LGBT in Singapore and the march forward

LGBT in Singapore and the march forward

SINGAPORE - Come saturday 16th May 2009, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community will come together with their supporters for a “Pink Dot” gathering at Hong Lim park. This event is historic in the sense that it will be Singapore’s first open-air and LGBT-supported event which has received the government’s go-ahead to proceed. What essentially happens is that the participants will wear pink apparels (clothes, caps, hats, glasses, etc) to the event. All of them will gather into a pink dot by 5 pm and this will be photographed from a vantage point.

This development has indicated a shift in the government’s stand. Two years ago, a gay interest group People Like Us tried to organize a pink picnic cum run at the Singapore Botanic Gardens. However, they were denied permission by the National Parks Board, with a queer reasoning:”it did not want the premier botanical institution to be used as a venue by interest groups to politicize their cause”. How a social gathering of like-minded people can be used as a platform for politicking beats even a rocket scientist.

The past few years have seen a number of watershed events of significance to the LGBT community. In a tiny step forward, Mr Goh Chok Tong revealed in an interview with the Time magazine that the government has made a move to employ openly homosexual people, even in sensitive positions. It was a quiet change until the interview. However, the spectre of religious fundamentalism has always lingered in the background. In a response to Mr Goh’s interview, a group of religious fundamentalists encouraged like-minded individuals to pursue this issue with their respective Members of the Parliaments (MP). Obviously, this is a lobby to get the government to ‘undo the change’.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, then chairman of the Remaking Singapore committee further justified Mr Goh’s position, noting that Singapore will do whatever it takes to attract talents, in a recognition of the contribution of gays to the economy. He acknowledged the relaxation of official sanctions against homosexuals which is backed up by a growing number of saunas, discos and bars that were tailored towards a gay clientele.

However, the government did not adopt a constant stand towards homosexuals, and one would get a feeling that the former is sending out mixed signals at that time. The banning of the aforementioned pink picnic can be seen in some ways - a setback. Thus, it appears that the red tapes are drawn. Based on the reasons given by the National Parks Board, it can be read in another way: The LGBT community is not allowed to politicize its cause.

The next movement of note was the one made to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalizes unnatural sex, and this includes homosexual sex. The outcome was that the government has decided to retain 377A, but it will not be actively enforced, which means that homosexuals could lead their private lives without harrassment. 377A was retained in consideration for the conservative elements within our society. At best, its retention was for ceremonial purposes. Thus, the government was in some sort of a catch 22 situation. Repeal the 377A and the conservative elements will start crying foul. The government wants to placate the conservative elements, and yet it also wants to adopt an inclusive approach towards the homosexuals. This was perhaps the reason why the government has adopted this unique approach of retaining 377A without enforcement.

Meanwhile, the spectre of religious fundamentalism looming in the background suddenly emerged into the foreground. A group of ladies from the Church of Our Saviour (COOS), an institution with homophobic leanings, took over the leadership of AWARE, a women’s advocacy group. They were “apprentices” of their feminist mentor, Dr Thio Su Mien. Dr Thio revealed in a press conference that she was ‘perturbed’ by the neutral portrayal of homosexuality by AWARE’s comprehensive sexuality program. She has always felt that homosexuality should be cast in a negative light. No one would find this surprising, given the fact that she is also a COOS member like her apprentices. And she was explicit in her motivation to radically change AWARE, albeit through her apprentices. The old guards of AWARE were caught unware by the takeover of leadership, and this culminated in an extraordinary general meeting (EOGM) showdown. In some ways, this showdown was a battle between inclusiveness/ tolerance and exclusiveness.

The EOGM was in some ways a thriumph for the inclusiveness/tolerance camp. And the public repudiation of Dr Thio at the EOGM made the victory even sweeter. The “Pink Dot” gathering has arrived in good time during the wake of this thriumph. Hopefully, the thriumphant march of tolerance and inclusiveness will continue come Saturday.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.336