Living in a multi racial and multi religious society is getting more complicated and even demanding of everyone to be extra sensitive to the needs and taboos of everyone. The special needs could now extend to people with medical or psychological conditions as well.
I will just confine to one specific factor of food and inviting people to a pig out or makan event, or a party, religious, cultural or just a simple wedding. The latter is of extra sensitive other than just an issue of food. Anyone who has been put through such an ordeal will know how difficult and sensitive is the invitation list as it could offend people for inviting and not inviting them, and serving them the right food. The vegetarians always felt shortchanged when others feasted on sumptious dishes and theirs were simply vegetables or glutens.
Putting that aside, let’s talk about an invitation to a Christmas Party. Not everyone is agreeable with the religion in the first place. That is another issue. Not everyone is agreeable with the food and the alcohol on offer. We have people who can’t take meat, some can’t take ham, some cannot consume alcohol, some can’t have sugar, some cannot take legume related products or nuts, some can only take vegetables and vegetables of certain types.
How is the host going to take care of all the prohibitions and cannot issue? To make sure that everyone is going to have what they want and nothing else is a tall order. The problem is with the host or organiser. If they want to invite people with special needs and sensitivity towards food, isn’t it their responsibility to make sure that the guest’s needs are met and be happy? To complicate problems, the numbers of guests with special needs may be so small, one may be diabetic, two may be vegetarians, and vegetarians also got different types, vegans and non vegans, one may not be able to take pork, a few may need food to be halal. And some cannot have fried food. So how?
One way is to go for the lowest common denominator whereby everyone can eat the same food and no one will be cheated. I can only think of a perfect menu, plain rice, porridge, bread, can have a few types, Swiss, English, French etc, and a spread of vegetables, and plenty of non alcoholic drinks, without sugar of course.
But if the host is rich and money is no issue, he could still have his cake and eat it, ask each guest to pick his own menu and engage an army of chefs to prepare anything under the sky.
Another option is to defer to the host, host priority. The guests will let the host decides what he wants to serve and eat whatever they can find suitable to them. I did that most of the time. I am vegetarians on 3 full days a week. And it is difficult to demand on my friends and host to prepare vegetarian food on the days that I am vegetarian. I don’t expect my friends or hosts to know that. So I make do with what is available. I pick on vegetarian dishes and may just stick to one dish and avoid the rest. Or if that is not possible, I will just take the vegetable and beans in a plate of meat food. But only I can do that, to accommodate the host and avoid making things difficult for them. I am my own boss and god when food is concerned. I decide. I choose to be vegetarian and no need to blame others.
Many people cannot decide as there is god and religion involved, there is also the doctor and his prescription for those with health issues. These make things that much more inflexible as to what can be eaten or not eaten is no longer a personal decision. The only thing left is plain water.
The issue I presented is tolerance of the host or tolerance of the guests. In the former, the guests make do with what is on the table, without putting any demands or pressure on the host. The latter, the host would have to bend backwards to meet the sensitivities of the guests.
I am not going to suggest that we go the Banquet way, where restaurants should all go halal. For the next step is, why just halal and not go for the lowest set of common denominator, vegetarian? When that be the case, then those deprived of their food preference would become the sensitive ones, making unyielding demands that their cravings for food must be satisfied.
It is tough to say who is being sensitive or insensitive to the needs of others when the issue is getting more complex, demanding and irritating when words like discrimination is hung on the front chests.
12/27/2011
12/26/2011
The use and meaning of quotes
Very often we like to quote what other people said in our posts. And we quote for various reasons. One major use of quotes is that the person is an authority and what he said is important or makes sense. The famous quote of Lord Acton is being used daily in cyberspace, ‘Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.’
When people make this quote, they are agreeing completely with the author. Absolute power corrupts, a fact. But people may make this quote and then explains why they agree or even disagree. And they will explain why they disagree, sometimes by writing a whole book on it.
Some may misquote or quote it partially by saying power corrupts, and power corrupts absolutely, which has a slightly different meaning. It needs not be absolute power to corrupt absolutely. But the person who quoted is happy that as long as it is power, needs not be absolute, it can still corrupt absolutely. Other wise there is no point in making the reference. He believes that power alone can corrupt absolutely.
This is different from Acton’s original intent or idea. Acton only pronounced that in order for power to corrupt absolutely, it must be absolute power. His criteria is more demanding, not anyhow power, little power, small power, as long as it is power, it corrupts absolutely.
When someone quotes, it is quite easy to understand his intent or thinking, his values, what he subscribes to, what he agrees or disagrees, or what he believes in what he quoted.
‘A picture is worth a thousand words.’ Anyone making this quote must agree with the saying or enjoys the brevity of making a profound expression with so few words. This is an artistic reason for making a quote.
When people make this quote, they are agreeing completely with the author. Absolute power corrupts, a fact. But people may make this quote and then explains why they agree or even disagree. And they will explain why they disagree, sometimes by writing a whole book on it.
Some may misquote or quote it partially by saying power corrupts, and power corrupts absolutely, which has a slightly different meaning. It needs not be absolute power to corrupt absolutely. But the person who quoted is happy that as long as it is power, needs not be absolute, it can still corrupt absolutely. Other wise there is no point in making the reference. He believes that power alone can corrupt absolutely.
This is different from Acton’s original intent or idea. Acton only pronounced that in order for power to corrupt absolutely, it must be absolute power. His criteria is more demanding, not anyhow power, little power, small power, as long as it is power, it corrupts absolutely.
When someone quotes, it is quite easy to understand his intent or thinking, his values, what he subscribes to, what he agrees or disagrees, or what he believes in what he quoted.
‘A picture is worth a thousand words.’ Anyone making this quote must agree with the saying or enjoys the brevity of making a profound expression with so few words. This is an artistic reason for making a quote.
Shafie being labelled a trouble maker
I was reading this article by a Shafie in TransitioningOrg. He related an incident when the company was organising a Christmas lunch party and how he was labelled a trouble maker.
I quote, ‘Soon, she came over to my desk and she informed me that she had booked a restaurant that served non-halal food. And she asked, would it be okay, for me, if she requested the restaurant to serve vegetarian, or order halal food from somewhere else and bring it to the restaurant?
I voiced out that, first of all, I’ve never heard of any restaurant that allows outside food. Secondly, a budget has been set aside for the party, and while the rest of the staff gets to enjoy a sumptuous meal……the rest of the minorities was expected to eat vegetables? – Sorry, to my vegetarian friends. Thirdly, why was the staff never consulted and a consensus taken to which restaurants we would like to have our party?
And before I could offer other alternatives, she exclaimed, ‘Why are you so strict?!’’
Actually the problem can be solved quite easily. No need to ask staff of all other religions which restaurant they would want the Christmas party to be held. Any restaurant will do. The main issue is food. Please let me explain.
For the vegetarian, ask the chef to prepare vegetarian turkey, vegetarian ham etc etc. There are all kinds of mocked vegetarian meat dishes available or can be created. Okay Christmas party must have turkey and ham. Log cake should not pose any problem.
As for the Muslims, instead of ham, provide them with lamb, and turkey can still be turkey if halal turkey is available. If that is not possible, get an oversize halal chicken instead from Kentucky. When I was in Saudi Arabia, they served no alcoholic beer and wine if I remembered correctly.
I think the Muslims will understand and such a compromise arrangement may be acceptable. I am saying maybe, just my opinion. I am not a Muslim and I may be wrong and insensitive to say this. Please disagree with me if you have to.
Point to note is that we are a multi racial and multi religious society and we must pay special attention to the sensitivities of every group. What is normal and taken for granted by one group can be something very sensitive and serious to another. This problem will be exaggerated when the population gets bigger and more people from other nationalities migrated here and become our colleagues and neighbours. Things can only get more complex and more sensitive as we go forward.
I quote, ‘Soon, she came over to my desk and she informed me that she had booked a restaurant that served non-halal food. And she asked, would it be okay, for me, if she requested the restaurant to serve vegetarian, or order halal food from somewhere else and bring it to the restaurant?
I voiced out that, first of all, I’ve never heard of any restaurant that allows outside food. Secondly, a budget has been set aside for the party, and while the rest of the staff gets to enjoy a sumptuous meal……the rest of the minorities was expected to eat vegetables? – Sorry, to my vegetarian friends. Thirdly, why was the staff never consulted and a consensus taken to which restaurants we would like to have our party?
And before I could offer other alternatives, she exclaimed, ‘Why are you so strict?!’’
Actually the problem can be solved quite easily. No need to ask staff of all other religions which restaurant they would want the Christmas party to be held. Any restaurant will do. The main issue is food. Please let me explain.
For the vegetarian, ask the chef to prepare vegetarian turkey, vegetarian ham etc etc. There are all kinds of mocked vegetarian meat dishes available or can be created. Okay Christmas party must have turkey and ham. Log cake should not pose any problem.
As for the Muslims, instead of ham, provide them with lamb, and turkey can still be turkey if halal turkey is available. If that is not possible, get an oversize halal chicken instead from Kentucky. When I was in Saudi Arabia, they served no alcoholic beer and wine if I remembered correctly.
I think the Muslims will understand and such a compromise arrangement may be acceptable. I am saying maybe, just my opinion. I am not a Muslim and I may be wrong and insensitive to say this. Please disagree with me if you have to.
Point to note is that we are a multi racial and multi religious society and we must pay special attention to the sensitivities of every group. What is normal and taken for granted by one group can be something very sensitive and serious to another. This problem will be exaggerated when the population gets bigger and more people from other nationalities migrated here and become our colleagues and neighbours. Things can only get more complex and more sensitive as we go forward.
12/25/2011
Bloops can be good too
It is official, Seng Han Thong is not a racist. Shanmugam has spoken and no man in blue will be going after him. It was just a bloop and not necessary to put words into his mouth. The SMRT official is definitely more astute politically. It is not fair to put a label on Seng Han Thong for misquoting him. I support this trend of not putting labels on people or jumping quickly to put a label on anyone. We will become a more tolerant society if we refrain from doing so.
The biggest and most notorious of such bloops was the darkness in Little India by an MP. I must be careful and quote the source or else people may label me as racist too. I did not say that, but quoting an ex MP. Then there was another bloop, or more serious than that, by a member of Young PAP in his blog about trainee terrorists.
And this is Christmas. All will be forgiven in good spirit. But I do wish for Christmas that more bloops will come out and be forgiven. They will set the precedents, the benchmarks to forgive people who blooped and be spared from being labelled as racists.
The Christmas Spirit is thriving.
The biggest and most notorious of such bloops was the darkness in Little India by an MP. I must be careful and quote the source or else people may label me as racist too. I did not say that, but quoting an ex MP. Then there was another bloop, or more serious than that, by a member of Young PAP in his blog about trainee terrorists.
And this is Christmas. All will be forgiven in good spirit. But I do wish for Christmas that more bloops will come out and be forgiven. They will set the precedents, the benchmarks to forgive people who blooped and be spared from being labelled as racists.
The Christmas Spirit is thriving.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)