On a more light-hearted note...
I have to admit, the sec 2 GEPpers in RGS ARE amusing. Very amusing, I must say. (: Found one of the most irritating sec 2 Geppers' blog whom we dislike for her weird accent, but undoubtedly, she 1)has a sense of humour and 2) is talented in writing.
Well, reading through her blog I found out something (this was in one of her and her friend's posts about a month ago): RI guys want to merge with RGS girls.
*pukes*
Never, people, NEVER. It's bad enough that we have to meet them in JC, and now they are requesting a merger?!? NO WAY, baby.
I shall now proceed to copy the whole entire personal expository essay of the RI guy who feels justified in wanting a merger (orignally from
here):
"We see this in our education system; there has come a time where what must be changed must be changed. In 2004, the inaugural Raffles Programme was launched to enable students to learn in a more flexible and challenging environment. We had done away with the conventional and replaced it with a better and more effective way of learning. However, regrettably, something has not changed. That is the single sex environment in RI. So ladies and gentlemen, I have come forward to advocate the turning co-ed of RI.
Firstly, some background. The current system of single-sex education is a residual of the unfortunate gender stereotype in history. In the past, only boys were supposed to go to school and so schools that existed then comprised only of male students. Female students who studied, if at all, did so in girls' schools. So resulted our boys' and girls' schools.
First to benefit from the turning co-ed of RI would be our academic interests. We currently take the top 3% of the male student population in Singapore. However, if we open up our admission to female students, taking the top 1.5% of the whole population, the overall academic ability of the population would be higher. When this happens, RI would be able to gain an upper hand in competitions that we join ever so often and bring more glory to the school.
Secondly, co-education would lead to a more vibrant schoolscape and a more natural learning environment. I ask you, for what is school preparing us? For real life, yes, for working life. If so, is it fair for us to be stuck in the confines of a single-sex school, not to interact with females? Stereotypes aside, both sexes have their strengths and weaknesses, their similarities and differences. Both sexes need to work with each other eventually anyway. Co-education is hence necessary for a more natural working environment.
Many people must be disagreeing with me at this stage. Wouldn't a co-educational environment be distracting for people? Wouldn't their grades drop after being involved in boy-girl relationships? I would like to point you to the slippery slope fallacy here. Need a co-educational environment necessarily increase the rate of relationships among students of the opposite sex significantly? Perhaps.
But are such relationships bad? Destructive? I beg to differ: many teenagers would be able to handle their relationships well. There are several advantages to such relationships, including motivation in schoolwork and more dating experience. In fact, those who are likely to involve themselves in relationships would involve themselves anyway. Wouldn't it cost more, then, on these people academically, involved in a relationship with someone of another school? Which is my third point: co-education would reduce the cost of keeping a relationship, having less of an impact on the schoolwork of the parties involved, while providing teenagers with their experience in a relationship.
Lastly, I would like to say that the current system gives rise to many unhealthy trends among innocent little boys like us. This includes the begetting of males who like other males, as we can see among certain students in our class. It also gives rise to people who takes a liking or even has a fetish for pinching cheeks of fellow male students. Wouldn't this be more distracting than a normal BGR? More destructive to the society at large?
Intake form both sexes would increase overall academic ability, lead towards a more vibrant schoolscape, make relationships easier to maintain and minimises the possibility of males who like other males. Placing these reasons against the weak rebuttal of distraction in school life and archaic reasons concerning education is akin to placing Mike Tyson and me in a boxing ring. Since the mid-1800's, single-sex schools and universities have started to turn co-educational. RI has every reason to do so too: what must be changed must be changed. We could start by raising this issue to the Prefectorial board and expressing our support and hopefully, for the general good of the population, the prospect of RI's turning co-ed would be considered by the Administration. Thank you."
Oh yeah, right. What I want to say has already been said by the GEPpers, you can go read their blogs yourself --
Lintong's version and
Olivia's version. Note: 1) I do not know who is Lintong, but I can bet we've seen her before.
Well, just a few points:
1) Note how their chauvinist attitude comes out in the essay:
"When this happens, RI would be able to gain an upper hand in competitions that we join ever so often and bring more glory to the school. "(So they want to join us so that WE can help them bring MORE GLORY to let THEM gain the upper hand in competitions they "join ever so often" huh?)
"This includes the begetting of males who like other males...Wouldn't this be more distracting than a normal BGR? More destructive to the society at large?"(Oh, so they want to merge with us just so they can prevent the increasing numbers of GAYS in their school? And, oh, how horrible, this increase of gays will be "more destructive to the society at large" and therefore they are justified in wanting a merger? Does he think that society revolves around them? WHO CARES if they turn gay, I ask?)
And notice how they only bring out the how the MALES can benefit. Hello, it's CO-ED we are talking about here. Which means it involves US GIRLS too. So why would we want to merge to the benefit of YOUR SCHOOL ONLY?
Well. I went to look at his blog, and he started clarifying stuff:
"I believe that never in the speech has a merger with RGS been suggested. Going co-ed refers to taking in girls for Sec 1. That's all. I believe that never in the speech has any suggestion been made about a merger with RGS; if not, whichever suggestion made is unintended."*scoffs* Yeah, taking in girls for sec 1. RIGHT. There's a reason for JC you know... and if you want co-ed, go Dunman High -- a school just as good as any of our schools. And if there's a split of talents of P6 girls, our standard might drop undoubtedly.
Oh yes, he clarified that HE was only speaking for a minority of the population, not the whole, but look at my next point and you can actually see why majority of the population are actually for it.
2) We can do much better than having desperate RI guys around us. Yes, DESPERATE. Have any idea what they do?
An example of DESPERATION: looking over their friends' contact lists and copying every female's contact number. Every female from RGS, that is.
Yes, and that's my definition of desperate. Who can get more desperate than them, I wonder?
And therefore, becuse they are desperate (I even have real life examples, seriously), we can tell that they are MUCH MORE enthusiastic about a merger or whatever he calls it than us.
3) Looking over at the comments at Lintong's blog, I can see that acs guys have a better impression on them than ri (well, almost every school can have a better impression on us than ri). Quotes from their comments:
"in acjc the guys open doors for you, in rjc they slam them in your face."
"we just don't really like ri. acsi is okay and they're male."
An RI guy who commented apparantly disagrees:
"Just bear in mind that ACS boys are charming but then they cheat on you and/or break your hearts :P"
But he admits that they (RI guys) haven't learnt the ways of chivary:
"Maybe we don't hew to archaic norms of proper gender behavior ;)"
And judging by the tone, he apparantly doesn't think much of "the archaic norms of proper gender behavior". No wonder they say chivary is dead, if that's the kind of guys we get in our society.
4) Well. Talking about good impressions, I get reminded of an incident... when I asked Rui ling yesterday about why NYGH girls were not coming for the spar, she replied with a "I'm not sure... maybe they don't like acs boys?"
After which Kristin proceeded to add in an interesting tidbit -- "They don't like Chinese High guys; they think RI guys are HOT!"
That is such a grave misconception I don't even know where to begin. We decided that we would let them live in their fantasy a little longer before showing them the horrible truth.
In fact, I actually think Chinese High guys are way better than RI guys... oops. But they are our BROTHERS, so I shadn't say much. (;
And that roughly sums up the whole debate with my opinions. For more details, go read the links I provided. (:
0 flowers
0 Comments:
far and wee
you and i together mysteriously and always floating
Saturday, September 10
12:17 PM
