Of Ridhuan Tee and non-Malays being 'ULTRA-KIASU' over toilet-canteen issue

Professor Ridhuan Tee Abdullah's analogy about toilets and changing rooms in hotels and the toilet-canteen fiasco at SK Seri Pristana is so childish and absurd.

In his comments, reported here on July 30, Ridhuan Tee tries to blame the Seri Pristana fiasco on the "ultra kiasu", asking why there is no hue and cry if people eat in the changing rooms of hotels and why hotels are allowed to have such rooms in the first place if changing rooms are not fit for eating purposes?

Sinks in hotel changing rooms are for washing hands, brushing teeth, washing cups if one makes a drink. Their presence there is not an invitation for guests to eat there. There are writing tables and coffee tables in hotel rooms which should be used by anyone wishing to eat in the room. Hotels also do not shut down the cafeterias or cordon them off and order their guests to have their meals in the changing rooms.

If a guest chooses to have his meal in the hotel changing room, it is his own choice. If he feels like going one step further to save time and chooses to do "multitasking" by having his meal sitting on the toilet bowl, it is again his own choice.

The guest in the hotel room is not a 10-year old primary school child (unless accompanied by his parents). He will be an adult, in full control of his faculties. There is no directive from the hotel management that he has to take his meals in the toilet-cum-changing room. So if he feels comfortable eating beside the sink in the changing room, it is fully his own choice.

Furthermore, during the guest's occupancy of the hotel room, it is his private place and not a public toilet or changing room.

On the other hand, the non-Muslim children in SK Seri Pristana had no choice. They had to obey the directive of the school. That they should eat in the toilet-canteen was decided jointly by the PTA and the school, i.e. by adult persons in authority and control over children.

That it should happen at the start of Ramadhan was no coincidence. This was again planned. With so much space around the school, wasn't there any other place for the 20 or so non-Muslim children to have their food?

What a lie to say that the canteen was under renovation since March as the deputy education minister Kamalanathan had confirmed the only renovation was the changing of the wooden door to the teachers' room in the canteen from a wooden door to a glass door. This could easily be done on a weekend. It was someone's innovative idea to hide the non-fasting children from those fasting so the latter would not see any food during their fasting hours.

If fasting Muslims should not see food during fasting hours, then all food advertisements during fasting hours should be banned also.

Why are the likes of Ridhuan Tee not clamouring for the banning of food advertisements during fasting hours, for even images of delicious food can cause one to salivate.

It is a shame that teachers, at whatever level, should try to defend the indefensible by using their positions in society. When they make comparisons or analogies, their reasoning should make sense.

Ridhuan Tee's falls flat as there is simply no comparison between what an adult hotel guest wants to do in the privacy of the hotel changing room on his own volition, and what little non-Muslim children were compelled to do. The children had no way to refuse the directive of the school whereas a hotel guest, if he is told that the cafeteria is shut and he must have his meals in the changing room, can walk out and go to another hotel.

Teachers whether in primary schools or universities should not bring down the dignity of their profession through ludicrous words and deeds. If this is the level of reasoning of our teachers, what can we expect of those they teach?

- themalaysianinsider.com