Rant 366 / Homo Milk

The Chinese company trying to buy the Hummer brand, Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Co., is really an unknown company in China. The fact that a relatively small company is trying to buy a big brand is attracting a lot of attention to it. Like they say, if it was an established brand doing the same thing it would have been nothing.

小鱼想吃大鱼? This is definitely something to keep an eye on. I'm interested in seeing whether it will succeed in the long term because even the biggest automobile manufacturer in China sees it as a lost cause. Maybe someday the Chinese military will use their Humvees, though it's much more likely they will resell it.






I really feel like buying a new computer, but it's such a hassle to wait for them to build the computer and then carry everything home. Hence I need more than one reason to go to Sim Lim Square.









A few days ago I was in a cab with a really talkative driver. He asked me what I major in and I told him. Then he said he majored in Mechanical Engineering too, but from a polytechnic. I wasn't thinking (I was secretly hoping he would shut up so that I can sleep a little more during the journey) so before I realized I ask that, it came out of my mouth," So why didn't you..." Seriously, I wanted to ask him why he didn't try to go for an university, NTU or SIM or whatever, instead of driving a cab.

He probably interpreted my question as " So why didn't you get a better job?" Which I believe is even worse than my original question. I think he took offense, because despite his friendly demeanor and friendly tone, his choice of topics were... well you'll see.

So he told me," Well, I got adventurous!" And he proceeded to tell me that after graduation he went to (blah blah blah I can't remember blah blah blah imagine elevator music running through my head blah blah blah) and then finally to the food industry. But he didn't like the way poly grads always end up as engineering assistants while only uni grads become real engineers (even in name).

Here's probably another bad move. I replied," Oh yea it was normal to be in poly back then, right?" Honestly speaking, I have no idea how long ago "back then" was, but he seemed to expect an answer from me so I just pulled something out of my ass. I have never been good at Table Topics during Toastmasters meetings.

Fortunately, he agreed and also said that "it is also normal to be disadvantaged". Then he went on to say that today's undergrads are not that much better than "poly grads last time", which kind of matches what one of my prof said. Once of my profs told me that uni grads with during his time with even a pass degree are of the same standard as today's second upper honours in my major because they've been becoming more lenient gradually over the years.

And I quoted that. Then after some discussion that I don't quite remember because seriously I find the moving cars, roadside trees and inconspicuous roadkills more interesting, we went on today's local media.

At first we both agreed that the media is tightly controlled in Singapore (btw it wasn't I who started this topic), but then he went on to say that the Singapore government and media are being infested by homosexuals. It seems, according to his observant eyes and sharp mind, that the local government favours homosexuals for their creativity and so they like to hire them (or in his words "gays, lesbians..") in the media industry.

Let us stop here for a break and a furious rant from me.

HOW CAN HE HATE LESBIANS!?!?!?! EVEN THE SINGAPORE LAW DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY BAN LESBIAN ACTIVITIES, ONLY MALE HOMOSEXUAL STUFF! HOW CAN A STRAIGHT MAN IN HIS RIGHT MIND EVEN DISLIKE LESBIANS! WHAT IS HE, A FUCKING FAGGOT?!? WHAT DOES HE HAVE AGAINST LESBIANS ANYWAY? THEY'RE FUCKING SEXY! KINKY TOO! HOW ON EARTH CAN A HETEROSEXUAL MALE NOT LIKE LESBIANS??? THIS IS HERESY! THIS IS MADNESS! NO, THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!





Okay let's get back to the main rant.

I was confused then. What was wrong with that?? It is rather true that they seem to be more creative than heterosexuals, just like Jews seem to win more Nobel prizes than any other types of people. So what if the number of gays and lesbians is rising over at Mediacorp or whatever??

This time I couldn't say anything, and hoped that it meant that the conversation was finally going to die off and become peace and tranquility for the last 10mins of the ride.

But no, Mr Cab Driver must talk or his balls will be infested with lice and ulcers will grow on his penis head.

He then realized that I didn't read the local newspapers and was unaware of the recent incident about the Awareness programme. The gist of it was that, according to him, they were introducing homosexuality as a normal phenomenon and promoting it to schoolchildren, saying that "it is good".

So I said that the part about it being normal was fine and good. Introducing the concept to children is alright or else they're going to get some shocks later in life. But promoting it? That was wrong. But then again, maybe they were trying to tell the secretly gay people to leave their closets. And this topic is rather controversial (here I was trying to hint that we really shouldn't go any further into the topic or we would argue forever).

He looked at me in a funny way and said," No, there is nothing normal about them! Homosexuality is wrong! There is nothing controversial about it. Normal is normal! Homosexuals are abnormal! Look at it this way: do homosexuals have children?"

I thought that was a pretty bad question because the obvious answer to me, which I said, was," Yeah, by adoption." And did the one-eyebrow-raised-look to increase impact.

As I expected, the retort came," Is adoption normal?"

Personally I find adoption normal. Some of my ancestors and my living relatives were adopted. In fact my maternal grandfather was adopted as a child somewhere during WW1 or WW2. And so I told the driver it was normal.

"Adoption is not normal! They are not their natural children! And those adopted children will grow up to be homosexuals because their parents would teach them how good it is to be gay! Okay let's put it this way: Would any normal parent want their children to be gay?"

I was amused and surprised. Two bad questions on the same topic. Is he asking for some real life trolling or is he trolling me???

I said," There are many things that parents don't want their children to be. Homosexuals is just one of many, if at all." I was about to list some things that are worse than a child turning out to be gay, eg a daughter (or worse - a son) who grows up to become a prostitute, but I didn't have the chance.

At that point he seemed exasperated. "Don't compare like that lah! Compare like that you can talk forever on unrelated things."

And I said," Homosexuals are just normal people with a different sexual preference."

He said something then, but I can't remember what. Anyway he finished with," So do you want to be gay?"

Epic question. My defense of homosexuality must have driven him to the point of insanity. And I don't see how it's something a person can become just by wanting to be. I've always had the impression that it's like men who love women's breasts - they can't really explain it. Or at least, I can't.

Anyway, my reply was simple," No (I dragged the "no" here a little to amplify the effect) but I don't mind my friends being gay."

That was when he revealed a deeper layer of why he disliked homosexual people. AIDS! Quoting data from the WHO that homosexuals have a greater chance of getting the HIV than "normal people", I was dumbstruck. I am simply not the type who can pull data out of my ass the way I can pull bullshit out. Btw I thank my mother for giving birth to me in the year of the Bull.

All I could say was," I see."

It didn't stop there! He went on," So if one day your friend passes you a card, and he has AIDS. He accidentally leaves some saliva on it (I'm assuming that is by talking) and you take it. Then how?"

I really didn't know how to go on. All logic, as I recently learnt, is always based on certain assumptions. Obviously we were relying on different assumptions here.

I mumbled "I see," again. Fortunately we were reaching the spot I wanted to alight at.

He continued," Haha! So you better hope you don't get cuts!"

Before he spoke any further, I cut in with instructions on where to stop and the discussion ended there.

I consider that debate to be a failure on my part. I have always been bad at debates because I cannot think fast enough. His revelation of his hatred for homosexuals surprised me only on its degree. I was expecting something along the lines of "Homosexuals are subhuman!!!" or maybe some quotes from certain religious texts, but he was more... moderate,I guess...

It was interesting though. The conversation made me rethink my stand because of my lack of reasoning to back it up. I had to consider the possibility that I may be illogically biased in favour of homosexuals for no reason.

It was only later that I remembered that there are many many more HIV-positive heterosexuals out there than homosexuals with the virus. One is more likely to get it from "normal people" than homosexuals.

See? Homosexuals are safe! Even homosexual cows milk is commercially available. Obviously even ranchers are liberal-minded enough that they don't mind lesbian cows frisking away in their pastures. Or wait.. what if they are male homosexual cows? The implications are enormous! And the milk... FUCK!!! URGH!! I'M GONNA PUKE!!!