Archive for September 2nd, 2010


Unisex toilets – to(i)-let or not to(i)-let

September 2, 2010

Equality between men and women, especially in the workplace, has prompted the emergence of unisex toilets. In America and in the UK, unisex toilets have become commonplace in workplaces, and is slowly being introduced in public places such as in restaurants, bars and shopping centres.

In BBC News UK , a man, Mr Glaser, sued a group of women for violation of his civil and privacy rights. The women had helped themselves with the men’s toilet after being tired of waiting in the long queues of women’s toilets during a San Diego rock concert. Mr Glaser claimed that he was unable to relieve himself in front of the women, causing him deep embarrassment and distress. However, the case was thrown out of court for being “frivolous”.

Although shared toilets have long been commonplace at home, I personally would be uncomfortable at the thought of sharing a public toilet with strangers from the opposite sex. In my opinion, it is an invitation for sex offenders to commit a crime in public places much more easily. This is of serious concern as toilets are used not only by adults, but by teenagers and children too. Safety is paramount.

In an article in The Daily Telegraph , a lady was followed by a stranger and sexually assaulted in a unisex toilet at a popular Sydney bar. Imagine how easy it is for offenders to access the toilets and choose their victims. How can male or female feel safe in unisex toilets? Who will be liable if anything happens? Why change something that already works?

Say NO to Unisex toilets.

References :
Talking Point: Would you welcome unisex office toilets?
May 4, 2000
BBC News

Sydney unisex toilet sex attacker charged over Ivy nightclub incident
October 30, 2009
The Daily Telegraph

Sex and the single can
April 26, 2000
BBC News


Can you really put a price on culture?

September 2, 2010

I love looking at beautiful things, particularly designer stationery and paintings done with great skills and attention to details. Studying design, I appreciate that the process of producing a beautiful piece of work is never easy. I don’t claim to be an art critic but sometimes, I think art is simply overrated.

In April 2009, the painting by Paul Cezanne titled Bords de la Marne, sold for $16 million. Not $1.6 million. SIXTEEN MILLION. That is a huge sum of money. I find it utterly ridiculous that the Art Gallery of NSW would pay that much for a piece of painting on canvas.

This painting by Jackson Pollock, titled no.5, 1948, is another example of a painting with an exaggerated price tag. It was sold to a Hollywood mogul – David Geffen – in November 2006 for a hefty $140 million – making it the most expensive painting ever sold. Some art critics and art investors may argue that the price is justified, in that it is an investment on a medium that has made a significant impact in its time in the art industry. Jackson Pollock introduced the ‘Dripping technique’ where he ‘paints’ without touching the canvas. His technique involves dripping and splashing paint freely onto the canvas. His action painting technique is still the talk of the art industry worldwide to this day.

There is no doubt that both Cezanne and Pollock have unique skills that are hard to find these days, and it is a piece of culture that should be preserved, but I think in this current economic times, that money would have been better spent on art education programs and nurturing upcoming talents. Perhaps, with better support for young artists, there could be plenty more like them, and art need not cost a fortune.

References :

March 16, 2009


Does culture shape technology?

September 2, 2010

We now live in the age of technology. There is an increase in the number of people reliant on mobile phones and social networks such as Facebook and Twitter to keep in touch with each other, television and iPods to keep us entertained, computers and the internet to do business. Technology is ever-changing, but so is culture. Which one influences the other?

A study by Genevieve Bell, an anthropologist that works at Intel Research, has found that technology tends to adapt to a certain culture that fit into existing patterns of behaviour. One example she gave, was how manufacturers of mobile phones designed mobile phones that takes into account the prayer times of Muslim users. It includes a function that reminds them of prayer times, orients them towards Mecca and stops incoming calls in that 20 minute block of time during prayers.

In Japan, space is limited, resulting in privacy issues. According to the article in, manners are also a way of culture in Japan, as they seek to make public places pleasant for everyone, especially in confined spaces such as a train. Talking loudly on mobile phones are frowned upon, which is why text messaging is the preferred mode of communicating in Japan, rather than talking on the mobile phone. This has influenced the design of mobile phones and the services provided by mobile phone carriers in Japan. Their mobile phones feature buttons that are easier to type, with screens that allow long text messages, with cheaper rates per message sent.

It is nice to know that culture takes precedence over technology, with consideration for the usual way of life for each culture.
The world would be a boring place without identity.

References :

Japan’s railway companies try to keep passengers’ manners on track
by Mohit Joshi – March 19, 2009

Does technology change culture or culture change technology?
by Tim Finin – July 10, 2006

For Technology, No Small World After All
by Michael Erard – May 6, 2006


Freedom of Speech

September 2, 2010

Recently, Facebook has been the target of a ban by Pakistan after a competition to draw caricatures of Prophet Muhammad offended the Muslims and caused a huge uproar among protesters in Pakistan. The Lahore High Court ordered the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority to ban the use of Facebook throughout the country. By the next day, the ban had expanded to include YouTube. Such is the seriousness of the issue.

The person behind the offensive competition was Molly Norris, a Seattle-based cartoonist. The offending contest was launched in April in ‘reaction to the decision by the Comedy Central network to edit a portion of its “South Park” television program that was to have depicted the prophet Muhammad in a bear costume.’ (Hill, 2010), and was to have the deadline day declared “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.” This caused an even bigger outcry from the public.

Religion is a highly sensitive topic, and certainly the freedom of speech rights of Americans do not apply in this kind of topic. While I don’t agree with what Molly Norris has done, I don’t think that Facebook should be the one to take the blame. Why should Facebook be shut out from the whole of Pakistan for something that one of its users did?

As of February 2010, there were more than 400 million Facebook users, and the numbers are rising. This social network allows people to control their own content. With that many users, there is no way Facebook can monitor each and every one of the postings on it. The responsibility is up to the users. Postings on Facebook should not be taken too personally, After all, if there is something you don’t fancy in there, you always have the freedom to ignore or get away from that site.

Tech News World: Social Networking
by Sidney Hill – May 20, 2010

Mashable – Social Media
by Barb Dybwad – February 2, 2010