Many students tend to say that the security officer and staffs does not treat students as adult. The question is, do you act as an adult. You may think that you are a customer and you should be getting the service that you want. Fine by me.
However, the simple ideology in handling humans.. Before you wish others to respect you, you first need to respect others.
Hence, scolding the guards saying "Do you know I pay your salary" makes you think you are an adult?
Parking along Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama (In front of EP) makes you think you are an adult?
Vandalism i.e. playing with the fire extinguisher makes you feel like and adult?
Wearing slippers and shorts as well?
Teat others how you want to be treated..
Students as well complaint that the guards give them a very "horny" look when they dress sexy. The students who complaint this the most comes from the Law School (though you do not have your own building). First, I think to myself why on earth will the student complaint when she is the one asking for it.
Since most of them are law student. Let's talk in a language law students can understand. Here is the senario:
When you enter a shop and purchase something, the price given is an invitation. And the person who purchase the product would be the offer. The person at the cashier who accepts the money would be the receiver. Clear?
Ok, so, back to the senario. If a girl were to wear sexily, its and invitation to treat. Is it not?
And can also be categorized as an offerer. While the person who looks at you, are the accept-er as you have offered.
In short, when you dress in such a way, do not complaint that there are people looking at you.
PS: You should be angry when you dress sexy and no one looks at you. Looking at you means admiring you.
i didnt wear sexy,moreover i wearing scarf but the security guard also give horny look to me..how come?
ReplyDeleteThanks for your concern on this "guard" and "horny look" issue. I am here representing some of the law school girls (yes we do not have a law school itself) to voice up some views.
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, the sentence "First, I think to myself why on earth will the student complaint when she is the one asking for it" was indirectly alleging that the law student who complaint this issue was wearing horny and sexy to the uni. For this statement, do you want us to sue you for defamation? I really want to applaud your action of making a statement without a proof. If you have a proof that the law students who you intended are wearing sexy to school, we give in. Now you are making a statement without any proof (of law student wearing horny to uni to ask for a horny look from the security guards) gives a bad image to the law students and it is sufficient to lead to defamation.
Second, you are trying to slip in the doctrine of invitation to treat to a matter of "security guard's horny look and law students wearing sexy". For your information, the doctrine of invitation to treat it applied to a contract, and thus you are saying that "security guard's horny look and law students wearing sexy" is a contract. So, what's the consideration for each party? Your statement is sufficient to lead to a serious criminal sexual offence between the security guard and law students. For this, I am going to copy paste ur blog post and blog url, and lodge a police report on this issue. If the police investigates this issue and find no proof, I am sure the law students have a right to sue you for defamation.
Furthermore, the uni hires the security guards to protect the safety of the students, but not to do something indecent. Thus, think thrice before you speak. Be smart, do not get yourself involved in such a bad situation.
Thank you for your feedback, seriously. At least your act tells all the MMU students that there is still such a foolish human being existed in the campus. Thank you very much. This blogpost will be seriously taken care of.
first of all, thank you for the long explanation. I hereby would like to clear few things first.
ReplyDelete1) I have nothing against you or any law students. The reason behind my posting; students who complaint are thr one from law school (mostly). And the complaints were verbal and informal complaints, in which I personally find it as redicilous.
2) I do not restrict you for lodging police report as to say that this blogs posting is false. However, what I do emphasis would be freedom of speech. It is up to you to think and to act as I believe I have my stand on this.
3) I have to agree on the guards part as I believe the university did not provide proper security personal. Security only knows how to check car sticker and nothing else. I doubt that the security is able to protect students should there be any need. This is why I shall preasure this from the umiversity.
This is what I have to say and is up to you what you would kike to do. But I would also appologise on my insensitive language that have made you or other innocent law students unhappy. If I were to change the word 'law student' to 'students', I wonder if all students were to sue me. My point is, if you think that I am wrong, justify it. The word 'law students' is quite general also by the way. I did not specify much and the post on 'law students' are to be seen as an example of complaint.
1. "The students who complaint this the most comes from the Law School (though you do not have your own building). First, I think to myself why on earth will the student complaint when she is the one asking for it." - Who is the she you were referring to? If there were a specific person, she can definitely sue you for defamation.
ReplyDelete2. "f a girl were to wear sexily, its and invitation to treat. Is it not?
And can also be categorized as an offerer. While the person who looks at you, are the accept-er as you have offered." You were making a statement that the girls were contracting with the security guard by giving him a good eye-wash by wearing sexy. This contains the element of sexual offense. I would like to inform the police to investigate whether it is true or not. Since in your Facebook u wrote u had a source, the possibility is still there. And honestly, everyone has a freedom to speech, but not the freedom to speech WITHOUT ANY RELIABLE PROOF. Be smart.
And I wonder if you were one of the SRC guys. Your statements had vividly illustrated that girls have no human right at all. They wear sexy (but I don't really see any girl in the campus wearing really sexy), they get raped, and that's their fault. Nik Aziz ideology eh?
Does it equal to if a girl carries a branded expensive bag, she gets robbed, and that's her fault? Foolish.
I hope u are careful with ur words next time. Do not make any false allegation anymore. Thank you.
Upon reading your justification based on your point of view, I think I should be responsible for my insensitive quotes and expressions. I will post an appology note tomorrow (29th jan around afternoon) as the appology note will be addressed to the law students.
ReplyDeleteI wish u luck by not being troubled by your narrow mind again.
ReplyDeleteAnd also, i would like to highlight your mistake in applying the doctrine of invitation to treat.
In your blog post, you said that "if a girl were to wear sexily, its and invitation to treat. Is it not? And can also be categorized as an offerer. While the person who looks at you, are the accept-er as you have offered."
I should give you a clear and simple example first. For example, in a mini market, the display of the items sold inside is the invitation to treat. In this sense, the customers who patronize the mini market will be the offerers. They offer the shopkeeper, the acceptance to sell the items displayed to them. In this sense, the shopkeeper, who displayed the items in the mini market, will be the acceptor, he has the right to accept or reject the offer of the customers for buying the items displayed.
In your example, you said that a girl who wear sexily (who displays the item of 'sexiness') is the offerer while the guard (whom 'sexiness' is displayed to) is the acceptor. This is not the doctrine of invitation to treat at all.
If you had taken contract of law before, i feel so sorry for your wasted time and empty mind on this subject. If you hadn't, i hope you will not make any statement before doing adequate research anymore because this will mislead the readers of your blog.
Hi there..
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, to blog on the issues happening in MMU in order to increase the awareness of students is encouraged. Students have all rights to know what happening around MMU, and only when the sources are the truth.
However, about the security guards, we should lodge report to the security department, highlight to them about what their securities have been doing (SRC does report to the security department lots of times). Then too, we realise that partial faults come from MMU students.. The way some of them wear has an issue towards this, making partly students 'salah' too. But with the improper look from security guards, this still remains back to the issue of the professionalism of the security department. And, when its one person's fault or afew person's fault, it does not mean its all humans' fault. Please do pay respect and make clear of who you are indicating. And to abuse on freedom of speech, Art. 10 is not useful, cause it is not an absolute freedom,and its restricted to rules and regulations.
To tell the truth, when it's really the truth..
Continue on.. Good job!!
haha... first and foremost, I wanna ask a simple question. Once you enter MMU, you have signed a few forms (maybe student don't realize), or in simple word, students agreed to become a student of MMU by following all the rules and regulation set by the Uni.
ReplyDeleteThe question: It is wrong or right if the students againt the rules ad regulation of Uni?
Open back your student handbook that you got on the day of registration. (Law students should have read this).
Find the section of Dress Code, read it, understand it and do it. If you dont want to follow, find another university which offer a freedom of attire to students and join them.
All da best...