Aware: Observation from a "lapsed citizen"'

There are many lessons to draw from the AWARE episode. While areas like steeplejacking or religious versus secular space in NGO are pertinent but I see also other more interesting aspects from my perspective of a "lapsed citizen"'.

2 worlds of Singaporeans collided at the Aware EGM. Not religious versus secular but 2 types of citizenry and their differences were so glaring it was blinding.

Legitimacy and authority

Josie, TSM, and their supporters were clearly more deferential to authority and hierarchical in their approach in life. Josie and the exco first expected to be shown this deference by their official position and by their credentials (as opposed to their passion, conviction or clarity of their own views whatever those are). I have read some comments by others that this is a miscalculation on their part. I dont think its a miscalculation, They may genuinely think their credentials alone would remove any doubts on their capabilities and were caught off guard when it did not resonate with the crowd. Some of the original AWARE members have equally impressive credentials but I dont think that is how they define themselves.

Josie and co are certainly not alone in this view of what gives them legitimacy. Verifiable or otherwise, it is widely accepted that Singapore society values academic excellence as a proxy for intelligence, success, wealth and therefore a higher right to rule and to lead over others.

Josie and co assumed their official postions allowed them to dictate how the meeting will be conducted without taking into account the original impetus for the mtg - that more than half of the original April AWARE membership had petitioned for their removal and that was the nature of the EGM they were presiding over. The underlying arrogance resulted in a team that was clearly unprepared to manage the meeting, mount their own offense/defense or even plan for an unfavourable voting outcome.

When their legitimacy was not accepted by the crowd (exasperated by their own mismanagement early in the mtg), they clearly crumbled and did not know how to regain any semblance of control of the EGM - the task of controlling the crowd ceded to the petitioners who ended up stepping into a void and took over to try to marshall and calm the crowd from the floor.

TSM make a similar mistake as Josie and her team, perhaps only amplified by the higher expectations on her given her self outed role as the puppetmaster.

They were very Singaporean in their view of how they thought the world should work and where is their rightful place in the world. It was just that there are apparently more than one definition of being Singaporean.

Submissiveness and (overly) respectful of hierarchy

While impassioned speakers come to the mic one after another and spoke their mind, Josie and the exco repeatedly asked for the "right of reply, coz its only fair" instead of just taking the mic time they had to actually reply! They were strangely waiting for the crowd to give an ok signal for them to start replying. I was amazed - it was perversely submissive behaviour. None of Josie's exco look or behaved like they were comfortable leading in any environment other than in a hierarchical manner where they can govern by official authority or within clear structural framework.

They spent more mic time asking for the right of reply than actually seizing the opportunity to respond to any of the criticism leveled at them. Not hearing a reasonable defence from them is probably the anticlimax of the whole afternoon.

By their behaviour, they strangely deferred to the crowd which became the more dominant force in the room. Josie and team effectively bowed to authority and waited for permission to speak, a permission that never came. They were meek as sheep in spite of their daring coup de'tat that culminated in the need for an EGM.

I doubt many of the people who spoke or were in the crowd would have quietly sat there if the roles were reversed. We would have fought back instead of being cowed.

They were meek like what Singaporeans were supposed to be. Again, the Singaporeans on the floor provided the contrast that not all Singaporeans are meek.

Individuals and the Independent Spirit

The supporters of the petitioners were boisterious and of independent spirit. The original petitioners thru We Are Aware had sent information ahead of time requesting that supporters let the petitioners lead and raise topics at the EGM. I read that as they were asking us to refrain from going to the mic and give the mic time to the official petitioners.

I recall having an instinctive resistance to the idea of anyone telling me not to speak or presuming to speak on my behalf. From the queue of people going to the mic, I was glad to see that many other people at the meeting were ignoring that suggestion.

I queued for about an hour and 45 mins to get into the hall. I also had my queue broken up once and had to rejoin another part of the queue before finally making it into the room. People came singly or in groups of about 2 to 3. Anecdotally, most do not seem to know any of the original AWARE members. They were individuals.

They supported the original AWARE's position on the vote but they did not necessarily deferred to their authority either. They cheered when they hear familiar names (and then strained their necks to see the faces coz they dont seem to be able to recognize the familiar AWARE faces) but were not about to sit quietly and only let the "old" AWARE speak on their behalf. They had something to say and they were making a beeline to queue for the one open mic on the floor.

For those of us who had hosted and sat through countless meetings/conferences where we beseeched people to ask questions at the mic, it was remarkable how the queue of people who wanted a turn at the mic never seem to end. They queued, spoke their mind and were more eloquent than anyone could have hoped or expected.

For civil society to continue to develop, our citizens need to participate in a contest of ideas and be willing to (re)imagine what is the society they want to live in and that they wish their children to inherit. The ability and willingness to step forward to express themselves as individual citizens who have a collective stake is key for ideas to surface and to persuade others to coalesce around a definition of society acceptable to all. I was reminded by sharp contrast public figures and politicians in Singapore who could not articulate their views or form arguments with clarity, passion or conviction, let alone persuade and inspire citizens.

Individual citizens rising beyond the concerns of daily bread and butter issues to bother about something that does not hit the pockets directly. I was reminded of the energy you find in schools, energy and passion we are often expected to lose as we graduate to adult life and hunker down to focus on earning a living.

The lapsed citizen in me always believed such Singaporeans exist in sufficient quantities because it is in the human spirit, I just never experienced an occasion of physical gathering of such scale (campus society, hall meetings and electionns not withstanding).

AWARE has been handed a great gift - the gift of potential renewal if they can harness the energy of these new members.

The lessons though I think are all political. In the larger political sphere, where they are not just women but Singapore citizens, what do they care about, who represents and leads these citizens and who can represent and lead them?

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.326

AWARE: Still on a victorious high

May 10, 2009

AWARE SAGA

Still on a victorious high

Members talk about EGM, its sex education programme and plans for future over dinner

By Debbie Yong
		Presenting Aware's new exco: (Back row from left) Margaret Thomas (black T-shirt), Nancy Griffiths and Tan Joo Hymn (in orange). (Middle row from left) Chew I-jin (sleeveless top), Yap Ching Wi (beige shirt), Hafizah Osman, Martha Lee and Joanna D'Cruz. (Front, centre) Aware's new president Dana Lum. -- ST PHOTO: MUGILAN RAJASEGERAN

ONE week after the Association of Women for Action & Research's (Aware) extraordinary general meeting on May 2, the newly elected committee members are still on a victorious high.

Of the 2,175 people who voted at the EGM, 1,414 gave a vote of no-confidence to Ms Josie Lau's team, which took office at the March 28 annual general meeting. After she announced her team's resignation at the EGM, elections were called and, by a show of hands, a new committee voted in.

Poised and calm 'They did well. They all sat there for seven hours taking in all the criticism. Josie, especially, was very poised throughout. She had a little of a smile on whenever she was listening to someone speak. She opened the meeting as president and she returned to close it. And she read out the results clearly and calmly.' MS DANA LAM, president ... more 'Upstanding' spinoffs from Aware saga 'SHUTUP and sit down!' - a phrase uttered during an outburst at Aware's recent extraordinary general meeting - has crossed over into advertising campaigns for Subaru cars and the Botak Jones chain of food outlets. Subaru's print advertisement reads: 'Once you are aware, you can't shut up and sit down.' Its radio advertisement has a customer scolding a car dealer for 'not being inclusive'. The latter responds by saying: 'Shut up and sit down.' ... more

After the EGM, the new exco - president Dana Lam, vice-president Chew I-Jin, honorary secretary Yap Ching Wi, assistant honorary secretary Corinna Lim, honorary treasurer Tan Joo Hymn, assistant honorary treasurer Lim Seow Yuin and committee members Hafizah Osman, Joanna D'Cruz, Martha Lee, Margaret Thomas, Nancy Griffiths and Nicole Tan - headed to the New York, New York restaurant in Suntec City to celebrate.

When The Sunday Times asked to catch up with them last week, Ms Lam extended a dinner invitation at Aware's premises at Dover Crescent last Friday. Nine of the 12 exco members were present and each was passionate in giving answers during the three-hour-long meeting.

Since the EGM, the group has met formally only once, and the five-hour meeting ran till 1am. But they see each other at the centre almost every day, said Ms Thomas. They addressed some of the issues and criticisms raised after the EGM.

Were the old guard supporters unruly at the EGM?

They disagreed and felt that their supporters were articulate, rational and spoke passionately.

'Isn't this what active citizenry is about?' said Ms Yap.

Ms Griffiths said the way the meeting was held played a part in rousing the crowd. The microphones for members of the floor were not working. Ms Lau made several appeals for security to step in.

At one point, then-exco member Sally Ang told the crowd to 'shut up and sit down'.

Ms Thomas said: 'With the microphones not working, people had to shout to get their point across and when your supporters hear you shouting, they get affected.' She added that members of the old guard made repeated attempts to calm the crowd.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.228

Christian Coup Foiled in Singapore Women's Club

Christian Coup Foiled in Singapore Women's Club
Written by Ben Bland
Friday, 08 May 2009

Women's associations are usually thought of as dull social clubs for the retired and others with far too much time on their hands. For the last 25 years, Singapore main women's body - the Association of Women for Action and Research, or Aware - was seen in a similar light and few Singaporeans had even heard of it.

But an abortive coup by a group of anti-gay fundamentalist Christians has thrown the organization center stage, in the process revealing the growing clout of Singapore's online activists, and the surprising strength of civil society.

The saga has pushed the boundaries of public discourse in Singapore, where discussions about homosexuality are normally taboo, in the process attracting the close attention of senior government ministers and Singapore's largest bank, DBS. The government has always maintained an uneasy balance over religion, allowing plenty of it as long as it doesn't get too fervent. In the 1980s, the government cracked down on a group of Catholic activists and threw them in jail. It has nailed the odd Islamic extremist here and there and arrested them. It has taken a largely tolerant attitude towards sex despite the island's conservative image. There are plenty of prostitutes and transvestites plying the streets without visible intimidation although Immigration seizes the obvious foreign entrants and sends them back to wherever they come from.

However, fundamentalist American-style mega-churches that peddle a heady mix of religion, showbiz and virulent social conservatism have been gaining strength. Taking the kind of approach to indoctrination normally employed by Communist insurgents or Al-Qaeda operatives, these churches eschew traditional Bible reading sessions in favor of "cells". They make explicit attacks on homosexuality, claiming in defiance of all medical expertise and any notion of equality and common sense that it can and should be "cured." And they also usually pay their pastors big bucks.

Singapore's Church of Our Saviour, housed in an old cinema west of the city center, is one such organization and it is from within this church that the plot was hatched to seize control of Aware. Led by a 70-year-old lawyer called Thio Su Mien, a group of born-again Christians had become frustrated with the way that, as they saw it, Aware was promoting homosexuality and lesbianism through its sex education programs.

To most observers, there was nothing even remotely controversial about Aware promoting tolerance, informed choice and safe sex to Singaporean youngsters. But to hectoring, self-styled moral guardians like Thio and her cohort it was unacceptable, so they decided to secretly seize control of the group. Using classic sleeper tactics, scores of women from the fundamentalist Christian community were urged to join Aware ahead of its annual general meeting at the end of March. The born-again Christian soldiers followed orders faithfully and to the consternation of Aware stalwarts, six unknowns – who it would later emerge were all members of the Church of Our Saviour acting under the mentorship of Thio – were elected to the executive committee and several well-respected female rights activists voted off.

But, in the days that followed, the anti-gay cabal refused to show their hand and most Aware members remained unaware, so to speak, of the true nature of the remarkable coup that had just taken place.

As rumblings of discontent about the takeover started to seep out from the old guard, as the ousted members became known, it was Singaporean bloggers and online citizen journalists who started to unravel the murky details of the plot.

They found out that several of the new members of the Aware board regularly attended the Church of Our Saviour, which offers "counseling and spiritual help for those who want to be set free from homosexual thoughts, tendencies and practices," and also revealed that some of these women had had letters published in local newspapers that made their anti-gay views clear.

The story was still largely confined to a handful of blogs and websites, with little interest shown outside of Singapore's community of determined, if sometimes conspiracy-obsessed, netizens. That changed when DBS took the extremely unusual step of publicly rebuking one of its senior executives, Josie Lau, another Church of Our Saviour attendee, after she was chosen to be president of the new Aware executive committee.

Like other blue chip companies in Singapore, DBS likes to keep tabs on what its senior executives get up to in their free time and the bank claimed that Lau had run for office against its advice. DBS stressed that it was concerned about the extra pressure that the new role would put on Ms Lau. But many saw another explanation for DBS' nervousness: last year, the bank came under fire after the credit card marketing division, headed by Ms Lau, launched a charity campaign whose beneficiary was Focus On The Family, an evangelical American group known for its anti-gay views.

Even as further evidence of the coup continued to emerge, Ms Lau and the other new Aware executives continued to insist that they had no secret agenda and that they had not known each other before being elected.

But once they had pushed the boundaries of popular disbelief to their limits, Thio finally came clean in a hastily-arranged press conference, revealing that she had, in fact, been behind the coup. While the women had not known each other, she had operated as their "feminist mentor" and convinced them to take control of Aware in order to reverse its supposed support for homosexuality.

It was only once all this information was out in the open that it became clear what a spectacular own-goal Thio and her mentees had scored by deploying such underhand tactics.

Public opinion began to turn against the group and hundreds of women joined Aware to voice their opposition to the new guard at an extraordinary general meeting that the old guard had called. The membership of Aware swelled from 300 to 3,000 in a matter of weeks as both sides prepared to fight it out.

The government of Singapore, as it usually does, also felt the need to get involved, with a number of cabinet ministers warning both sides not to advance their religion or their views on sexuality in a way that would threaten Singapore's delicate social balance. These were not just empty words from a government that, while respecting freedom of religion for the most part, has always taken a dim view of religious groups becoming too aggressively involved in social issues. The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Moonies' Unification Church have been outlawed because they are deemed a threat to social stability.

At a riotous EGM last weekend, the Aware old guard triumphed with the anti-gay plotters eventually resigning after losing a vote of no confidence. But they are continuing their fight and have convinced the ministry of education to suspend the use of a sex education manual produced by Aware.

As the dust settles, the government and the handful of opposition politicians in Singapore will be taking note. This sort of divisive public battle for control of a civil society group is unprecedented in the normally quiescent city-state. It is far from the clear that this activism will translate into the stale sphere of Singaporean politics, where the ruling People's Action Party has won every election since independence with an overwhelming majority.

However, one thing is clear. Empowered by the freedom of communicating through the internet and fueled by a deep sense of justice and tolerance, people power (of sorts) has finally arrived in Singapore.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.227

Singapore's NGO furore: Taken unawares

Singapore's NGO furore
Taken unawares

May 7th 2009 | SINGAPORE
From The Economist print edition
Liberals rally to take on the Christian right

A BLOODLESS coup instigated by a septuagenarian “feminist mentor”; a death threat sent to the new president’s husband by a self-proclaimed “jihadist sleeper”; a 3,000-person showdown. The tiny world of Singapore’s usually timid NGOs has never seen anything like it.

In late March a secretive group of conservative Chinese Christian ladies surreptitiously took over the executive council of AWARE (Association of Women for Action and Research), an advocacy group that has done much to promote women’s rights. Half of the new council attend the same church. They were jolted into action by AWARE’s alleged pro-gay agenda, particularly in sex-education courses taught at some schools. “Are we going to have an entire generation of lesbians?” bemoaned Thio Su Mien, their 71-year old matriarch.

Ms Thio’s disciples snatched control from a group of liberals who had served AWARE for years. The conservative new council and the liberal old guard traded barbs, exposing an ideological divide. Critics questioned the new lot’s shady tactics as well as their religious motives.

And so the old guard tabled a no-confidence motion, forcing an extraordinary general meeting. Ahead of it, politicians called for tolerance. And the new council’s pastor, Derek Hong, tried to mobilise support from the pulpit. Rebuked by leaders from a number of religions, he later apologised.

But the damage was done. At the meeting on May 2nd, the new council lost the vote and resigned. The question is why it staged the ill-fated raid in the first place. According to Alex Au, an online commentator, the Christian right will tend to use stealth to achieve its goals, because the discussion of religion is taboo in Singapore. They do not have well-established channels of discourse.

Yet the manner in which this conflict was resolved—through reasoned debate, without government intervention—is reason to cheer, says Braema Mathi, a former AWARE president. On May 7th, however, the government announced that AWARE’s programmes in schools did not conform in all respects to its guidelines and would be suspended.

Mr Au rejoices that the episode saw more people involve themselves in important issues. They are still, however, in a minority. In a survey, 70% of those polled said they did not care about what is going on at AWARE. But then, with Singapore’s trade-dependent economy facing its worst recession in history, most people have more prosaic worries.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.177

Why MOE suspended Aware project

May 7, 2009
SEXUALITY EDUCATION
Why MOE suspended Aware project

IN RECENT weeks, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has received feedback on the sexuality education programme conducted by the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), as well as other lesson material not involving Aware. MOE has done a thorough investigation and the following are its findings and future steps.

MOE and the schools do not promote alternative lifestyles to students. The ministry's framework for sexuality education reflects the mainstream views and values of Singapore society, where the social norm consists of the married heterosexual family unit.

Today, schools are allowed to engage external vendors to supplement MOE's sexuality education programme. The ministry has reviewed the internal processes for selecting and monitoring vendors and found that they can be improved. It will put in more stringent processes to ensure that training materials and programmes delivered in schools are in line with the ministry's framework on sexuality education.

Schools will suspend the engagement of external vendors until the new vetting processes are completed. MOE is also reviewing ways to provide parents with more information about sexuality education in the specific schools that their children are in.

MOE has examined Aware's Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Basic Instructor Guide. The guide contains some positive aspects, like the accurate information on sexually transmitted infections (STIs), the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and role-play practice for students to say no to sex.

However, MOE's assessment is that in some other aspects, the guide does not conform to MOE's guidelines. In particular, some suggested responses in the instructor guide are explicit and inappropriate, and convey messages which could promote homosexuality or suggest approval of premarital sex.

In view of this, Aware's programmes in schools will be suspended and subjected to the new vetting processes.

MOE has also investigated feedback about materials used during General Paper (GP) lessons in junior colleges which carry information on alternative lifestyles. These materials and lessons did not involve Aware.

GP lessons are meant to promote critical thinking and discussion on contemporary issues. MOE investigations showed that the teachers had used these materials to initiate discussion on family structures, and not to promote alternative lifestyles.

Nevertheless, MOE will remind school leaders and teachers to exercise greater professional discretion in guiding their students when such topics are discussed. They should also adhere to social norms and values of our mainstream society.

Parents are ultimately responsible for inculcating values in their children. MOE's sexuality education programme aims to complement parents' role in helping students make informed, responsible and values-based decisions regarding sexuality.

Jennifer Chan (Ms)
Press Secretary to Minister for Education

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28486.11

Volunteer tells why Aware's EGM turned raucous

Volunteer tells why Aware's EGM turned raucous

I READ Ms Sumiko Tan's article on Tuesday, 'More losers than winners', with dismay. There were some 3,000 people present last Saturday at the extraordinary general meeting (EGM) of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware). Emotions were charged, people came to correct what they thought was a grave injustice to the core principles of Aware, they came to stand up for what they believed in, they came to speak up.

If Ms Tan expected 3,000 people in these emotionally strenuous conditions to sit like sheep and make polite conversation, then obviously she had not thought through the gravity or extent of the event.

I was one of the volunteers for the old guard and my duties included keeping peace in the hall. As volunteers, we were prepped for these conditions and we braced ourselves for extreme ugliness. There was none. There was no violence and considering what we had to put up with, I think the crowd was very well-behaved.

In fact, everything was relatively quiet until Ms Josie Lau's team started to switch off the microphones on the floor at the start of the meeting to silence the crowd. When one is trying to speak up in a hall as cavernous as the one in Suntec City with no microphone, one is left with little choice but to shout to be heard. Even the new guard's legal counsel, Mr Gregory Vijayendran, advised that the microphones be left on as this was normal procedure at an EGM.

Ms Lau's team's actions set the tone for the EGM, the crowd did not. This 'unbecoming behaviour', which Ms Tan described as 'disquieting and disgusting', was not 'bitchiness' as she claimed. This was passion, which Ms Lau's supporters did not have, made clear by the fact that most of them left after voting, without even caring about the outcome.

We protested when Mr Siew Kum Hong was told to go and sit with the men at the sidelines. There is nothing in the Constitution that dictates segregation of sexes at an EGM. Furthermore, Mr Siew was acting as legal counsel for the old guard, so he had every right to sit with them.

We protested when Ms Lau started making her president's address; we had not come to listen to her speech. This was not an ordinary meeting, this was a meeting requisitioned for by 160 Aware members to submit our vote of no confidence in Ms Lau's exco. Ms Lau proceeded with her speech eventually and we protested again when she brought up a slide that showed the achievements of Aware in the past 24 years, none of which she or her team was responsible for.

We protested when Ms Lau tried to credit the spike in membership from January to last month to her new exco. The spike in membership had nothing to do with the work of her new exco, they had not done any.

We protested when Ms Sally Ang shouted the now infamous 'shut up and sit down' line into the microphone. We were treated like primary school children from the start and we were not about to allow that to happen.

We protested when Dr Thio Su Mien hijacked the microphone from people who had queued for up to an hour and a half for their chance to speak.

We protested when she started to boast of her credentials and why she deserved the self-named title of 'Feminist Mentor'. This was the woman who had admitted that she was the driving force behind the March 28 takeover of Aware.

We protested when she demanded that we respect our elders; as a member of the meeting so rightly called out, respect has to be earned.

We protested when it was revealed that $90,000 had been spent by Ms Lau's team in the past month, a staggering figure that made many of us gasp in shock.

As a volunteer peacekeeper, I found certain times very trying myself, such as when a male supporter of Ms Lau's team twice referred to the crowd as 'the congregation'. We were not a congregation, but we were certainly expected by Ms Lau's team to behave like one.

Pamela Oei (Ms)

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.138

Exposed: The missing hour after Aware new exco received no-confidence vote

Exposed: The missing hour after Aware new exco received no-confidence vote

What happened during the hour that the new Exco went missing during the Aware Extraordinary Meeting on Saturday?

They went missing for an hour after they lost the vote of confidence and were asked by the old guard to step down.

Well, an anonymous creative person ventured an answer by using a Rambo movie as a parody.

The video was sent to us by Stomper Everyman, who praised the sense of humour that Singaporeans have -- plus our creativity, a facet of Singaporeans that is not always recognised.

The text accompanying the video says this: "A very emotional clip. Not for the faint hearted.

"During the Aware EGM, when the new exco lost the vote and were asked to step down by the old guards, they went missing for an hour to decide on their destiny.

"What happened during that hour? This video provides the answer."

Here we carry excerpts of the video.

CLICK FOR LARGER IMAGE:

Video spoof of the missing hour during Aware EGM

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.123

Aware: OLD GUARD SAY VOLUNTEERS HELPED THEM TO VICTORY

Aware Showdown OLD GUARD SAY VOLUNTEERS HELPED THEM TO VICTORY

'Whatever you can think of, they did'

By Benson Ang

May 05, 2009

ON SATURDAY, Ms Alex Serrenti, 35, got up at 5.15am, jumped on her motorcycle and rode to Suntec City. DEDICATED: Volunteer Alex Serenti got up at 5.15am to 'warm' seats at an event that was to start only seven hours later. TNP PICTURES: NG XI JIE, KELVIN CHNG She had a mission - she was there to 'warm' seats for someone at an event that was to start only seven hours later. The teaching assistant was one of about 100 'white-shirt' volunteers on the side of the former leadership of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) at its extraordinary general meeting (EGM) on Saturday. They offered their services as legal advisors, social workers, seat-warmers, crowd-controllers, caterers, and even bodyguards for the old guard if the situation got out of hand. These volunteers were the muscle behind the dramatic victory of the old guard, who wrestled back control of the feminist orgnisation from a group who had ousted them earlier this year. The old guard did so by successfully passing a vote of no confidence in the new leaders, who then resigned. Roughly two-thirds of the members at the EGM voted for the no-confidence motion. Most of these volunteers were friends of the old guard, or concerned members of the public. Some were men. Through their personal networks, they also called on others to chip in. Amazing LEGAL BEAGLES: The old guards legal team, with Ms SIngam (in green). They are (clockwise from bottom left) Ms Halijah Mohamad, Mr Mark Goh, and Mr Siew Hum Hong. TNP PICTURE: BENSON ANG Said veteran member Braema Mathi, 51: 'The seat-warmers struck me the most. That kind of dedication... they were amazing.' She added: 'It's a defining moment that people are willing to give so much of their time to do this type of job.' She added that she felt there was so much goodwill around because people wanted to protect the secular state of Aware. With fellow teaching assistant Ms Kamalini Ramdas, 36, Ms Serrenti headed the logistics team inside the auditorium. By turning up early, she made sure that the old guard speakers had seats next to the microphones, and could speak easily. When she was allowed to start queuing around 11am, she and 40 other seat-warmers were first in line. During the meeting, Ms Serrenti was also actively involved in crowd-control, and tried to calm down the old guard supporters for the meeting to progress. She was so busy that she did not have lunch, and only had dinner around 10pm, after the meeting was over. Said Ms Serrenti: 'It was never about us. It's our responsibility to ensure safety for everyone. 'Some of the old guard have spent their lives fighting for Aware. It would not have been fair if the logistics stopped them from defending their organisation.' Although Ms Serrenti was in the final stages of her PhD, she said she 'couldn't not do anything' because she had supported several students to go for Aware's counselling services before, and was afraid these services would be affected under the new guard. She had been an Aware member in 2001, but had let her membership lapse. Ms Singam. She claimed their team initially sent letters to the new guard seeking to co-ordinate the logistics in the auditorium together, but the latter was unresponsive. It was then that their team thought of safety measures on their own. Volunteers like her had been planning for about three weeks, meeting at the Women's Initiative for Ageing Successfully, a venue they arranged through a founding member of Aware, Dr Kanwaljit Soin. Money was tight - the old guard had only $10,000, from two anonymous donors. Most of it was spent renting out the restaurant New York, New York for a day, so the old guard could have a place to organise themselves, and hold a press conference if their no-confidence vote failed. When asked about the volunteers, newly-elected Aware president Dana Lam-Teo, 56, a writer, smiled. She said: 'They have given us the kind of quality service that no money can buy.' She had never seen the We Are Aware website updated so speedily, and felt very supported because everything else was taken care of. 'Whatever you can think of, they did,' she said. 'We had better organisation than the F1, I would imagine!' What the volunteers did Before the meeting: Designed white T-shirts in support of the old guard. Updated the website (www.we-are-aware.sg). Released two YouTube videos campaigning for the old guard - one featuring various women calling for support, and another an interview with Ms Dana Lam, who was eventually elected president. Prepared an information pack for voters, and a sign for them to hold up. Arrived at the venue at 7.30am to fill the seats, and ensure that key speakers from the old guard could sit close to the microphones. Greeted each voter, and gave out the information pack and a badge, a piece of styrofoam in the shape of a heart. Bought and distributed flowers to their supporters. Prepared to negotiate with the event organisers if there were disputes with voters' memberships. Borrowed loud hailers, and supplied publicity materials. Recced each of the three venues which the EGM was slated to be held in. During the meeting Sent out SMSes to voters' mobile phones with instructions such as 'Stay Calm Be Dignified' and on how to fill in the voting forms. Scrutinised the counting of the votes with the audit firm. Calmed down passionate old guard supporters so the meeting could progress. Kept a look out for people who appeared too upset, and guided them outside, where volunteer social workers were ready to provide counselling. Supplied the audience with spring rolls, mini-sandwiches, fish fingers, onion rings, apples and water when the meeting dragged on. Contingency plan Escorted the key old guard speakers, and in case a fight broke out, were ready to act as bodyguards.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.121

Aware: Feminist Mentor no more

Aware Showdown
ACT 2
A NIGHT OF EMOTION
MOST HATED
Feminist Mentor no more
She called herself 'lion-hearted', yet was booed whenever she took the mike. Was Dr Thio Su Mien the mentor she claimed, or was she, as some say, simply patronising?
THE loudest jeers were reserved for feminist mentor Dr Thio Su Mien.
04 May 2009

THE loudest jeers were reserved for feminist mentor Dr Thio Su Mien.

Whenever she tried to take the floor, the audience would drown her out.

When Dr Thio came on the first time, the boos got so bad that a group of security guards started surrounding her, as if afraid the raucous crowd was going to pounce onher.

Dr Thio looked angry but took the mike anyway. She spoke about herself and her qualifications, including her position as the first female law dean in Singapore.

She brought with her a copy of the Aware book, Small Steps Giant Leaps: A History Of Aware And The Women's Movement In Singapore, in which she was featured.

She proudly held the book up, declaring herself a 'lion-hearted pioneer' and taunted the audience, saying that they should tear up the book since she was in it.

'Shut up!' the crowd screamed.

Dr Thio snapped back: 'You have no respect for your elders.'

Louder boos.

She added: 'You were falling asleep, you were not interested in your organisation...'

This riled the crowd further, who yelled that her three minutes of airtime was up.

Then she went back to her seat, which was in the front row of the stage.

She was seated next to Mrs Jean Marshall, 83, wife of the late David Marshall, Singapore's first chief minister. Mrs Marshall was there to support the old guard.

Later, Dr Thio sought the mike. Again, boos. The audience yelled as she tried to wrestle the mike from an Aware member who had been lining up to speak for some time.

She was told by other members to queue up like the rest did.

After some wrangling, Dr Thio finally got the mike. She went on to talk about Aware's constitution and why it should be adhered to.

'The constitution gives legitimacy and you need to be law-abiding,' she said.

Some members of the audience turned to each other and were overheard saying: 'That was so patronising'.

But after the vote of no confidence was announced in which the old guard won overwhelmingly, the confidence and aggression Dr Thio had displayed earlier faded.

Indeed, she appeared as if the wind had been knocked out of her sails.

In her final parting shot before she left, Dr Thio told The New Paper on Sunday: 'If they are happy for Singapore to be like this, then so be it.

'Let everything take its course.'

With that, she disappeared with the rest of her defeated exco.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.112

Aware: Seven-hour drama ends in dump

Aware Showdown ACT 1

A DAY OF DECISION Seven-hour drama ends in dump

Quietly, they entered the Aware fray, unaware of the drama they were about to cause. And last night, the new guard of Aware left (for a moment) as steathily as they had come, via the back door

By Ng Tze Yong

May 04, 2009

RUBBISH RETREAT: After the vote of no confidence was passed against them, the new guard retreated to a cargo loading area to discuss their options. -- PICTURE: NG TZE YONG, KELVIN CHNG and NG XI JIE AT a hidden spot of Suntec City, the Feminist Mentor led her flock into a cargo lift. The dirt-caked metal grill doors rumbled shut as a red siren sounded, and the women disappeared. For a while, it seemed that was how the Aware saga would end. Minutes earlier, the new exco had been handed a no-confidence vote. It was then given an ultimatum: Quit in five minutes. But for almost half an hour, the new exco was nowhere to be seen. And as reporters waited outside the cargo lift where they disappeared into, amid the forklifts, humming of machinery and faint smell of trash, the loud cheers of a crowd baying for blood floated in from the doorway leading to Hall 402. For a while, it seemed they had left for good - as quietly as they had arrived. In a night of high drama, this was the pivotal scene few saw. They saw the taunts, the cheers, the shouting matches played out over microphones and giant speakers. Some had queued for four hours to get in. The women came - in matronly frocks and sultry black numbers, in tattoos and permed hair. Inside the sprawling hall, the women took the nice green seats down the middle. The men, who had no voting rights, were relegated to one side on white plastic chairs. 'Wah, this is like a Muslim event man... girls one side and boys one side!' one usher quipped. As soothing lounge music played, the audience sat awkwardly in their chairs, not sure if the one they're brushing elbows with was a friend or enemy. Amid the sea of women, a shiny bald head stood out. 'Mr Siew Kum Hong (the Nominated Member of Parliament), can we request that you move to the men's section,' said president Josie Lau, as she opened the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM). Her request was immediately greeted by loud boos and taunts. A grim-faced aunty clapped her hands furiously, trying to drown out the nubile young lass beside her waving a stalk of sunflower like a flag. Ms Lau tried to control the commotion, shouting into the microphone repeatedly: 'Quiet, please!'. The audience broke into boisterous chants instead. The old guard explained that Mr Siew was there as a legal advisor to them, but the new exco wouldn't budge. 'There is nothing in the constitution that designates seats,' protested a member of the old guard. Mr Siew was finally allowed to stay. The crowd almost brought the house down. It was Old Guard 1, New Guard 0. The opening salvo set the tone for the EGM, with one side booing when the other side cheered. There was hooting, screaming and taunts bordering on racial slurs and religious insults. The first half hour went past like this, with angry shrill voices blasting from the speakers. 'Escort them out!' shouted Ms Lau, referring to the hecklers. In front of the angry crowd, the Aetos auxiliary policemen moved half-heartedly, unsure of who to obey. Amid the impasse, an elderly usher, already bored, made a shadow of a dog on one of the projector screens and giggled to himself. When a relative calm finally settled, Ms Lau proceeded with her speech. But its content, mostly a rehash of what she has already publicly said, got the impatient crowd riled up again. War of words 'Can you please listen? Can I say something? Can we move on? You are missing the point!' These were the most often-heard phrases amid the war of words. For the men in the hall, it must have seemed familiar. They took a back seat, making the occasional boo or cheer when it was safe to do so. But a few good men waded right in. 'I paid $40 to come here...' one man began, calling for calm. 'At an EGM, you follow the agenda strictly. We can debate until 10pm if you want. There are 3,000 of you here.' But his voice was lost in the chorus of women's fury. Another man put himself in the line of fire, pleading: 'Let's be sensible!' A woman jumped to her feet, crying out: 'Emotional is not irrational!' The liberals made their voice heard. It was harder to pick out the supporters of the new exco, who sat mostly silent, waiting for opportune times to clap furiously in support. As the hours went by, the EGM descended into an open mike night, with long lines forming at the microphones, each spouting their displeasure, at times rousing, at times poetic. Through it all, Ms Lau sat slouched on stage, her face radiating a zen peace. At the front rows, the old guard sat smugly with equally serene smiles. Through the war, a baby lay sound asleep in his mother's arms at the back of the hall, somehow oblivious to it all. A woman fished out a novel, Marley And Me, from her handbag, and was soon engrossed in it. In a less happy position was Mr Gregory Vijayendran, a partner of Rajah and Tann, legal advisor to Ms Lau's team. He sat at a table below the stage - just 2m from the angry women taking turns at the microphone - stoically, unblinkingly, his hands clasped in front of him, still as a statue. Nearly seven hours later, it all came to an end. And when it did, it was thankfully civil. You have been wonderful people, the old guard told the new exco. 'But you have five minutes (to step down).' Thank you, Ms Lau replied sweetly. And after a time-out with their mentor in the dump, they returned - and bowed out. REPORTS: NG TZE YONG, SHREE ANN MATHAVAN, BENSON ANG and PEARLY TAN When Margie riled Sally A HEATED exchange broke out within the first hour when founding member and ex-vice president Margaret Thomas, 57, took the floor to speak, to respond to Ms Josie Lau. Ms Lau was defending her decision to be on Aware's committee, but Ms Thomas interjected: 'Point of order Josie, I'm sorry but you're over your three minutes.' A visibly-angry Sally Ang, the outgoing assistant honorary secretary, shouted: 'Shut up and sit down.' Ms Ang's outcry drew loud shouts of 'You shut up' from the audience. Many stood up in protest. There were also cries for Ms Ang to be escorted out. Ms Lau apologised. After more screaming from the audience, Ms Ang relented. She said: 'I offer my apology but I hope that everyone gives the president a chance to speak without being interrupted.' 'Don't harass me, I'm just a man' AMID the emotion and anger, there were moments of levity. One such moment was provided by 'concerned father' Marshall Lee. The father of three daughters began his turn on the floor by paying tribute to the previous exco's ex-president Constance Singam. He admired her for her smile and how nurturing she was, just like 'his own mother', he said. As the crowd turned restless and jeered him, he went on to say bizarrely: 'I'm only a man, not a woman. I'm just a man don't harass me.' Shortly after, one of the volunteers presented him with a sunflower, perhaps as a gesture before leading him off the floor. He then insisted on giving this same flower to Ms Singam, who accepted it after some persuasion. Red, white and new COLOUR-coded camps aren't confined to Thai politics. Yesterday at Suntec City, those at the EGM, too, showed their colours. The new guard wore red; those who supported the previous committee and old guard wore white. Before the meeting started, white shirts were seen at the escalators distributing We Are Aware packages which included a list stating why a no confidence vote should be carried. They also distributed sandwiches and bottled water to the crowds, some of whom had queued for over an hour for the EGM. During the meeting, the white shirts were more vocal, shouting in support whenever members of the old guard took to the mike. Supporters of the new guard showed support quietly, by clapping when their committee made a point they agreed with. AT A GLANCE 300 Number of members before saga 3,000 Number of members after saga 65% Members voted against new exco 35% Members voted for the new exco

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.110

AWARE old guard makes new blood a priority

AWARE old guard makes new blood a priority

SINGAPORE : No meeting date has been set, but the old guard AWARE executive committee - voted back into power two days ago - has set out its priorities.

Top of which is how to manage its now-swollen base of around 3,000 members, many of whom joined only in the days leading up to the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Saturday.

“There’s so much more we can do now because we have so many more people … we will look at how to extend the use of new media and engage younger people,” AWARE’s new president, 57-year-old Dana Lam, said on Sunday. She was speaking on Talking Point on MediaCorp TV Channel 5, and to TODAY. Ms Lam said there is “a heavy responsibility now” to keep the new members interested.

Exco member Margaret Thomas told TODAY that managing the membership is now the “biggest challenge” for AWARE. “We have to get in touch and find out more their interests,” said Ms Thomas, 57, an AWARE founder member.

What the Exco won’t be doing though, is to change the direction of the 24-year-old advocacy group.

“I don’t expect us to be in great hurry to go in new directions. There are very good programmes in place,” Ms Lam told TODAY. “(These) will carry on.”

Different views will be taken on board, but they will have to be taken into context, added Ms Thomas.

“If we do something that the majority of people feel is wrong, we will consider what is wrong and needs to be changed. But just because someone barks, it does not mean that you change your path.”

An immediate task is to arrange for a handover and retrieve official documents from the previous team, as well as restore confidence with AWARE’s sponsors and programme users. “One of the first things might be to contact our subcommittees chairs and restore them in their position,” said Ms Lam.

On the S$90,000 supposedly spent by the previous Exco, Ms Lam said: “It’s a little too early for us to comment on (talk of a law suit). We have to go into the office and look at what has actually been going on before we make a decision.”

Correcting certain impressions of AWARE brought on by the saga is another priority.

For one of the six new faces on the 12-woman committee, Ms Hafizah Osman, content development manager of Mocca.com, the task ahead is to “get back on track” and “ensure that the passion and commitment (at the EGM) … are captured and harnessed for AWARE”.

The leadership coup had made the 39-year-old mother of two young children “sit up” and take on an active role. With women from different races and religions on the new committee, she is “confident” that AWARE “will be able to hear the different voices in society”.

As for criticism that AWARE has not been organised, Ms Lam said this is inaccurate. “We don’t have enough volunteers, we may be a little slack in the administration. It has always been difficult to get busy people to give us the time, and advocacy is not a very popular kind of thing to do.”

The loopholes in the constitution - that enabled the takeover on March 28 - were already in the process of being thought out.

“We were not fast enough to put it into fact. What are the lessons learnt? I think we have to be more vigilant … Of course, we are now going to look at that and change the locks on our back doors.”

- TODAY/il

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.215

How to lose an EGM vote

How to lose an EGM vote

SINGAPORE: Did their inexperience and naiveness, or perhaps their under-estimation of the competition, contribute to the downfall of Aware’s new guard team on Saturday night?

The first time round, the old guard and their supporters were caught sleeping, but at Saturday’s extraordinary general meeting of the Association of Women for Action and Research, they were out in full force to turn the tables on the new Executive Committee that had pulled off a shock takeover a month ago.

The veterans came out with guns blazing, as they shot question after question that left Ms Josie Lau and her team on the defensive for the most part of the six-hour marathon session.

The new guard had come prepared with power point slides and introductory speeches — but the crowd would not listen. Their quiet, reserved voices were no match for the fiery passion of the other side.

They had no track record to fall back on — when they instead did a presentation of Aware’s past achievements, this drew thanks from the Old Guard for highlighting their work.

As one veteran Aware member even told them, if the new team wanted to present their case, they should have, like the Old Guard, prepared supporters to take the microphone.

Instead, the new guard’s main defender was self-declared “feminist mentor” Thio Su Mien, whom they introduced as someone who would “give a more balanced view”.

Suffice to say, this did not go down well with the crowd. They barely listened to Dr Thio, showering her instead with jeers.

Did the young Exco lose the vote in part because they were not truly prepared for the showdown?

Were they over-confident of controlling the crowd? Did they believe they could set the agenda for the day without contest?

Perhaps, they underestimated the boldness of the other group, which had supporters such as Nominated Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong, newly-proposed NMP and theatre director Loretta Chen, and Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics president Bridget Lew.

Ms Rose Tan, a new Aware member and chairman of a public relations company, observed that the new guard team were “six nice ladies” but “inexperienced and not ready” to lead Aware.

Just look at the veteran civil rights advocates they were up against, she pointed out. Past presidents Dana Lam and Constance Singam; founding member and ex-journalist Margaret Thomas, just to name some.

It even seemed like members from the floor were giving the Exco a lesson on running a civil society group. Why, for instance, didn’t the Exco seek pro-bono help in holding the EGM, instead of paying for everything?

Did they realise, when they installed CCTVs in the Aware headquarters, that this would hinder women going in to seek help and compromise the privacy of volunteers?

But perhaps, Saturday’s outcome was already decided before the EGM.

Many who turned up were self-confessed supporters of Aware’s “old guard” era.

Others came because they had read media reports on how the new team had “infiltrated” Aware with their allegedly anti-gay and religious stance, and wanted to tick them off.

One giveaway sign: Even before the arguments were made, some Aware members were already seen checking off their voting slips. - TODAY/fa

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.214

A NIGHT OF EMOTION: Feminist Mentor no more

A NIGHT OF EMOTION: Feminist Mentor no more

She called herself ‘lion-hearted’, yet was booed whenever she took the mike. Was Dr Thio Su Mien the mentor she claimed, or was she, as some say, simply patronising?

THE loudest jeers were reserved for feminist mentor Dr Thio Su Mien.

Whenever she tried to take the floor, the audience would drown her out.

When Dr Thio came on the first time, the boos got so bad that a group of security guards started surrounding her, as if afraid the raucous crowd was going to pounce onher.

Dr Thio looked angry but took the mike anyway. She spoke about herself and her qualifications, including her position as the first female law dean in Singapore.

She brought with her a copy of the Aware book, Small Steps Giant Leaps: A History Of Aware And The Women’s Movement In Singapore, in which she was featured.

She proudly held the book up, declaring herself a ‘lion-hearted pioneer’ and taunted the audience, saying that they should tear up the book since she was in it.

‘Shut up!’ the crowd screamed.

Dr Thio snapped back: ‘You have no respect for your elders.’

Louder boos.

She added: ‘You were falling asleep, you were not interested in your organisation…’

This riled the crowd further, who yelled that her three minutes of airtime was up.

Then she went back to her seat, which was in the front row of the stage.

She was seated next to Mrs Jean Marshall, 83, wife of the late David Marshall, Singapore’s first chief minister. Mrs Marshall was there to support the old guard.

Later, Dr Thio sought the mike. Again, boos. The audience yelled as she tried to wrestle the mike from an Aware member who had been lining up to speak for some time.

She was told by other members to queue up like the rest did.

After some wrangling, Dr Thio finally got the mike. She went on to talk about Aware’s constitution and why it should be adhered to.

‘The constitution gives legitimacy and you need to be law-abiding,’ she said.

Some members of the audience turned to each other and were overheard saying: ‘That was so patronising’.

But after the vote of no confidence was announced in which the old guard won overwhelmingly, the confidence and aggression Dr Thio had displayed earlier faded.

Indeed, she appeared as if the wind had been knocked out of her sails.

In her final parting shot before she left, Dr Thio told The New Paper on Sunday: ‘If they are happy for Singapore to be like this, then so be it.

‘Let everything take its course.’

With that, she disappeared with the rest of her defeated exco.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.213

AWARE SHOWDOWN: Religious leaders back Archbishop

AWARE SHOWDOWN: Religious leaders back Archbishop

By Aaron Low

Key religious leaders in Singapore have thrown their backing behind the Anglican Archbishop’s stand that churches - and religious bodies in general - should stay out of the affairs of secular organisations.

Leaders of Buddhist, Taoist, Catholic and Protestant bodies said they agreed with Dr John Chew’s statement that the pulpit should not be used to push social or political causes.

They declare that secular organisations should stay secular, while religious organisations that want to propagate their beliefs should do so to their own members.

‘We feel that organisations which are meant to be secular in nature, to better serve the general public, should always be kept secular, while other organisations with non-secular or religious stances are free to propagate them to their own members,’ said Venerable Kwang Sheng, president of the Singapore Buddhist Federation.

‘It is best that members of a secular society be always mindful of the objectives of the society, and to respect secular points of view, so as to foster harmony for society at large,’ he added.

Archbishop John Chew, who is head of the local Anglican diocese as well as president of the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS), issued a statement on Thursday saying the NCCS does not condone churches getting involved in the leadership tussle at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

This came about a few days after Pastor Derek Hong of the Anglican Church of Our Saviour urged the women in his flock to support the new leaders at Aware, most of whom attend his church.

One of his statements during that Sunday sermon - ‘It’s not a crusade against the people, but there’s a line that God has drawn for us and we don’t want our nation crossing that line’ - caused many ripples of concern among Singaporeans.

Pastor Hong issued a statement on Friday saying he regretted his actions on the pulpit and that he would be ‘more sensitive to similar situations in future’.

On Saturday, the head of the local Catholic Church, Archbishop Nicholas Chia, weighed in on the issue.

Responding to The Sunday Times, he too stressed the importance of drawing a clear line between secular and religious organisations.

While religious organisations can give their opinions on secular organisations,’we don’t go into their affairs’, he said.

He added: ‘Aware is secular. If there are issues, the Government can look into it. If it is a religious organisation within the church, we will handle it.’

The head of the Taoist Mission, Reverend Master Lee Zhiwang, told The Sunday Times: ‘Secular organisations should be run based on what’s best for the people, including respect for individuals’ religion and values.’

‘Religious groups should not be involved in this matter. Let members of Aware resolve their own issues,’ he added.

Even as these religious leaders spoke out against interfering in the affairs of secular organisations, however, other religious organisations preferred to let their silence speak.

The City Harvest Church, a Protestant church with 24,000 members in Singapore, reflected a sentiment common among many of the 30-plus church groups contacted by The Sunday Times yesterday when it said: ‘We feel the Aware matters should be resolved internally by their own members. We are not in a position to comment.’

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.212

Men play active role in meeting

Men play active role in meeting

It was a women’s meet but the issue of men came to the fore repeatedly.

Barely minutes after the meeting started yesterday, a woman raised an objection.

She asked: Why was Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong, a man, allowed to be seated on the right side of the hall, a section reserved for women who were eligible to vote.

Like ordinary members, men can pay $40 annually to join the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) as associate members, but they have no voting rights and cannot be elected to the executive committee.

Even so, about 300 or so men - many of whom signed up on the spot - attended yesterday’s meeting. They sat on the left side of the hall together with foreign women, who were also not allowed to vote.

While the crowd rumbled with cheers and jeers, Mr Siew remained in his seat in the fifth row, unflinching. A member from the old guard clarified that Mr Siew, who joined Aware last October, served as its legal adviser and should be allowed to remain. The grumbles then died down and the meeting started.

Although the atmosphere among the men in the crowd was calm at first, it grew more lively as the afternoon passed. Several chuckled when the Aware exco members exchanged sharp remarks with female members on the floor.

‘She was a man in her previous life. Short and sharp,’ joked one man loudly when Ms Josie Lau addressed the audience, causing several men around him to snigger.

There were generally two types of men: Young, articulate men in their 20s or 30s who went to see the issues of civil society being discussed, and men in their 40s to 50s who were mostly fathers and went with their wives.

About two-thirds of the men seemed to be supporters of the old guard. They cheered and pumped their fists when anyone made rebuttals to the points laid out by the team led by Ms Lau. Some heckled and booed as passionately as the women.

‘You should get out,’ yelled one man to Ms Lau’s team.

At one point, the men broke into sonorous chants of ‘Where were you?’ when former Aware president Constance Singam asked Ms Lau’s team where it had been in the group’s two decades of existence.

Several men also volunteered as ushers, helping with registration and the distribution of free bottles of water, sandwiches and flowers.

Some men arrived after 3pm and were not allowed to register and denied entry. They kept vigil outside the hall.

‘It’s very frustrating to hear loud cheers and noise inside and be able to only peep through the door cracks,’ said fresh graduate Ed Chan, 30, who stood by the entrance for more than seven hours.

Those who supported the veteran Aware members generally wore white T-shirts with the words ‘We are Aware’ printed in red.

Those who supported MsLau’s committee wore red shirts with the word ‘Aware’ printed in black.

Analyst C.F. Lam, 47, who was wearing a red shirt, said he was attending the meet ‘to defend family values’.

Referring to Aware’s Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programme, which Ms Lau’s team had criticised for promoting homosexuality, he said: ‘I pay taxes and I want to know what my children are being taught in school. If they are being taught the wrong things, we should speak up.’

Another father, Mr Farid Hamid, 45, took a different stance.

Addressing the crowd during the question-and-answer session held while the votes were being counted, he identified himself as a Muslim father of three girls.

He said he would be ‘proud’ for his teenage daughters to go through the CSE programme as ‘they need to make informed choices, not submit to dogma’.

The issue of male membership was also brought up for scrutiny.

On the accusation that the inclusion of male members has become a mask for male homosexual activists to forward their cause, former chairman of Aware’s male chapter, Mr Tan Wah Kiat, 37, said: ‘The only masks I wear are SKIIs (facial masks) and I share those with my wife.’

In response, Ms Lau turned to the exco’s appointed legal counsel from Rajah & Tann and asked if the Aware Constitution provided for a men’s chapter.

When the lawyer said it did not, former Aware president Braema Mathi replied that ‘there are feminist men today’ and that ‘they should be equal partners in the feminist movement’.

But not all the talk was serious.

Several men who took the microphone also elicited much laughter and jeers.

One joked that he was inspired by the meeting to ‘write a book and call it Women Are From Mars And Men Are From Venus’.

Trainer Marshall Lee, 47, said of the heated atmosphere: ‘One woman I was sitting next to hissed at me as though she was Catwoman. I feel so harassed. Don’t harass me. I am only a man.’

debyong@sph.com.sg

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.211

Face-off: The white shirts v the red shirts

Face-off: The white shirts v the red shirts

Battle lines are drawn as supporters from both sides bear their allegiance proudly
By Teo Wan Gek , Elizabeth Soh

9am: Five hours before Aware’s extraordinary general meeting (EGM) is due to begin at 2pm, supporters of the old, and new, guard begin streaming in.

Outside the venue - Suntec’s Exhibition Hall 402 - battle lines are clearly drawn.

Volunteers from the old guard are turned away by event organiser APE Communications but ‘red shirt’ volunteers from the new guard appear to enter freely.

Ms Eileena Lee, 38, a sports therapist, is one of the volunteers turned away. ‘We were told by the event organiser that we had to leave as the voting ground was neutral ground,’ she says.

The red shirts bear the words ‘Pro-woman, pro-family and pro-Singapore’.

The old guard supporters are in white shirts that say ‘We are Aware’.

11am: Eighty per cent of the more than 200-strong crowd outside the venue are from the red side. About 20 per cent of them are men.

When asked by The Sunday Times, the volunteers in red refuse to comment. One man says: ‘Talk to the women; they know better.’

When Ms Schutz Lee, 42, who was sacked as centre manager for Aware by the new guard, turns up, she is pushed by a red shirt volunteer and asked to leave.

Ms Lee is overheard shouting: ‘Don’t touch me. Do you think this is right?’

The mood at the exhibition hall is visibly tense.

Noon: When registration begins, the queues form.

Mrs Constance Singam, past president of Aware, arrives and greets supporters with hugs and smiles. She is met warmly by Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong.

‘I support everything that the old guard has done,’ he says.

Queues snake all the way to the third floor as people throng the holding area to register as new members.

Only members are allowed to attend the EGM.

About 10 security officers arrive and say the starting time for the EGM will now be 2.30pm as the crowd is getting too chaotic.

However, Ms Yap Ching Wi, a volunteer with the old guard, tells them that the crowd is orderly. There is no need to break up the queues - it will delay the proceedings if people have to re-queue.

Artists Patricia Mok and Chua En Lai are among the last to register as new members.

Mr Chua, who says he supports the old guard, describes the way the new guard has taken over as ‘insidious and sinister’.

2pm: Registration for new members closes.

Aware president Josie Lau tries to begin her opening address at the EGM but is met with repeated boos and jeers.

She asks photographers to leave as they have used flash photography, which is not allowed on the premises.

As Ms Lau is repeatedly interrupted, Ms Sally Ang from the new exco shouts to the crowd: ‘Shut up and sit down.’

Her outburst draws even louder jeers. Ms Lau apologises for Ms Ang’s outburst but the latter again admonishes the crowd sternly to let them continue.

3pm: The crowd is briefed on the voting procedure. Each ordinary member is entitled to one vote. The men cannot vote.

Members cast their votes in boxes as the audience continues to fire questions at Ms Lau and her exco.

The meeting is interrupted many times by chants of ‘We are Aware’ and ‘Where were you?’ after Mrs Singam asks the new exco where they were over the past 24 years.

Fly Entertainment’s chief executive, Ms Irene Ang, steps up to the microphone during the debate and says: ‘I’m a Christian and I love God as much as you do. But I don’t agree with what the new exco is doing.’

4pm: Self-styled ‘feminist mentor’ Thio Su Mien takes the microphone and asks people to ’show respect to their elders’.

NMP Siew asks for the old guard’s team of scrutineers to monitor the vote-counting, which the new exco’s legal counsel agrees to.

5pm: Ms Lau says in her right to reply that Mrs Singam was asked to step out of a recent meeting after the March 28 annual general meeting (AGM) as sensitive matters were discussed.

Ms Lau says Ms Schutz Lee was fired for ‘insubordination’.

The crowd is agitated when Ms Maureen Ong of the new exco reveals that it cost more than $20,000 to book the venue.

It is later revealed that the new exco has spent about $90,000 in the first month in office.

Members accuse the new exco of ‘high-handedness in the use of Aware’s funds’.

6pm: The discussion moves on to the controversy over Aware’s comprehensive sexuality education programme.

A sex education trainer with Aware says the information has been taken out of context - discussions on homosexuality take up only one and a half minutes of lesson time, compared to half an hour dedicated to the topic of abstinence.

It feels as if the meeting will never end.

8.10pm: The vote of no confidence is passed with a two-thirds majority. The crowd goes wild and demands that the new exco resign.

The new exco asks its legal counsel for advice. Mr Gregory Vijayendran says: ‘Legally, the new exco is allowed to stay in office even though the vote of no confidence has been passed. However, they are advised to take the vote of no confidence into consideration.’

Ms Lau and her team leave the stage for a discussion.

8.45pm: The crowd is still waiting for Ms Lau and her team to return, failing which it will ‘declare by their conduct that they have resigned’.

9pm: The old guard passes a motion to remove Ms Lau’s exco. It is passed with two objections.

Former Aware president Dana Lam is named new president, Ms Chew I-Jin vice-president, Ms Yap Ching Wi honorary secretary, Ms Corrina Lim assistant honorary secretary, Ms Tan Joo Hymn honorary treasurer, and Ms Lim Seow Yuin assistant treasurer.

9.10pm: Ms Lau goes on stage to make a statement with her team: ‘We have decided to graciously step down. We wish Aware all the best,’ she says.

Ms Lam declares: ‘I was just astonished by the number of passionate women; it is just so reaffirming. This is a historic moment, and a moment we can be proud of for a really, really long time.’

What a night.

wangekt@sph.com.sg

esoh@sph.com.sg

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.210

New team spends $90,000 in five weeks

New team spends $90,000 in five weeks

Wearing a black dress and a string of pearls, lawyer Karen Teoh, 30, queued up patiently, and when her turn came to speak, articulated a question that was already being muttered on many lips.

‘How much money have you spent so far?’ she asked the Josie Lau team.

Honorary treasurer Maureen Ong gave a long and detailed explanation of how Aware’s skyrocketing membership numbers - which had gone from about 300 five weeks ago to nearly 3,000 last Friday - had prompted several venue changes.

The executive committee (exco) finally settled for the Suntec City venue which cost more than $18,000.

The gasp across the hall was audible, since $20,000 is the upper limit of what the exco is authorised to spend in a month.

But there was more to come. Minutes later, Ms Lottie Poole, who identified herself as a ‘proud and dedicated fund-raiser’ for Aware, asked: ‘How much money have you spent in the one month you have been on the exco?’

Ms Ong replied that the figures were not confirmed, but it was roughly $90,000.

‘We are horrified,’ countered long-time Aware member Poonam Mirchandani, a lawyer. ‘We will look to you personally for reimbursements over $20,000.’

Ms Ong replied, as often throughout the seven-hour meeting, that the team would ’seek legal advice’.

Her revelation that the new team had spent $90,000 in five weeks opened a barrage of protests and rebukes, with many members saying the exco could have spent a lot less.

New member Rose Tan, a public-relations veteran, said she was shocked that the exco was paying for things like renting a venue when it could have been had for free.

The new exco also faced flak for hiring what some members perceived as pricey auditors and lawyers from the firm of Rajah & Tann to help conduct the proceedings.

‘If you had reached out and called, you would have got free legal advice,’ said lawyer Mark Goh, who said he served as legal adviser to the old Aware committee for free.

‘Did you even ask?’

A member from the floor also wondered if the overspending on the exco’s part needed to be reported to the Commissioner of Charities, which keeps tabs on whether all charities follow the letter of the law.

But the exco found some support from the floor in accountant Lim Wee Lim, 55.

Identifying himself as a member of the Church of Our Saviour - which several exco members attend - he said to some applause: ‘If you take away $90,000 from $120,000 that you got, you still have $30,000 more than before.’

He was referring to the windfall in membership fees Aware collected - at $40 a person - from all those who swelled its membership in recent weeks.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.209

The awareness to right a wrong

The awareness to right a wrong

Hundreds of women joined Aware to make their voices heard after group’s takeover
By Radha Basu

Until recently, many of them had no more than a passing knowledge of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

But concerned over what they saw as a stealthy takeover of a secular organisation by a group of Christian women, hundreds of women signed up as Aware members to put right what they felt was a grave wrong.

And yesterday, they spoke clearly, in a resounding vote of no confidence in Aware’s five-week-old leadership.

Several spoke up at the Aware extraordinary general meeting, questioning Ms Josie Lau and her team, as well as their mentor, veteran lawyer Thio Su Mien, who had encouraged women to take over Aware.

Internet executive Hafizah Osman, 39, pointed out that Ms Lau and her executive committee (exco) members were all of the same race and faith.

‘Where is the diversity?’ asked the mother of two, who wore a pink headscarf.

‘As a Muslim woman, I have no faith that you can represent my voice, my views, my faith.’

Business development manager Siddy Zb, 45, said that the new Aware team contravened the spirit of the Singapore pledge, which promises to build a democratic society based on justice and equality for all.

‘This is not about the new guard or old guard,’ she said. ‘You deliberately left out the old guard who were on your committee at meetings,’ she said. ‘Is that equality?’

The new exco’s stand against homosexuality also generated heated debate.

Associate Professor Chitra Sankaran, 49, from the National University of Singapore, who teaches a module in feminism, said that she felt compelled to join Aware last month as she thought the new committee would harm its international stature.

She rose to point out that according to modern feminist theory, you cannot speak about one marginalised group - in this case women - without speaking for all marginalised groups, including racial, religious and sexual minorities.

Observing that Aware had won widespread respect in the region, she said: ‘Please do not undermine Aware’s international credibility with your thoughtless actions.’

Public relations executive Meera N, 23, spoke up, saying: ‘I am not a raging lesbian, but I believe you have no right to tell us who to love. It’s ridiculous. You have to be pro-choice.’

She too joined Aware recently, to be heard.

Undergraduate May Yee, 21, defended Aware’s sexuality education programme, which has faced flak from the new guard for a chart in which homosexuality is treated as neutral.

She said she had had a Christian education and added: ‘I did not come out of the system learning to judge people. For people to make informed choices, they must have information.’

Arguing for parents to give their children access to optional school-based sexuality education programmes, she said: ‘The alternative is the Internet and it’s much harder, especially without adult guidance.’

Many women who described themselves as Christians also said they disagreed with the new exco, with some chiding them for ‘un-Christian behaviour’.

Actress Irene Ang, who runs a talent agency, criticised the new exco for changing the locks on the Aware office and asked: ‘How can you change the locks and say your doors are open?’

Ms Dale Edmonds, a mother who described herself as a ‘traditional Christian’, also spoke passionately in favour of Aware’s sexuality education programme and its other programmes.

She said that as an 18-year-old she had received free legal advice from Aware and it helped her get out of a bad marriage.

‘They helped me when I needed help badly. Now I want to do what I can do help them back,’ she said.

Although the Josie Lau team had several hundred women supporters in the room, hardly any stood up to speak during the proceedings.

From their seats, some of them would call out: ‘How rude, how rude.’

radhab@sph.com.sg

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.208

‘Feminist mentor’ responds to jibes

‘Feminist mentor’ responds to jibes

Senior lawyer Thio Su Mien stood up to respond to the jibes on why she had declared herself the ‘feminist mentor’ of the women who seized control of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) in March.

She had called herself that when she revealed on April 23 her key role in bringing about Aware’s sudden leadership change.

Dr Thio, Ms Josie Lau and five others on the executive committee booted out yesterday all attend the Anglican Church of Our Saviour in Margaret Drive.

Yesterday, amid loud boos and objections, she held up a 2007 book that Aware had published on the women’s movement here and pointed out that she was mentioned as the first woman dean of the Law Faculty - from 1969 to 1971 - at the then-University of Singapore.

Holding up the book, she said she felt ‘very charmed’ to have been included.

As the booing and jeering continued, Dr Thio told the crowd: ‘Show some respect to your elders.’

Someone in the audience responded: ‘You have to earn respect.’

Dr Thio had sent out e-mail messages encouraging women to join Aware and change it, but she maintained yesterday it was no ‘covert operation’.

Old guard leaders had said that most of the people who came to the March 28 annual general meeting were unknown new faces, and they voted solidly for unknown new faces who took over without saying who they were, or why they were in Aware.

But Dr Thio yesterday accused long-time members of having fallen asleep.

‘You were not interested in your organisation…So don’t blame others…don’t blame other people. You are not interested. You are not interested!’

She wanted to continue, but she was drowned out by chants of ‘Your three minutes are up, three minutes, three minutes.’

Later, she told The Sunday Times she was surprised by the ‘anger’ and ‘vehemence’ she felt from the Aware members.

‘It’s very scary,’ she said. ‘What is happening to women in Singapore?’

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.207

AWARE : One Saga, Many Lessons...

AWARE : One Saga, Many Lessons...

This one is not about whether being gay is morally correct or wrong but on how to further your own cause. Suppose I'm a fundamentalist right wing religious person who believes that God has spoken to me as he did to Noah - how do I go about to do what I believe is right and rid the world of sin. The answer I believe is in the movie Evan Almighty...the lesser sequel to Bruce Almighty. God spoke to Evan one day and told him about an impending flood. He tried his best to warn the people but all they do was laugh at him - it was a waste of time. Even his family couldn't believe and thought he was mad. He was only able to redeem himself when the flood came and he saved a group of people who actually turned up at his ark to mock him. If you want to bring people to your worthy cause who don't share your faith, you can only convince them with evidence. When the evidence is compelling like the flood in the movie your harshiest critics will become your biggest supporters. Regardless of how much you believe something is right and how much faith you have - the rest of the world needs evidence. The more you try to push your ideas without evidence, the more people will push back and they will laugh at you.....
.
Lesson 1: There are very few people who can call themselves MENTOR without being laugh at. As one participant of the EOGM put it, respect is earned. You can't force people to respect you. You can make them fear you by force but respect has to be given. You can't make yourself mentor something just because you think you're somebody who deserves respect. The title "mentor" something is given when there is clear consensus about your status otherwise there will be some people laughing at you all the time.
.
Lesson 2; Think ahead & do basic planning. Step 1 was takeover Aware....hmmm step 2?? Step 3? A Christian group taking over a secular organisation will definitely result in national scrutiny in Singapore. People will want to know why you're doing this...what is your justification and it better be compelling. They didn't even think of the immediate consequences of their act and look totally lost when the spotlight shone on them. When you do something like this you better have a dossier of solid evidence to justify it otherwise you end up getting condemned by the media and your opponents.
.
Lesson 3: Start with the end. Before you do something, ask yourself what you're out to achieve. Then you try to get there with the least effort. Stripping away all the baseless accusations and suspicions, the main grouse was that Aware ran a CSE programme that has contents they didn't like. The easiest way to do get it fixed was to collectively complain that the contents were unsuitable and insensitive to people of their religion. You can be very sure the MOE will move to revise the content and Aware would be put on the defensive for having controversial contents in its CSE. No need to takeover Aware to get this done.
.
Lesson 4: Know your opponents. The women in Aware were not the type to walk away quietly from a fight - they fought for a long time to set up the organisation and that required tremendous commitment. They have links to the media and allies in positions of power. They have helped thousands over the years and these people are looking for a way to pay them back.
.
Lesson 5: Perception is important. No matter how they tried they cannot change the perception that this is whole thing was about a Christian group taking over a secular organisation to impose its own values on others. Its a case of "it looks like a rat, smells like a rat....".
.
Lesson 6: Understand everyone's interests. Otherwise you will find yourself the enemy of many. When the CSE programme was dragged into the spotlight, MOE was forced to step in to explain and deny what was said hurting the credibility of the Aware exco and their mentor. National Council of Churches had to say that it did not support the use of the pulpit for social causes[Link] as religious harmony is one of its . That was a rebuke for the pastor who asked his flock to lend their support.
.
Lesson 7 : Actions must reflect intent. Saying you're also inclusive but have members from the same small group is not convincing. Saying you're for feminist causes then sacking feminists in the organisation is not credible. Saying you're not anti-gay but having given speeches and written letters to public forums against gays makes it look like you're not telling the truth and cannot be trusted.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.382