Some scholars are stupid - guilty as charged

8
Many people look up to or admire scholars. I've never admired them. Most of them get scholarships because their parents are important members of society. Applicants are always required to state their parents' names and occupation. Other than selection by parents' occupation, I don't know what other criteria is used because some scholars are really stupid!

Ministry of Education (MOE) scholar Jonathan Wong, 23, who was on a Teaching Scholarship in University of York, pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography in Britain last week. [read report]

Some people think it was stress that caused him to "snap". Well, that's silly. People don't just "snap" into child pornography (pun intended). He liked child pornography and that's that.

I say he's stupid not because he liked child porn but that he was stupid enough to get caught. Thank goodness he got caught with child porn, not molesting or raping children under his charge. Gosh, how does MOE select scholars?! (To think he's been living on taxpayers' money!)

Educators, child-care givers and priests molesting and raping children - it's nothing new and happens all the time. Sad, isn't it? I'm not saying any particular group of people - not MOE, not the church - is solely at fault but that everyone involved including parents are responsible. Aren't too many people inclined to think that a scholar is a good person because he has been screened by some higher authority, has higher social status and is supposedly more intelligent? Clearly, a better form of screening and selection needs to be done. Inaction shouldn't be an option.

Update 2 Dec:
A report in The New Paper on 2 December 2010 stated that Wong had been publicly caned in the then Chinese High School for peeping in a primary school girl's toilet but the offence was not captured in the system and it was not included in his testimonials because his teachers "thought he had learnt from his mistake", says a Hwa Chong Institution spokesman.

I mentioned earlier that a better form of screening and selection needs to be done. This latest news is proof that there's a problem with the process. How can the MOE be unaware of such an offence when they offered him a scholarship? Or were they aware of it but chose to take their chances?



Related post:
[Pedophilia]
[Nerds put heads together to hunt child abusers]
[Legalisation of child porn: For or against?]

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Don't Whine lah. There is no corruption in Singapore because we have legalised it.

Sure, parents connections should not have anything to do with scholarships, but that is purely an assumption ah!

Anonymous said...

Pedophilia is a MAJOR CRIME in Western countries, but it is quietly accepted in Sillypore! There are child prostitutes in Thailand etc.

It is now common knowledge that most Irish Priest & Brothers sexually abused children and even the Pope has apologized on their behalf. But we can't be sure whether this practice has completely stopped.

Singapore should clamp down on such crimes.

boh.tak.chek. said...

can never understand paedophiles, period. What's there to like about children ? Undergrown genitals, little or no sensation on their organs, dun even have breasts.

Tsk Tsk. Happens not just to scholars but celebrities also. Just look at MJ. He has women swooning over him but he prefers children. Fetish for children is in-born lah.

Anonymous said...

Not related to the topic, I'd also like to raise the issue of why some rich students applying for scholarships in the first place.

I wonder why these students who could afford would want to compete with other equally good students who come from poorer families who are finding hard times to fund for their education.

I have seen scholars who are children of doctors, managing directors, etc., who could easily afford to pay for their children's education. I don't get the point why these students are being so selfish.

Yes, of course they have the right to apply for it but why does the scholarship organisers seem to neglect the financial conditions requirements?

David said...

Yu-Kym,
Mr. Wong is stupid, for being caught with child porn, and he no doubt feels stupid because he likely feels nothing is wrong with kiddie porn.

Whether he is a pedophile remains to be seen. However many, if not most pedophiles start with kiddie porn.

Both are perverted behaviour. One has to wonder if these so called smart young adults are so socially inept that they discover kiddie port as an outlet for lack of the most basic social graces.

Do you have any knowledge of kiddie porn followers being sexually immature?

You and others have raised good questions regarding the vetting process for such scholars, at the taxpayers expense!!

IMHO, most scholars are judged by their character. In Wong's case, he is not a good person, he will lose social standing and his intelligence is being wasterd.

David

I do not ask the wounded person how he feels, I myself become
the wounded person.


-- Walt Witman

Yu-Kym said...

Anon, pedophilia is not accepted in Singapore. The Internet service providers do try to block Internet porn. Downloading and/or possession of porn including child porn are illegal.

boh.tak.chek, I agree. Pedophilia is against nature. I can understand consensual sex with a minor but not with children and babies who have not developed sexually.

Anon, it's for the prestige. And scholars are automatically put on a fast-track for job advancement and given opportunities and privileges that other employees do not get.

David, he's perverted indeed! I doubt kiddie porn followers are only being sexually immature. Many young people might be sexually curious and engage in some sexual exploration because of what they read and hear from others but kiddie porn crosses the line...

Anonymous said...

I believe there are corruption in Singapore, just that they are doing it in a professional way, making it seems legal.

As we are not insiders of the govt, we do not know the truth.

Alex

Yu-Kym said...

Alex, I believe you are right. Though what should be legal or illegal changes with time, e.g. legalisation of abortion and prostitution. Sometimes the reason might be having to choose between the lesser of two evils.