer cards cost. A wedding celebration usually has a minimum of 200 guests, so to think that there are those who would pay a minimum of RM2,500 just to send out 100 or so invitation cards is rather mind-blowing.

But then again, those who are within that bracket of affordability are not reflective of the general populace (although their numbers are increasing).

Having said that, these elegant weddings are not held only by the well-endowed. Even regular ‘makan gaji’ folk are now pulling out all the stops to present spectacular wedding ceremonies.

As guests we are of course enthralled by the beautiful ceremony, but images of the newlyweds and their parents scratching their heads and crunching numbers over the bills which must be paid after the celebrations, often play in my head when I attend these weddings.

Because the reality I am quite sure, is that some amount of debt would have been incurred in order to throw the lavish ceremony(ies).

Some time last year, I listened to a radio programme where the host took calls from listeners who had borrowed money in order to get married. The stories coming from the steady stream of callers were similar — because they did not have enough money for the wedding ceremony, they took out personal loans from banks and made extensive purchases towards the ceremony by swiping their credit cards.

Some took loans because they craved the perfect wedding — something which cost very much more than what they and their parents could afford. Some incurred wedding debts because they really wanted to get married but their families could not help out financially.

There were even some sad stories — like the husband who took on a humungous debt simply because the woman of his dreams came from a rich family who imposed such extravagant conditions for the ceremony before they would agree to the marriage. Or the lady caller who was in the process of dissolving her marriage, but how both she and her husband were still paying the wedding bills. What cruel irony that the debt should outlast the marriage.

When I got married, I had to rely entirely on whatever ceremony my father could afford. That of course, meant that my wedding ceremony was small-scale, but who was I to complain when the money wasn’t my hard-earned cash? At least I didn’t have to borrow and neither did my father.

Thankfully my levelheaded husband made it very clear to me at the outset (you know how women can sometimes get a little carried away) that we shouldn’t incur any debt heading into our marriage, so that once the ceremony was over, we were in the clear with a clean slate. We couldn’t afford to buy a house and so rented for many years into our marriage before finally committing ourselves to the long term investment of a home.

Stepping into a marriage on the foundation of debt is sometimes inevitable, but at the very least, couples who are planning to take this route should ensure that the purpose for which the debt is to be incurred must be something which makes it worthwhile in the long term. From the string of calls on the radio programme, it was evident that the debts were primarily incurred towards paying for the wedding ceremony itself, rather than towards starting out their new lives together.

There is nothing wrong in holding a dazzling wedding ceremony if money is aplenty. But when the funds are borrowed and so much of it is sunk into the ceremony(ies) itself which is fleeting, as opposed to being invested in something tangible and permanent like a house or a family car, then this will only place the newlyweds in an onerous financial position after the marriage.

In Egypt, the cultural norm is for newlyweds to be able to move into a home (‘home’ being subjective — it could be the size of a shoebox but is at least a private abode for the newlyweds) complete with basic fittings like furniture, television and refrigerator (even a washing machine if they could afford it), right after their wedding ceremony. This is achieved either through the newlyweds’ parents pooling their finances together to provide the home (whether rented or acquired), and thus easing the newlyweds from the burden of having to incur those ‘start-up costs’ after tying the knot.

If, on the other hand, the parents of the couple seeking holy union are financially unable to do so, then like in the case of our Egyptian driver, he simply holds off any marriage plans until he can save enough to prepare a home to share with his future wife. With Egypt’s economic woes, particularly for the masses, it isn’t uncommon to find Egyptian men (within the lower income brackets, especially) who remain bachelors well into their 40s simply because they can’t afford to ‘build’ that first home.

Wedding ceremonies are also reveled in Egypt as they are all over the world, but whilst there, I observed that the amount of money spent on the wedding celebrations is small in comparison to what is put into preparing that first home. Of course, this doesn’t apply to the more affluent Egyptians who would not only throw celebration after celebration at hotel after hotel, but also have enough cash leftover to purchase swanky high-end apartments equipped with state-of-the-art furnishings for their newlywed children! Consequentially, Egyptians who marry at a young age often hail from wealthy families.

Now who doesn’t want a beautiful wedding? Couples planning to take the big plunge must carefully consider what it is they seek to achieve. If it’s for a long and happy marriage, then start on the right footing and think long-term. The wedding celebrations will dazzle us for a few years, but after that, even the most-perfectly-taken wedding pictures get a little jaded – especially when you know you still haven’t paid off the wedding bills.

Socio-economically, my modest viewpoint is that Egyptians approach this ‘new beginning’ the correct way. If at all a debt should be incurred going into a marriage, it should be towards laying down the foundation for the long-term commitment of the marriage and raising a family, not just towards the wedding celebrations.

Even then, any intention to take on a debt at such an early stage of the marriage must be deliberated judiciously, as there isn’t much point in committing to a house or car loan which is beyond the newlyweds’ realistic financial ability to pay each month.

This way, over time, husband and wife can heave a sigh of relief that the early years of their marriage were not wasted in paying off all the ‘wrong’ bills. Marriage is hard work in itself and there will be many storms to weather together as the years unfold. So minimise the headaches (at least the financial ones) while it’s still possible, and step out together into that new world with a clean, debt-free slate.

Sazlin Daud was once an overworked corporate lawyer. She quit practice, became a homemaker (no maids, this is the real stuff), trailed her husband to Egypt for a few years and gave birth to her most difficult client yet - her son. In between ironing, changing diapers and cleaning the cat's litter box, she reminisces about the Egyptian winter, rice pudding and fresh strawberries.

The two missing F5 fighter jet engines ended up as scrap metal?

JAN 5 – The explanation by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail on the two missing RM100 million F5 fighter engines have raised public incredulity and outrage to new heights, spawning even more questions.

Firstly, why have the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers taken such an inordinately long time of over 16 months in the investigations into the two J85-GE-21 engines, which power the F5 fighters, which had been stolen from two RMAF facilities while some components from the same planes were also unaccounted for?

All that Gani can say now is that police had completed its investigations “to a large extent” and that he would announce “very soon” the decision on the next course of action against those involved in the thefts.

This is totally unsatisfactory as, according to police investigations, the engines were taken out of the RMAF base on Dec 20, 2007 and Jan 1, 2008, and sent to premises in Subang Jaya.

The military only realised that the engines were missing on May 22 of that year and launched an investigation, and the base’s chief Major Zulfikli Ayub later lodged a report at the Brickfields police station on Aug 4.

Secondly, have the two missing RM100 million F5 fighter jet engines ended up as scrap metal or sinkers for fishing? Gani stressed that he was being sarcastic as “I really do not know what is being done to it now, whether the engines are used as scrap metal or as sinker for fishing.” (Star)

But such unintended sarcasm is at the expense of the Mindef, Police and the AG himself!

Thirdly, what is the use or worth of Gani’s “vow” to bring back the two stolen jet engines when the government does not know where they are, what they have become or has not been able to bring to book the culprits responsible?

Fourthly, has kleptocracy (a government characterised by rampant greed and corruption) become so rampant that mere “rank and file” can walk away with two RM100 million jet engines from top-security areas without the involvement of “senior” military personnel in the scandal?

This is the implication when Gani said that no senior military personnel was involved in the scandal, only those from the “rank and file”.

If so, this is all the more justification why there must be a Royal Commission of Inquiry into rampant government kleptocracy in Malaysia.

The questions posed by a visitor to my blog warrants response by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, himself as he was the Defence Minister at the time of the theft of the two jet engines and also because of all his sloganeering about KPIs, NKRAs and, most of all, “1 Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.

“What kind of outfit are they operating if rank and file could steal and cart two RMAF F5-E jet engines out with impunity?”

“If security was so lax in a military base, what is there to prevent enemies of the state from securing corrupt rank and file for access to plant bombs in the jet planes at the base in sabotage of the nation’s defence system? Isn’t this a case of criminal negligence of higher ups to allow security breach of such nature to occur in extreme threat to national interest?”

“If the theft occurred in 2007, you mean that they need to take over two years to discover this? Does that not mean that in these two years, no pilot tested the jet planes and no maintenance people maintain these planes for all the two years for otherwise the theft would surely have been earlier discovered?”

“If that’s the way they neglect the planes that are supposed to defend the country’s territorial integrity – what hope is there for a proper defence of the country’s national security? And why should so much of the Public Expenditures/Taxes go to pay for these defence systems if there were no proper inventory controls?”

“Worse still if higher ups were in complicity for a sting of such daring proportion and scale to be carried out.”

“If it were so easy to take out military hardware from a secure base due to lack of inventory controls, what is there to stop the hardware being hijacked at source even before it arrives at the secure military base?”

“For example if we buy planes or submarines from a foreign country what is there to stop the so called ‘low ranking rank and file’ from selling them to another third country and arrange for these planes and submarines from going direct from the first mentioned to the third country direct whilst the inventory over here registers that they (planes and submarines) have arrived at the base here when in fact they have not? Have you seen the military arms-in-being when they arrive here? Can we check inventory records ? No – because of Official Secrets Act.

“So if rank and file can pull a stunt of such magnitude, what is there to stop a total hijack and detour (at source) if ever (hypothetically) some higher up general or brigadier were ever involved in complicity in such a bold sting???

“I am just extrapolating the situation as logically will result based on such a ridiculous situation of jet engines being in the position to be stolen by rank and file!” - Lim Kit Siang

Me, my tudung and my 2010 sports predictions

JAN 2 — In a crowd of approximately 8,000 spectators at Colchester United’s game against Leeds United earlier this season, I could see fans from all walks of life taking their seats with me. The old, the young, the very young — there was a baby in a Babygro — the ones in a wheelchair, the ones with precariously balancing themselves with walking sticks, the ones with Col U tattooed across their arms.. Yes, you could say there were all sorts. But I dare declare that of the 8,000 odd spectators, I was the only one in the grounds wearing a tudung.

To be honest, this wasn’t something I quite noticed about myself. You go to a football game, you want to watch people, not watch people watch you, you know? But I get asked, sometimes, whether I felt out of place at a football ground because I wear a tudung. And I suppose that had I been at a Premiership ground, I would not be all that “unique”, as it were.

But while watching football at famous Premiership venues is as much a sporting activity as it is a touristy one, I would agree with my friend’s contention that turning up to watch your local team play two divisions below the top tier does require a certain level of football madness. I’d be the first to confess that I have an unhealthy fascination for all things football, and all things sporty. To date there are only three sporting events I would still change television channels for if it came on: horse racing, showjumping and golf. Yes people, I even watch snooker and darts. In my defence, it’s an illness.

“Do you find it odd that you are a female football fan who wears a tudung?” I was asked recently by a friend who knew of my football-related exploits. My short answer to that is a simple “no”. But if I am to reflect on the question within the framework of social norms and gender roles, perhaps there is space for further elaboration. So if we were to view the whole issue as an anomaly, truth be told I think the oddity lies in the fact that I am a female sports nut.

While women do sports, the bastion of obsessiveness has always been a male stronghold. Men are known for being anoraks, devouring every sporting statistic known to mankind. It is men who get sport almanacs for Christmas or birthdays. It is men who plan their weekends based on what live games are being shown on TV. It is men whose emotions are a function of how well their team fared in a recent match. It is men who include a football match in the itinerary when going abroad for a holiday.

The fact that I do all of the above, I suppose, casts a slight on my womanhood in the whole bigger picture. Add to that the notion that a woman who wears a tudung is generally viewed as demure and dainty, and, to some, backward and incapable of speaking English... well, there are some stereotypes I’ve missed adhering to, I guess. But all in all, it doesn’t really matter to me anymore, not after sitting near the away end when the team I was supporting was playing Leeds United. If I got through that without being abused by drunken Mat Sallehs, then I fail to see how being a tudung-wearing sports fan is an issue. And besides, if anyone questions my womanhood, I am told I make a mean lasagne, and a pretty decent nasi lemak. So there.

But all that aside, I suppose at this conjecture in the Gregorian calendar it is apt to think about the sporting year ahead. As a football fan it feels rather weird thinking of the New Year as the focal point of the year ahead, because the beginning of a football year in Europe is late summer. But 2010 is a special year: it is World Cup year! Barring my former landlords not paying me back some £700 (RM3,580) in deposit, I will be on a plane to Cape Town in July! We have tickets to a quarter-final tie, we do, we do! But the World Cup isn’t the only major sporting event of 2010 of course: in January we have the Winter Olympics, and the Commonwealth Games as well.

Still, while 2009 has ended with quite a bang, what with Thierry Henry’s hand and Tiger Wood’s err... wand, I would like to see a spicier 2010 sporting wise. So here are my sporting wishes for 2010:

• Following in the steps of former Welsh rugby international Gareth Thomas, Cristiano Ronaldo finally admits that... no... cannot be... can it?

• In the spirit of 1 Malaysia Boleh Belaka, former F1 driver Alex Yoong makes a comeback to drive the Lotus F1 car in a bid to challenge Petronas-sponsored Mercedes team driver who also recently came out of retirement Michael Schumacher. Rumours of a Datukship if he manages to finish a race have been quashed.

• Lee Chong Wei gets a Tan Sri-ship for being able to win a badminton tournament and not lose in the first round of the subsequent tournament.

• France fail to win any of their group games at the World Cup 2010 in an act of divine retribution. Whaddya mean that already happened in Euro 2008?

• Malaysia make a surprise appearance at the Winter Olympics in the bobsled event! Frustrated by years of unfulfilled potential, former sprinter Watson Nyambek enlists the help of three friends and a disgraced coach to propel Malaysia to a dignified showing in Vancouver, where their bobsled fails to finish but they all get out and carry their sled to the finish line. No, I haven’t heard of “Cool Runnings”, why?

• Usain Bolt finally admits that he is part of a secret Hadron Collider-related project which has resulted in the fabric of time being manipulated ever so slightly, allowing him that extra edge in breaking records.

• Malaysia win a gold medal at football. Eh wait. That’s happened already.

Or, failing any of the above, I’ll settle for England winning the World Cup. Now that would make a good 2010. Altogether now, football’s coming home...

- By: Idlan Zakaria lives in Colchester with her made-in-Malaysia Dyson vacuum cleaner. She is the (less-talented) Scourist half of Stoodle

Welcome to Malaysia

DEC 30 — It was an omen which I should have heeded before I left for Krabi a few weekends back. And Krabi will forever be etched in my mind as a 12-hour holiday, filled with environmental and emotional turbulence. This week’s essay is not about Krabi however (that would be more suited for a Bridget Jones's Diary type of novel).

I had entered the Pusrawi shop in AirAsia’s LCCT to get a bottle of mineral water. Surprisingly, there was none on display, save for soft drinks. So I asked the three workers at the cashier’s who were busy gossiping whether there was any in stock and in the store.

The sole young man, amid his miniscule harem, shook his head and waved me away.

I asked again: “Dik, ada tak jual mineral water?”

Frowning at me before turning to his adoring audience, he snapped: “Eesh, China ni pekak ke. Aku dah cakap tak de, tak faham-faham ke?”

One good thing about looking the way I do is that I am never thought of as a Malay and everyone else thinks I don’t understand Malay, and that I’m deaf, so I know what people say about the Chinese. However, when other Malays realise I’m one of them, they’re instantly friendlier. And sometimes I get a discount when I buy pisang goreng. (Sometimes looking so Jepun works to my benefit; a taxi driver gave me a free ride about KL showing off his city while I just said, 'Hait! Hait! Arigato!' at the back.)

You’ve heard of that one, haven’t you?

Depending on the vendor, if you’re XYZ race, the price of pisang goreng kat tepi Jalan ABC fluctuates. If you are an expat or Chinese, you’ll be paying this much, but if you’re Malay, it’s that much. If you’re Indian, and since Indians are similar to the Malays in their sensibilities, they get a similar rate. Something like the Bumi discount Bumis get when they buy property.

I remember our Ustaz Arifin bemoaning this unethical practice at an usrah once: if you’re Muslim, an honest one at that, and if you’re not Muslim but honest, you would not charge pisang goreng the way some of these sellers do. It's wrong. There should be a flat rate for pisang goreng. After all, stomachs have no colour, yes?

Back to my mineral water adventure.

I left the shop in a huff, and after a while simmered down enough to think, that if I were to write about this incident, would it have be about race, or about the poor service we customers get? For surely, good service transcends race? Or that in Malaysia, everything IS about race?

Of course, this does not happen everywhere in Malaysia. Where my parents live, politeness reigns. You’re talking about a semi-rural area with a good multi-cultural make-up. My father became acquainted with the mechanics around the area, who range from Indonesians to Malaysians, who always have a smile on their faces, and are soft-spoken, unlike the cutthroat mechanics he met in the city.

“Good service can be had if you put your mind to it and if the boss instils it,” he said, citing another example of exemplary service, Citibank. It’s nothing to do with race. A good number of the frontliners are Malays but they are efficient and polite. So it has nothing to do with being a lazy Melayu.

Unfortunately, bad service generally is something we have come to take for granted. And one cannot say expatriates have it better — it all depends on your wallet. If you’re the expatriate with a huge bank account, yes, you will be worshipped but what of the normal, average Mat Salleh?

Sensitisation workshops can be held, but perhaps only at corporate and government levels, but what about the mom-and-pop businesses? Will they invest in etiquette or focus on the profit margin? And honestly, is it so difficult to be nice and honest? Or is this part of a BTN campaign?

Friends tell me that what we have to endure is nothing compared to what migrant workers and non-white working class foreigners face when they need to be attended to by salespersons and frontliners. So tell me, is this just plain bad service we have come to live with, or is this racism?

- Dina Zaman writes so she can find answers. A lot of times, she doesn’t. When she has free time, she reads literary fiction or very trashy magazines. Her pet causes are Tony Leung, children’s rights advocacy and HIV/AIDS issues.

So why do people do what they do?

DEC 27 — A couple days ago, The Malaysian Insider ran a story in its business section about Christmas being the biggest shopping holiday in Malaysia. It’s not that surprising a revelation, seeing as how the end-year sales coincide with the holiday.

But is that the only reason? Joyce Yap, the chief executive of Pavilion — one of the biggest shopping malls in Kuala Lumpur — offers up several other reasons: usual year-end bonus and tourist arrivals.

But the one other reason she gave struck me as so spot on, I wondered why it has never before been articulated: she is quoted as saying people tend to shop more or are willing to shop more at this time because of that “end-of-year feeling.”

“It’s all about the inner feeling. ‘I’ve survived through this one year and now it’s time for me to catch up. I’m looking forward to ring in a new year and I’ll pamper myself first’,” she is quoted as saying. How absolutely apt and insightful!

It immediately made me think of a book I just finished reading: “Superfreakonomics.” The authors of that book — Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner — would totally applaud what Yap “discovered” about shoppers and their habits.

In this book, you find out all sorts of things you never even knew that you needed to know... but once you do, you feel that another piece of the life’s puzzle has been found. I especially loved the part about Indian men’s anatomy and why a certain type of birth control did not work in the sub-continent; the banking behaviour of terrorists and how this can help authorities spot them before they act; and how erupting volcanoes actually help cool down the planet. Fascinating stuff.

These guys — in their first book, “Freakonomics” — gave me the answers to questions I never even knew to ask, such as “Why do drug dealers still live with their mothers?” (Believe it or not, the small guys don’t make that much money but it is the eternal hope that they will make it big one day that keeps them in the game.)

When that book first came out five years ago, I didn’t give it a second thought... or look. Despite the freakish title, it was still a book about economics. And I don’t know about you but I hated economics in school.

I could not wrap my head around the subject and having a dreary teacher teach it to me made me completely detest the subject. Till today, it is a mystery how I even got a pass in the subject. I skipped about 90 per cent of my classes.

Fast forward to “Freakonomics”; I finally gave it a shot because the reviews promised that it would be “breezy and anecdotal.” I mean, when was the last time you heard those two adjectives used to describe a book on economics.

Their second book, “Superfreakonomics”, is just as entertaining... and insightful. Once again, strange questions are asked and the poring over of data reveals interesting answers. But wait... anybody can do that, right?

“A good set of data can go a long way toward describing human behaviour as long as the proper questions are asked of it. Our job in this book is to come up with such questions. This will allow us to describe, for instance, how the typical oncologist or terrorist or college student behaves in a given situation, and why.”

That was from “Superfreakonomics” and yes, it begins with a good and proper question. I imagine that is how Pavilion’s Yap came to her discovery of the “end-of-year feeling.” She probably began with the question: The stats show people buy more but why?

Wonder if she read “Freakonomics”?

Joan Lau has worked with words all her life – whether as a journalist, copywriter or even editor – and would love nothing better than to live between the covers of books.

Multi-religions under one roof

TALK of securing a "common space" in Singapore's multi-religious society has focused largely on maintaining a secular public sphere.

The ongoing interfaith exhibition at Suntec City is a timely reminder that pluralism plays a part in promoting religious harmony, too.

On display at the exhibition, organized by the Inter-Religious Organization and China's State Administration of Religious Affairs, are more than 1,000 items of religious significance from 10 different religions, notably including lesser-known faiths like Jainism, Zoroastrianism and the Baha'i Faith, which in Singapore number altogether only about 3,000 followers.

The week-long exhibition, flush with explanatory notes, books, CDs as well as lectures and talks, enables visitors to better understand the fundamental tenets of each religion.

This transnational, interfaith endeavour is a public symbol of what has been ongoing in private circles all around Singapore in recent years.

Activities organised by the various neighbourhoods' Inter-Religious Confidence Circles, and interfaith youth forums, give opportunities for faith groups to exchange alternative views, and share with each
other the different religious values that shape their lives.

Such exhibitions and cool-headed discussions on religion are crucial in a time when faith-based tensions in the world are hotter than ever.

Whether in Baghdad, Bombay or Belfast, from the recent Swiss ban on minarets, to the Ford Hood killings in the United States, community conflict is more often fuelled by religious misconceptions, rather than disagreement on where the line should be drawn between secular and religious society.

For example, since the 9/11 attacks, Islam, whose name means "peace" or "submission", has been hijacked by religious extremists to cultivate public perception that Muslims are all suicidal, bomb-carrying fanatics.

This has led to the rise of faith-based attacks and public policies that discriminate against religions as a whole, when it should be directed towards fundamental extremists, which by and large are minority groups.

To combat such misguided representations, it is not enough to talk only of maintaining a secular, common space.

What is needed is more discussions on pluralism, and the need to maintain a public space for all religions -- such as the one in Hall 603 of Suntec City, where on the opening night of the religious exhibit, leaders of all 10 faiths in the IRO stood together on stage to offer the world a prayer of peace.

Such a show of non-exclusive solidarity is an example of what United States' president Barack Obama's faith advisor Eboo Patel said in an interview last month that "religion in the 21st century has to be about building a bridge of cooperation, not a bomb of destruction".

In Singapore, such a bridge may be drawn not as a detour from our public sphere, but as a meeting point for all religions to work together.

In a 1996 paper, American political philosopher Michael Walzer wrote that "the challenge of a diverse society is to embrace its differences while maintaining a common life".

In a small country like Singapore, where people of all religions live together cheek by jowl, it is particularly important that we have a clear, unbiased understanding of the religious lives of our neighbours.

We should know, at least, what the holy books central to each religion are, and what they say about their beliefs and the significance of their religious practices.

We have to reach beyond easy generalisations, such as that Taoism is about burning joss paper to dead relatives, or that Hinduism is about milk pots, spiked kavadis and lit candles.

In times of increased religiosity, such efforts will also circumvent acts of intolerance as politicians warn of followers retreating into their respective religious communities.

In making the effort to understand the beliefs that underpin our neighbours' rituals, we may find more commonalities than differences between us. And that is a surer way in Singapore -- and around the world -- to promote peaceful co-existence and religious harmony.

The 2009 China-Singapore Religious and Cultural Exhibition is held at Hall 603 at the Suntec City Convention Centre, daily from 10.30am to 8pm. Admission is free.

Yen Feng lauds the interfaith exhibition, a meeting point for all religions.

The modern Russian and his religion

THE limited popularity of Singapore's Russian Orthodox Church calls to attention the uneasy relationship modern Russians have with religion.

Since it was set up two years ago, Russian Orthodox Church members have increased from 10 to 100, but that is still only a small fraction of the 3,000 Russians who live here.

Most churchgoers are professionals in their 30s or 40s, with young families. Last Sunday, a quarter of the 40 devotees in church were under 12-years-old.

History, from 1922 to 1991, gives an insight into why Russians remain tentative about practising their faith.

For 70 years in the Soviet Union, the Party regarded religion as an ideological rival to Communism. Churches were flattened, or converted into prisons and warehouses.

Historians estimate as many as 20 million Christians killed or thrown into labour camps and mental hospitals. Many fled. Those who stayed were re-baptised as Communists. Lenin became their new god.

Mr Evgeny Shmelev, born in 1975, had not stepped into a church until 2006. A newborn converted the born-again Christian.

The recent father, who now goes to church weekly with his three-year-old son, said: "I want my boy to know religion. It will be a good guide for his life."

To church member Sergeui Zagriatski, it was both paternal and romantic love that opened his heart to the holy connection.

The self-professed Christian confessed it was not until he met his Singaporean wife (who converted to Russian Orthodox) that he became religious.

The Holy Spirit, he said, has helped him become more grounded, and he wishes the same for his two young daughters.

"When the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991, it was a time of maximum spiritual emptiness," said the 34-year-old, who moved to Singapore two years ago.

"It was complete devastation, a collapse of all references. After going through such a vacuum, I would like my daughters to have some moral and religious reference points they can use later in their lives."

On Sunday, the children obediently took turns to offer their sacrifice of lit candles – no easy feat for those who were shorter than the candle-stand.

Even though the service was conducted in Church Slavonic, an old language used nowhere else besides in Orthodox prayers, Sasha, Mr Zagriatski's five-year-old Eurasian daughter, took to the syllables easily, with practice.

Bishop Sergiy of Solnechnogorsk, Russia, who founded the Church here in 2007, described it earlier this month as fundamental to the modern man.

"For many Russians today, religion is like bread and love – it is basic."

But if the young families of the Orthodox Church are representative of their generation, the modern Russian's re-introduction to religion will require first filial love as a matchmaker.

Those who were parents and grandparents in the Soviet Empire remember giving up their faith to protect their young.

It makes sense that generations later, when parents themselves, modern Russians will recover what was lost to do the same.

Yen Feng learns why Russians in Singapore want their children to have faith.