NMP Thio Li-Ann earned extra bit of sympathy for second threatening letter

Really, no one likes to be threatened. NMP Thio Li Ann was first threatened to be ‘pissed on her grave’ by Mr Alfian Sa’at. A second threatening letter was sent to her but this time it was from an anonymous writer. The second threatening letter had stated that ‘we know where you work, we’ll send people there to hunt you down’.

She is now like a dart board. Ever since her strongly-worded Parliamentary speech on the repeal of 377A which was peppered with words of discrimination from her religious point of view, she has received numerous criticisms from all over Singapore including myself. But to threaten Ms Thio and her family with bodily harm is completely against the “spirit of civil discourse and democracy’, as quoted from Mr Alex Au from yawningbread.org. I do personally condemn such actions as being uncivilised.

Was the threatening letter from the members of the pro-repeal group? I certainly hope not, for it would further discredit their stand on this whole issue to fight for the repeal of 377A and they would have gone overboard to resort to criminal intimidation.

Could it be from members of the 377A anti-repeal camp or perhaps someone from neither? Well, it would be unscrupulous for anyone to try to sow discord between the pro-repeal and anti-repeal camp as it would just create more ‘ammo’ for the anti-repeal camp to say “See, I told you, they don’t deserve the repeal. They are such immoral and dangerous people to our society to threaten a member of the parliament who speaks for the majority of us”.

In any case, while I am becoming more sympathetic towards Ms Thio's plight, I wish she would re-think her religiously-inclined stand on the 377A issue by making gay friends if she had not, to understand about their lifestyle and stand on morality. Being a victim of threats will not make her flawed arguments about homosexuality any less flawed. See my previous article on NMP Thio Li-Ann.

I wish her safe and sound.

Sorry Alfian, NMP Thio Li-Ann has finally earned my little bit of sympathy

After being terribly disappointed with NMP Thio Li-Ann’s performance (here and here) in the parliament for her infamous, homophobic speech, NMP Thio Li-Ann has finally earned my little bit of sympathy for being the target of a spate of ‘hate mails’. In my opinion, Mr Alfian Sa’at, a multi-literary award winner which includes the NAC-SPH Golden Point Award for Poetry and NAC’s Young Artist Award for Literature, should not have acted recklessly to include strong words such as “piss on your grave” in his email but use his excellent linguistic skills to rebut her. He has since apologised for his honest mistake and Ms Thio has decided to let the matter rest.

Why Alfian posted copy of e-mail to NMP online

IN THE report, 'Police question poet over e-mail to NMP' (ST, Oct 30), it was stated that I had 'emerged as the writer of the strongly worded e-mail to Nominated MP Thio Li-ann'. This might suggest that the exposure of my identity as the letter-writer was involuntary, and that it was a check with the police that had pinpointed me.

In reality, I had already decided to claim ownership and personal responsibility for the e-mail last Saturday. I posted a copy of the e-mail online, explicitly identifying myself as its author.

Contrary to some reports that stated that it was penned by an 'unnamed stranger', the e-mail was sent from my personal e-mail account, signed off with my own name.

Your article also stated, twice, Professor Thio's assertion that 'it was full of obscene and vile invective'.

I wish to clarify that the e-mail was no more than four lines in total, in which an impolite word appears but once.

377A Issues: Social Acceptance of Gays and Lesbians

For quite a while, the "377A Penal Code Homosexuality Debate" has been a rallying point for many Singaporeans. Everyday, we are seeing more blog posts on this topic. I would admit it is, however, very difficult to determine if the reluctance to repeal 377A would eventually result in further discrimination against the homosexual population.

Basically we are dealing with 3 issues:

• The right of gays and lesbians to have equal protection under the law
  

• Christianity believes that homosexuality is a sin, and thus gays are fair game to marginalise and deny the benefits of married heterosexual couples
  

• Conservative mentality

The first issue should have been a non-issue as irregardless of the sexuality of a person, every Singaporean should have equal and fair treatment as detailed in our Constitution and in our national pledge where we recite: “To built a democratic society, based on justice and equality..”. The second issue, however, is a religious one. Since it is a religious issue, we should all understand that religious beliefs do not have any place in our laws.

The third would be that of a perception or attitude towards homosexuality. In my opinion, those who have positive attitudes towards gay men, lesbians and bisexuals are those who say they know one or more gay, lesbian or bisexual person well - often as a friend or colleague and I think negative attitudes towards homosexuals could be prejudices that are not grounded in actual experiences but are based on stereotypes. So until it becomes clearer that homosexuality is not a choice but something people are born with, something which can not be preached against, and gay sex is not deemed to be the only culprit for the AIDS disease, I believe the government would just sit on the fence and not do anything.

But even so, I do hope the government sees the importance for society to be better educated about homosexuality to prevent the issue from turning into a serious social problem in the future. I feel educating all Singaporeans about sexual orientation and homosexuality is likely to diminish anti-gay prejudice. Accurate information about homosexuality is essential to young people who are first discovering and seeking to understand their sexuality—whether homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual.

We should show genuine compassion for others, even when we disagree with them and we should also take a firm stand for what is right.

Related articles:

The Kway Teow Man: On Section 377A

Cognitive Dissonance: Alternative Perspectives

To do a “Brokeback Mountain” on 377A: Understand the Homosexuals

Just as everyone is debating over the social, religious, moral aspects of the petition to repeal the 377A of the Penal Code and the hullabaloo created by the parliamentary speech made by NMP Thio Li-Ann, no matter which side you take, for or against the repeal, perhaps we should try to understand more about the lives of homosexuals. One good example to explain my point could be the triple Academy award-winning movie “Brokeback Mountain”. To quote Stephen Holden of the New York Times wrote a review on the official movie website:

“So begins a sporadic and tormented affair in which the two meet once or twice a year for fishing trips on which no fish are caught. Jack urges that they forsake their marriages and set up a ranch together. But Ennis, haunted by a childhood memory of his father taking him to see the mutilated body of a rancher, tortured and beaten to death with a tire iron for living with another man, is immobilized by fear and shame.

Both Mr Ledger and Mr Gyllenhaal make this anguished love story physically palpable. Mr Ledger magically and mysteriously disappears beneath the skin of his lean, sinewy character. It is a great screen performance, as good as the best of Marlon Brando and Sean Penn. The pain and disappointment felt by Jack, who is softer, more self-aware and self-accepting, continually registers in Mr Gyllenhaal's sad, expectant silver-dollar eyes.”

The fact that this is a film about two men in a homosexual relationship will upset a lot of Christians to begin with. But my aim is not to challenge the Christian belief that homosexual life is wrong as I do not want to be seen as someone who is anti-Christian but I feel there seem a general misconception among some Singaporeans especially Christians to see gay relationships as no more than gay sex.

Director Ang Lee's portrayal of a secret passion between two men torn apart by societal norms and distance described the widespread non-acceptance of homosexuality in the 1960s. We do have something common with the characters in Brokeback Mountain: Jack and Ennis's constant battle to live differently within a culture that rejects their way of life. The ‘conservatives’ seem to be sterotyping homosexual lifestyles or relationships as being morally wrong that they will ultimately lead to promiscuity. Why are homosexuals being seen as ‘monsters with poisonous dicks’ and not individuals with feelings? What the conservatives should do now is to stop preaching on the wrongs of the homosexual life but to embrace diversity. Only then can we begin to share and build relationship with the gay community to allow a gradual acceptance of them into our society.

Are You Sure Gays Are Not Harassed?

He has spoken. Who? Our most esteemed leader, Mr Lee Hsien Loong has spoken. He has mentioned that abolishing 377A would not end the argument whether it is morally, culturally, socially right to accept the sexual activities between homosexuals. He felt repealing the law would not give gays (I wonder why lesbians are not mentioned since they are part of the homosexual group of people) more space but in fact, it would cause more discriminations. Our bloggers, siewkumhong (Sponsor of the parliamentary petition), pseudonymity etc and aggregators theonlinecitizen and singapore daily have made extensive coverage on the ‘pink’ issue.

But there is one part of Mr Lee’s speech which I felt very strongly against. Quoted from Channelnewsasia:

The prime minister said gays in Singapore do have space and they are not harassed.

He said: "Homosexuals work in all sectors, all over the economy, in the private sector as well as in the civil service. They are free to lead their lives, free to pursue their social activities. But there are restraints and we do not approve of them actively promoting their lifestyle to others or setting the tone of mainstream society."

Did he not remember the gay cycling issue? A group of 40 gays went jogging along Singapore River but they were harassed by undercover police who followed and filmed them. They were not even having mass orgy nor were they nude. So why did the police do that? Did the authorities form a perception the gays would always stop by at some dark corners, take off their clothes and start having orgy sex whenever they meet? There is absolutely no need to waste taxpayers’ money to actively ‘monitor’ their activities this way.

The picnic at the Singapore Botanic Gardens organised by People Like Us was another. It was promptly turned down by the authorities as they did not want to turn the venue for interest groups to politicise their cause. What are they trying to politicise? Did the authorities think the gays might flaunt their assets in front of the tourists and nature lovers, or make them change their sexual orientations? If the government does not allow anyone to do anything which is above the law, I would deem that as an act of harassment.

There are so many incidents which I can use to rebut the PM that gays are not harassed. I am not a gay. Neither am I a gay activist. I just feel our society needs to be more inclusive and understanding towards this group of people. They are Singaporeans who are contributing their efforts to the progress of our nation.

Also read:

You've Got a Problem with Gays and Lesbians?
Nothing Wrong with Being Gay

Homosexuality Issues: To repeal S377A of the Penal Code or not?

It is interesting to note there are so many governments and individuals around the world who are still reluctant to acknowledge that gays and lesbians are “equal in dignity and rights”. Being gay or lesbian is not seen as a right but as a wrong. Homosexuality is considered a sin, or an illness, an deviation in ideology or a betrayal of one’s culture.

Governments and individuals defended their stand against the repeal in the name of religion, culture, morality or public health. Homosexuals are branded “perverts” and “paedophiles”, and AIDS is labelled a “gay disease”. Homosexual relations are “anti - Christian”, anti - Islamic”etc. Wouldn’t such discrimination make this group of people “less than human”?

Campaigning for lesbian and gay human rights might be seen by some as a controversial arena of human rights activism. We have NMP Mr Siew Kum Hong who, on behalf of gay media company Fridae.com and lawyer George Hwang, submitted a parliamentary petition requesting the government to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code.

Over the past week, I have been following the news and the numerous opinions, both online and offline. It appeared to me Singaporeans are split on this issue. But in my opinion, the decision lies ultimately with the government which itself is dominated by PAP MPs. Being more or less a centrist political party, I think PAP will not be in favour of the repeal as the group involved is after all a minority. It would not want to enrage the majority: the religious who feel homosexuality is a sin and the conservatives who feel homosexuality is not for this Asian country. Even if it decides to surprise everyone by lifting the party whip to allow all PAP MPs to vote on matters of conscience and issues such as this, the final verdict would still be the same – the government would stick with the status quo. The reason: according to gay activist Mr Alex Au’s Yawning Bread website, almost half of their MPs are christians and christians are known to be generally homophobic because of their religious teachings.

Nevertheless, even though I expect the petition to be unsuccessful, I hope the government would be “magnanimous” enough to explore more ways to recognise this minority group by:

• Enacting a Non-Discrimination of Homosexuals Act to protect them from discrimination at work.
• Allowing them same rights and benefits as that of a married person, such as the ability to purchase newly built HDB flats.
• Allowing talks on mainstream media to ‘educate’ the general public that most homosexuals are as normal as straights.
• Allowing them to form legal civil unions to address homosexual rights issues.
• More funding for this minority group on AIDs/HIV education and prevention.

This is a period of changing times with changing demands. Our government should really do something to eventually seek an end to this social injustice.

You've Got A Problem With Gays and Lesbians?

7 out of 10 Singaporeans have a problem with homosexuals. That was what I read in yesterday’s Straits Times report. It was based on a NTU SCI survey out of 1000 people. This high percentage of non-acceptance of homosexuals really baffled me. Who did they survey on? Could it be a coincidence that the surveyed ones are generally less receptive of the ‘social deviant’? From the people I know, friends, family members and relatives, who are all between the age of 10 and 62, I found out that more than half of them do not really mind having homosexuals around them. To them, homosexuality is created by nature and is not of a choice in life, so there should not be any discrimination against this group of people. I agree with this logic.

So I am curious. Is it just the people around me who are more liberal in thinking and does the Singaporean society generally find homosexuals disgusting?

I did my little ‘survey’ from a few popular Singapore blogs and websites and was pretty surprised to find out that the results were totally different from that of the survey done by the Straits Times.

From Tomorrow.sg, out of 1280 people surveyed online, almost 70% of people felt gay sex should be allowed. Although it is to be noted that having homosexuals around is pretty much different from approving gay sex to be the norm of the society, it is justifiable to assume that more than this 70% would find themselves ‘ok’ with homosexuals around. After all, we are not even broaching on the topic of sex which is still considered a social taboo.

And from an Attitude Survey 2000 found on PLU website conducted in Singapore to gauge attitude of general public to gay-related issues, a similar trend prevailed and most people think as Singapore is becoming more and more global, it should be a more tolerant society and all citizens should be treated with equality, irregardless of their beliefs, races and sexuality.

So why not consider repealing Section 377A of the Penal Code and remove this divisive curtain placed on the gay community and give them equal rights?

Also read "Nothing Wrong With Being Gay".

Nothing Wrong with Being Gay

I notice there has been many cases of confrontations with the authorities and MOE, like Mr Alfian Sa’at’s relief teaching case, police confronting a group of runners during Pink Run, and now this case of a RI teacher, Mr Otto Fong apparently being told to delete his blogpost on his ‘coming out’ by the school or maybe the MOE. This incident has become a fiasco on the blogosphere. You can read some of the articles on theonlinecitizen

The issue with homosexuality is always a sensitive one but in my opinion, all homosexuals should not be stopped from doing anything that is lawful. In Mr Otto Fong’s situation, if he is a good teacher, what’s wrong with declaring himself as a gay if he does not perform lewd acts in front of the students?

I do know of ‘normal’ friends who are teachers and like to go clubbing with their skimpily dressed female clubbing friends. If Mr Otto Fong gets dismissed because of this blogpost, all heterosexual male teachers should be dismissed too by the same logic that they may deem to be threats to all the girls and women in mixed or girls’ schools.