A StraitsTines news article reads: “Just 12, and she had nose job, liposuction and eyelid surgery.”

Critics of the procedure cite her inappropriate young age, while proponents claim whatever she had done was acceptable, in today’s media-saturated world with images of flawless people. I do not agree with these critics on their argument of ‘ age’- what makes  a young person less entitled- or more harmed, by the plastic surgery adults undergo? Maturity isn’t defined by age. While I concur with supporters of this girl in that the intentions of her parents- were benign: to boost looks and self-confidence, I still hesitate for very good reasons. Of course, they can convince well that good-looking people are arguably more socially accepted and likeable.

This contention does not bother me as much as the question that cuts deep is this: is plastic surgery the only answer to beauty, and hence confidence in it?

By medical definition, plastic surgery is the branch of surgery dealing with the repair or replacement of malformed, injured, or lost organs or tissues of the body, through surgical transplant of living tissues.

Throughout Asia and the globe, the above has extended to cosmetics, overthrowing the adage that ‘ beauty is only skin deep’. Like a pandora box, plastic surgery gives you the face and the body, you want. What else will hold you back, given the choice? I’d have things to change about how I look, too. It’s almost a part of our human nature to jump on the bandwagon, and join the eternal quest for beauty. What is there to lose? Liposuction easily sucks fats out of a patient like a vacuum cleaner sucks dust; a knife scalpel can craft a nose attractive at any angle; double-eyelid and other facial surgeries instantly create more youth; breast augmentation makes a woman more of a woman- the list goes on. Going for plastic surgery is permanent quick fix to earn increased recognition in work and in society.

However, what would hold me back from going under the knife? Perhaps you may wonder, what would hold you back? Contemplate what could be a cliche : beauty is in The Eye of the beholder ? Otherwise you may be supportive of plastic surgery; whether one goes under the knife for vanity, to boost self-esteem, or even for cold hard cash, it is undeniable that the days of enduring pain, bleeding and stitches is the human’s insatiable desire to preserve youth and beauty.

Even though there is a unquestionable desire to gain social acceptance with plastic surgery, the artifice of it can diminish individual identity, ironically in a world where one has a set of unalienable human rights, including that of personal expression. As a result of our hopes of being more likable with plastic surgery, we could unknowingly be endorsing less authentic relationships.

I am aware that ethical standpoints tend to be weaker, but I’ve truly recognised that all these three motivations, are rooted in the desire for recognition, and acceptance. Not to say that as social beings, these are bad, but fine-tuning the lens of someone else’s split-second view of you by changing yourself, how much of self-diminishment does that cost? I tremble at this thought.

I repulse at the thought of paralyzing one’s facial muscles through Botox which promises zero wrinkles. Why not take pride in the ‘ smile lines ‘ and ‘ worry lines’ – they are beauty marks that record the emotions of a rich experience of a lifetime- be it joy or sorrow.

On a more serious note, attempting pplastic surgery is a recipe for evolution into an obsession; an addictive cycle that I am certain will never end, as with the flux and flows of the ever-changing beauty ttends. Though I am far from an example, I reckon inner beauty more precious. It’s unfathomable from The Eye. It can’t be judged on first meeting. Such a treasure may never even be figured out because of how well it is concealed or overlooked, as compared to a passing pretty face that captivates instantaneously. better still, there are 0 RISKS of accidental disfigurements caused by the scalpel of someone else’s hand. Are Strength, Dignity and Confidence, firmly built from within… or from an aesthetic tool- as flimsy as silicone in a surgeon’s hand? You decide. 

As for me, I don’t want to look “pretty”. I want to look otherworldly and vaguely threatening. 😉

“You invited him into your dorm room, how is that considered rape?” 

The above statement is an example of victim shaming. In this article I will present the views of both camps that sides the victim and the perpetrator respectively. However, I think as a society we need to be wary of regarding this dispute as a zero-sum game. With the media spotlight on sexual harassment, voyeurism and assault cases, can schools provide due process for defendants and adequate justice for victims, or do these cases belong in the courts? The principal question is how the justice can be served with respect to the measure of punishment meted for varying degrees of sexual violation in harassment, voyeurism and assault.

Is it advisable for the victims to be seeking restitution through the school, which will likely to expel or suspend the perpetrator, or should victims be seeking the police and prosecution from the court?

Proponents on the side of courts would feel that institutions are not capable in protecting its members from sexual violence. It is unfair to the accused in the event of an miscarriage of justice, as a result of an unreliable process as a result of violations of the due process and transparency issues and lack of competence. The rape kit requires a medical examination of the victim. For the past decades, colleges have a huge incentive to sweep rape cases under the carpet. Under fire of media, the disciplinary panel of colleges are pressured to uproot the previous cases, inadvertently leading to the innocent being wrongfully accused. Indeed, they should focus on prevention, but are not equipped enough to deal with a case once the damage is done.

Moreover, rape is defined in three versions by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is important to realise the debate is not a zero-sum game between courts and campuses, but rather the equality of rights between men and women, which can only be ensured with the fairness of process. Campus tribunals often reach inaccurate outcome in response to the complaint. They do not publicise the investigative reports, find sufficient witnesses, maximise the evidence gathered and lack of live hearings, and disallows appeals; and the secrecy of these cases masked by the lip service that it was for ‘privacy reasons’. The shocking disregard for essential fair process deeply harms the cause of taking sexual violence seriously, increasing society’s skepticism towards victims of sexual violence and reinforcing the patriarchal view that women may be used for the pleasure of men. To make matters worse, schools are now stretching the concept of what sexual assault is – far beyond recognition. If you have sexual contact without an explicit agreement, that might be considered non-consensual in the law. Yet, some schools define consent as an ‘imaginative agreement’, and even uses incapacitating influence of alcoholism as a mitigating factor to reduce the punishment for a perpetrator of rape. The idea is that men should actively seek permission, instead of waiting for an objection. We need to re-focus on how to protect women from coercion. We can date these ideas to 1880 – women are timid and fragile – and schools are accepting this. Watered down procedures and overly broad definitions of ‘non-consent’ makes a mockery, and dishonors a victim. A rape on campus is not distinct from a rape anywhere else. It is uneasy to see resources go into pseudo investigations. The long-term nature of education on alcohol consumption and sexual education does not resolve the immediacy of sexual assault today. The answer to sexual assault is not a campus tribunal investigation mired in secrecy that is in the confidence of nobody and squandered opportunities for sexual equality. 

On the other hand, proponents on the side of colleges believe that the college are obliged to decide sexual assault cases; colleges and universities exist to generate and transmit knowledge, yet they cannot do so without providing a safe learning environment. They also cannot single out sexual criminal cases out of other violations like plagiarism and riots, without harming the learning environment and without violating the civil rights of the accused. However, problems arise when victims do not report their cases to the police or the lack of redemption served when cases are given over involuntarily to the criminal law.

It is in the high interest of schools to end sexual violence, in order to increase the effectiveness of their academic space. Campuses can take protective measures like allocation of students,  staggering of classes. The victim can be witness as to say that she protested against sexual penetration, and this would be enough for the judge to give the verdict that the verbal statement is ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’. 

Taking away the option of campus remedy removes the autonomy of a victim to choose not to get her perpetrator charged out of a recognition of her own role in permitting conditions for sexual assault, like wearing provocatively or inviting him to a secluded place. Prosecutors typically charge minor offences and major offences, such as molest and rape respectively, qualifying both as sexual assault. It becomes in the prerogative of the judge to giving the student jail time and permanent criminal record. Most criminal cases end in a plea bargain for attempted rape, giving a 2 year of imprisonment instead of a default 15 years. As such, the accused will opt for plea bargain, and do not get a chance to be trialed in court at all. When you put thousands of adolescents together with raging hormones and some of them will be rude and aggressive. Misconduct is inevitable. The college can suspend a student for copying in his exams, so can it suspend a student for groping another’s backside. The college can make sanctions in order to take action for the punishment to fit the crime. A criminal record for the accused students will follow them all their life.  The advantage for victims in relying on campuses is prompt and immediate response. Where there is an allegation of sexual assault, the campus can change dorm arrangements for students’ safety, in the best interests of the community.

An eye for an eye? A tooth for a tooth? When a person’s liberty is at state—as it is with the criminal suspect—we owe it not just to them but to ourselves to be critical thinkers. Largely, there is alot of public opprobium, because of the pervasive nature of the offence. However, is it right for a single person to take on the fiery ire of all the past victims of so many other perpetrators? It is something we owe ourselves because the legitimacy of our justice system depends upon it. The respect of process and justice that we desire can only come from us treating such judicial mechanisms seriously and giving them a rigorous foundation to rest upon. Our ability to think through things carefully, critically, and rationally is not in question. If we are willing to treat matters like guilt an innocence with proper gravity than we have gone a long way to ensuring that our system is fair and just. And a fair and just system is good for all of us.
The act of being filmed in a shower is traumatising. however, it’s necessary to approach the incident in perspective of the perpetrator’s plight, although this view is shared by a minority. Largely, there is alot of public opprobium, because of the pervasive nature of the offence. However, is it right for a single person to take on the fiery ire of all the victims who are nonetheless empowered by a digital era of #metoo? wouldn’t this make him a metaphorical scapegoat? The internet is merciless towards nicholas, more punitive than the police and the AGC. I think Nicholas would rather get expelled from NUS OR imprisoned OR fined than be vilified all over the media, leaving behind an irreversible footprint that would prevent him from getting a job or even lifting his head up in public.

Overall, it is true that sexual assault has been trivialised from rape into sexual conduct. My stance is that campuses do not have be adjudication to strike minor sexual offences without sufficient evidence. The conflicts of interest between court and campus are not just one-off in the case of Monica Baey, but structural. Historically, it was in the favour department of education that sexual assault be swept under the rug to maintain their credibility. Sending the sexual assault cases to the criminal court encourages victims to report to the police who can provide a comprehensive investigation and for the court mete out the necessary penalties. Campuses should be required, under the guidance of a third party, to decide which cases are valid to go to court or not, using the statue of “guilty until proven innocent”.