ST: Gay community looks ahead as it signals a new focus (Oct 24)

Oct 24, 2007
Gay community looks ahead as it signals a new focus
By Li Xueying

THE dialogue has been started, and it will continue.

While disappointed that Section 377A - which criminialises sex between
men - has not been repealed after two days of parliamentary debate,
Singapore's gay community is determined to keep the conversation going.

As media company executive Stuart Koe put it: 'We've started a
dialogue which we don't intend to stop.'

His group, which collected 2,341 signatures for a petition to
Parliament to repeal the law, also issued a statement On Wednesday:
'The beginning of the end of the discrimination of one group of
Singaporeans has begun and there is no turning back.'

Reaction from the gay community a day after the end of the Parliament
debate, also indicate a new focus.

For now, petitions and active lobbying are not on the table, said six
gay activists interviewed on Wednesday.

Instead, they will look towards heightening the visibility of the gay
community through efforts such as volunteer work, support groups and
events like IndigNation which hosts, for instance, arts exhibitions
and poetry readings.

This will help Singaporeans understand gays better, and be more
comfortable among them, they said.

Said former teacher Dominic Chua, who runs a support group for gay
teachers: 'What makes this so divisive is that many of those who are
against gays, do not have gay friends, and do not understand them.'

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who joined the parliamentary debate on
Tuesday, said Singapore had to maintain a balance between upholding a
stable society with traditional, heterosexual family values and giving
gays space to live their lives.

He also cautioned that 'as a matter of reality, the more gay activists
push this agenda, the stronger will be the push-back from conservative
forces in our society'.

Mr Koe said on Wednesday: 'We're taking that to heart. I don't think
we're going to be knocking our heads against the wall this way.

'Rather, to foster understanding, we will work with the community to
be more visible such as through volunteer work, so they are
comfortable with us.'

Added Mr Kelvin Wong, who heads a support group for Buddhist gays: 'We
will move on. We will do what we have been doing - IndigNation, the
support groups, increase our visibility and get people to understand us.'

But, academic Russell Heng said, the gay community must be given its
right to 'try to change minds' and educate Singaporeans on gay issues.

'I expect the Government to be fair and not obstruct those
organisations that might invite me to speak, while my opponents have
every right to spread their anti-gay message.'

As for whether the debate polarises society, Mr Chua said: 'It is, if
the debate is one-sided and couched in uncivil terms. Otherwise,
genuine dialogue is a sign of a mature society.'

Even as the gay community look upon that as a silver lining, groups
that opposed repealing 377A applauded the Government's decision.

In a statement, Muslim organisation Pergas said that whatever the
reason for homosexuality, 'Islam clearly states that Man can assert
his power of reasoning over his negative desires if he so wishes'.

Executive director Martin Tan, 30, who co-organised a counter-petition
to keep the law, said: 'The feedback we got supporting the retention
of 377A has been overwhelming, and I'm sure most Singaporeans are
happy with the decision.'

Overall, the gay activists interviewed hailed the two days of debate
as a 'milestone'. A community, hitherto 'kept in the shadows', had
been heard, they said.

Ms Eileena Lee, who runs a resource centre on gay, lesbian, bisexual
and transgender issues, added: 'As a gay woman, I felt affirmed and
acknowledged, especially with the Prime Minister's speech.''

ST: Stories of Young Asian Activists (Oct 10 )

Oct 10, 2007
STORIES OF YOUNG ASIAN ACTIVISTS

When 1+1 = 11

By Chua Mui Hoong

KV STANLY and ML Parashu were young rookie reporters in Mysore, India, when they met a prostitute who changed their lives. They were in a park for a photo shoot, for a story on the harsh life of the city's horse-cart workers. A lady standing under a tree derided them. 'You're wasting one day's earning by taking this picture,' she told the cart workers.

'These reporters put you in the newspaper so they get a byline. Tomorrow, they will move on to another story and you will still be struggling here.'

She challenged the reporters: 'Why don't you write my story?'

Disturbed by the encounter, they looked for her the next day to hear her story.

She took them to her 'home' - a strip of pavement where her son sat studying.

Mr Stanly wrinkles his nose as he tells me: 'She had been sold to a brothel by her husband. After a few years, the brothel also threw her out. She's stinky and drunk. Her clients are the lower class and poor labourers. All she wanted was to make sure her son has a decent life.'

For Mr Stanly and his friend Mr Parashu, that was a defining moment. They pooled funds to take the woman and her son off the streets into a spartan home.

Her next challenge for them: 'You are helping me but I am an old lady. What about all the other young girls in the brothels?'

Their consciences pricked, the two young men started Odanadi Seva Samsthe, a group that helps rescue girls from prostitution. They went on to build a shelter to house, school and train these women.

'I also trained in therapy, so I could do psychotherapy for the women and help them recover,' Mr Stanly told me over lunch.

He was one of 200 young leaders attending the Asia 21 Young Leaders' Summit held in Singapore over the weekend.

I asked if he ever got into trouble with criminal gangs that run the brothels and he nodded matter-of-factly. 'It's a fact of life. I've been hospitalised several times.'

Today, Odanadi, which means soulmate in the Kannada language, has rescued more than 400 girls from prostitution. It organises an advocacy group for prostitutes and has helped rehabilitate hundreds of women into mainstream jobs. A few were married in well-publicised
ceremonies, helping to remove the stigma against girls forced into prostitution.

The organisation received a special award last Saturday from the New York-based Asia Society, which organised the summit.

As I spent the next two days among the participants, I would learn that stories like Mr Stanly's are common among this unusual lot of people, activists who did not stand by in the face of injustice, but rolled up their sleeves to change their respective corners of the world.

Mr Ravi Krishna, a lawyer trained in Pennsylvania, America, had a comfortable state counsel job in India. He often accompanied his frail mother to hospital and grew incensed at the way patients were dying en route to hospitals because there was no proper ambulance service.

He got together with friends to set up an ambulance service.

Called 1298 - Dial for Ambulance, the service uses technology to overcome the challenges of navigating the back lanes of Mumbai.

GPS (Global Positioning System) and RTS (Realtime Tracking System) track the location of 24 vehicles every moment of the day and night. Mr Krishna wants to use Google Earth maps to help in navigation - with ambulances sending back pictures of uncharted back lanes to widen
Google Earth's future coverage.

To do so requires each ambulance to be fitted with a laptop computer. Problem: Traditional laptops which are fan-ventilated and run on hard discs are vulnerable to damage in Mumbai's treacherously bumpy, dusty environment.

Solution: Mr Krishna is talking with Taiwan company Via to use its fanless computers that do not run on hard discs.

As Mr Krishna told his story over dinner, Mr Faiysal AliKhan peppered him with questions.

Turns out Mr AliKhan, a logistics professional by day, runs a foundation devoted to rural development in Pakistan. 'We have the same problem about having no ambulance service and we're thinking of setting one up,' he said.

After dinner, the two caught up with each other and promised to get in touch. Despite the periodic tension between the two countries, development work knows no boundaries when activists like these are bound by a common zeal to improve the lives of those around them.

Many of those at the forum had incredible stories to tell - of how they moved beyond self, work and family to do something for others.

There was Filipino military commander Dennis Eclarin, who decided to build lives. He started a microfinance foundation to reach the highland and most remote parts of the Philippines.

Then there was Mr Mitchell Pham, who fled Vietnam in a rickety boat when he was 13, with 65 others or so. The boat ran out of food, then water and fuel.

A cruise liner passed them by - with clueless tourists waving and taking pictures of the refugees in their dire straits. The next ship was an oil tanker, whose captain rescued the refugees.

'That was my leadership moment,' said Mr Pham. 'I learnt that even if you are in business, carrying on with your life, you can choose to ignore others' call or you can choose to make a difference and help. The cruise captain chose one, the oil tanker captain chose another.'

Mr Pham stayed at an Indonesian refugee camp for 1 1/2 years before settling in New Zealand, where he now runs an IT company and is active in business and community organisations, having chosen not to ignore others' problems.

Closer to home, there was Ms Eileena Lee, who started an online support group nine years ago for gay and lesbian people in Singapore. She now runs Pelangi Pride Centre, a resource centre on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues.

'I never saw myself as a leader. But I suffered in my own journey when I came out as a lesbian woman, and if I can do something to help others on that journey, I felt I had to.'

As a panellist at a discussion put it, it is about starting small, and making one plus one equal not two, but 11.

Listening to stories of these activists' 'leadership moments', learning what spurred them to act, I was humbled into silence.

I am a columnist but for once I have no point of view to offer, nothing but these stories from those who make a difference.

muihoong@sph. com.sg

Merrill Lynch was the lead sponsor of the Asia 21 Young Leaders' Summit. Singapore Press Holdings was a media sponsor.

Copyright (c) 2007 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.

IGLHRC: Singapore: Religious Homophobia, Gay Activism & Repealing the Sodomy Law

SINGAPORE: RELIGIOUS HOMOPHOBIA, GAY ACTIVISM & REPEALING THE SODOMY LAW

Date: September 10, 2007

Asia & Pacific » Singapore » Documentation

BACKGROUND: In 2005, the Singapore government cancelled Nation Party, a mammoth gathering of queer people and their allies, held every August since 2001. One report indicates the first Nation Party had 1,500 people; by 2004, there were 8,000. In response to the
cancellation, some lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists organized Indignation, designed to be a series of events that would de-emphasize the "party" aspects of gay culture and instead provide a forum for LGBT creative expression and political commentary.

In August 2007, several public Indignation events were banned on the basis that they "promoted a gay lifestyle."

On the other hand, in November 2006, the government first announced that it might repeal Article 3771 . Unlike Article 377A2 which, specifically addressed sex between men, Article 377 criminalized what was considered unnatural sex acts between heterosexuals. LGBT activists argued that removing 377 and retaining 377A amounted to discrimination. This ramped up the public debates. At the forefront of public opposition to repealing 377A was the small but vocal population of Singaporean Christian fundamentalists. They vehemently supported retaining 377A and pushed the government to also criminalize lesbianism since the law was silent on this.

Three Singaporean activists spoke to IGLHRC about their efforts to dispel myths, shift attitudes, and change the minds of government and society so that Singapore's LGBT communities can live openly and with dignity. Each interview was conducted separately but similar questions were used and the responses are presented next to each other for this
article.

Eileena Lee: I am a lesbian activist, former president of People Like US, a gay advocacy group, and one of the founders of Pelangi Pride Centre that promotes positive self esteem among LGBT people and sexual health for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS.

Alex Au: I am a gay activist, one of the organizers of Indignation Pride events, and a social commentator on my blog, Yawning Bread.

Rev. Yap Kim Hao: I am a former Methodist bishop and currently a pastoral counselor at Free Communities Churches, which is currently the only church in Singapore open to gays and lesbians and queer people.

Grace Poore: Eileena, what kinds of activities do you do at Pelangi Pride Center?

EL: We run monthly events about coming out. We expose gay people to positive information about themselves. We also have events for straight people to come to so they can understand LGBTQ issues and we put our information in libraries. We run activities for parents of gay
people. We talk about ourselves as Singaporeans who are part of a family unit.

GP: Singapore's Indignation is considered by local and international press as Singapore's Gay Pride season. In 2007, several events during the two-week Indignation were banned – including a talk by a Canadian law professor on sexual orientation in international law focusing on Asia and a photography exhibit of 80 posed shots of clothed gay couples kissing. This was your photo exhibit, Alex. Talk about the ban.

AA: I am not altogether surprised that it was disallowed. The very purpose of attempting an exhibit like this was to test the boundaries of the government because it is not something that's been done before. And the ban confirmed a pessimistic view of Singapore, not an optimistic view. Bans also raise the profile of the events. I did end up doing nine slide shows where I showed some of the images that were banned and gave talks with each show. So it was converted from a
static exhibit to a dynamic one.

GP: Were reasons given for the ban?

AA: Because it promoted a homosexual lifestyle. That's the language they used. So the censorship was not predicated on any law. It's usually because they don't want any positive portrayal of homosexuals; they are happy to allow negative portrayals. Like if there's a movie
where the homosexual person dies they will not ban it but if he or she lives happily ever after then it's considered promoting a lifestyle and they ban it. This kind of censorship is not only on gay men's work. It also affects work produced by lesbians even if the law itself does not criminalize lesbianism

GP: Eileena, you don't support Indignation. Why?

EL: I don't agree with the premise of the Indignation Campaign, which started in 2005 as a reaction to the government banning the Nation Party. Pride for me is being proud of who we are. Indignation tells people we are different from everybody else. I don't see this as empowering gay people. People need to come out but in order to come out we have to educate our own families, our own circles, and we have to educate the straight community. It's hard to educate people if we are telling them that we are different. Also, Indignation uses a negative forum to be Prideful. LGBTQ communities don't need to say we are Singaporean in an antagonistic way.

GP: Is there an advantage to taking the less antagonistic approach?

EL: Some gay people are not as out as me and for them to attend something like Indignation, it may not be safe because it is all so high profile.

GP: Alex, is the high profile of Indignation frightening off LGBT people from participating and isn't this having a negative impact on the very people you want to galvanize?

AA: My observation is that in the last 10 years in Singapore, there's been a massive coming out despite how much flak we get because, in Singapore, we are still quite safe, we are not arrested for participating in public Pride events, and most of us are accepted by our families. Some of our families speak up on our behalf. So more gay people are seeing Indignation as something positive. Also, the awareness about gays and lesbians in the general society has gone up. Six months ago, a young college person who was interviewed by the press said that if you ask college students, they all say they know at least one gay and lesbian person. In fact, Singapore Polytechnic did a survey recently of Singaporeans between the age of 15 and 29. And 50%
of people in this age group thought homosexuality was acceptable. This represents a massive change from the generation 10 years ago.

EL: How you go about organizing is crucial. When you organize things that you know are going be banned that's taking an antagonistic approach. Part of the process of Indignation is to test the waters with the government. Pelangi Pride Center has different goals. In the same week of the banned activities we organized a talk by Rev. Oyoung WenFang [the first openly gay Malaysian Chinese pastor ordained by Metropolitan Community Churches]. Over 80 people attended and the event wasn't banned. We reached out to our own communities and we publicized it in the mainstream press. The point of the publicity was about the book he wrote. A few years ago, we organized a coming out event with a local NGO (non-governmental organization) . Someone asked what is this about and we said it's about a mother's love for her child. So our approach is not to be antagonistic or on the offensive.

GP: Do you think the ban of your photo exhibit was because gay people were kissing or because public kissing between anyone, including heterosexuals is frowned on in a conservative Asian culture?

AA: But gay people jogging and having a picnic in the park were also banned events at Indignation. So this is not about Asian culture but about Bible belt homophobia from America transported to Singapore. The language used by the Media Authority for the ban was clearly cut and paste language from America. These were the same people in favor of keeping the sodomy law, who use references to Leviticus and the Christian god. So you get a sense that opposition to repealing the existing law is by church fundamentalists. Yet Christianity only makes up 15 percent of Singapore. Many high level civil servants are themselves Charismatic Christians. Very much like what's happened in the Bush administration.

GP: But Singapore is majority non-Christian. What is this majority doing about the homophobia from the fundamentalist Christians?

Rev YKH: The Buddhists are little bit divided on the Gay issue. They are not necessarily anti-Gay but because they have a different view on sexuality, they don't take a position on homosexuality. It's the fundamentalist Christians who are vocal so the debate tends to be
controlled and shaped by them. The religious climate shifted in Singapore around the 1970s. Charismatic influence from America came here and has penetrated most of the churches now. People who grew up in these charismatic movements are in the forefront of the anti-gay
movement in Singapore and they mobilized the Church of the Savior to be on a battle against gays. There's also the impact of Focus On The Family, which is from America, and uses the gay issue to win support for its mission. It emphasizes traditional family values. And they have set up an office in Singapore which is run by a former Methodist parishioner. Church of the Savior also set up a therapy program called Choices. It's an ex-gay program and a lot of gay people tried it out and left because it doesn't work for most people. Some of the gays who went through it came out and started organizing Indignation.

GP: Are there no progressive Christians in Singapore to counter the fundamentalists?

Rev YKH: Many open-minded people have just given up on churches. The more liberal are not becoming part of church leadership. They are finding more satisfaction in secular work and non-church work. When there's pastoral leadership it's gone into the charismatic movement.
And most of the church members have responded to the charismatic approach. So when there are liberal pastors who are gay supportive, they have to be closeted because their membership is not in favor of gay people.

GP: Of the 15 percent of Christians in Singapore, what portion is fundamentalist?

Rev YKH: They are in the majority, especially the younger people. The older Christians remain liberal because they have not joined the charismatic circles.

GP: Why does it appeal to the younger people?

Rev YKH: The appeal for the younger people is the music and theater, and with the uncertainties they face – the charismatic church, which is more prescriptive, gives them something they're looking for. These young people are not from poor families but from the middle class and more affluent families.

GP: It's ironic that the Singapore government has allowed Christian fundamentalism from the west to have such an influence while it has not been as open to rights of gays and lesbians, which is also often seen as the product of western influence.

AA: Singaporeans have been educated to be utilitarian. They may understand what you are saying about rights of gays and lesbians but the typical culture of people in Singapore is not to speak out. Also, ours is the kind of society that is not terribly interested in gay and lesbian history. If you look at the history of Asian societies, like that of the Javanese, and of the societies in Thailand and China, there is a recognition of homosexual relationships and the third gender. None of these societies has had a major clamp down on homosexuals or same-sex relationships. Homophobia came into this part of the world through colonizers and missionaries.

Rev YKH: By and large the majority in society are not concerned about the gay issue but the vocal minority have whipped up the anti gay sentiment. And the government is reluctant to push against public sentiment. Privately they [the government] will support MSM programs,
even financially, but they have to keep saying Singapore is a conservative society that's afraid to embrace gay people.

GP: What is your take on Article 377 and Article 377A of the Singapore Penal Code?

EL: The whole penal code argument is ridiculous. If they are going to decriminalize anal sex for straight people then why not also for gay people? Are they are only thinking that gay people commit sodomy?

GP: Isn't the problem with the use of the term, sodomy? Doesn't it convey crime? Shouldn't sodomy be used to refer to rape and sexual assault, not for consensual sex?

EL: People see anal sex between gay men as violent and non-consensual. So it's not same-sex love that people feel is wrong but anal sex. The idea of anal sex is taken as an affront. For instance, many people I have spoken to are a lot more accepting of gay women because they
believe lesbians don't perform anal sex and because there's no penis in a lesbian relationship. Hence, most straight people think that gay women don't have sex. At the same time, the image people have of all homosexuals is a villainous picture. They believe that gays are pedophiles and that gay relationships are predatory.

GP: The sodomy law in Singapore is silent on lesbianism. Where does that leave the lesbian community?

EL: Just because we are not included in the law doesn't mean we are accepted. We are invisible. It's like we don't exist. And because there are no anti-discrimination policies and no laws in place, anything can happen. There's nothing to protect us when something does happen. For
instance if a lesbian couple buys a house, one partner dies who does it go to – the other partner or the family because the family automatically inherits the property? If the will is written can the family contest it because same sex relationships are not accepted by the State? So the law may be silent on lesbians but gay women can also be discriminated against. Many lesbians are not aware of 377A…they should also get into 377A, they need to speak out against 377A.

GP: Since there already is constitutional protection for other minorities in Singapore based on ethnicity, religion, and language, what is the government's resistance to repealing 377A and protecting LGBT people also as a minority community?

AA: The discussion is much wider than 377A. It is likely the government will draw a line between gays and lesbians and other minority groups because the Constitutional protection for other groups is not because of a rejected identity, there's no issue with not conforming with heteronormativity. At the same time, homosexuality is conflated with pedophilia. That's like conflating consensual sex with rape. There's a victim in the case of assault and pedophilia, which is very different from consensual relationships between people in gay relationships.

Rev YKH: Singapore doesn't approach the gay issue as a human rights issue but a globalization issue. It's a very pragmatic approach. If we are open, people will come here. More of the artistic element will come here. Tanjong Pagar [in the business district of Singapore and considered a historic area] will become a gay district and the government will project Singapore as an international city. So purely for economic reasons, things will change. After all, this is a
puritanical society that allows gambling. So we can be open to gay culture.

AA: 377A has to do with sodomy and it is as much a heterosexual issue as it is a homosexual issue. I am confident that the law will be repealed in about 5-10 years. But my concern is that even after repealing 377A there will be continued policies that discriminate against homosexuals. I mean, Lee Kuan Yew [former prime minister and currently the Minister Mentor] says that homosexuality should be allowed as long as it doesn't infect the heartland.3 What does that
mean – get away with the absolute minimum liberalization? Also, I fear it may take so long to repeal 377A that the cost that Singapore pays in terms of bad press internationally will accrue – turning away many talents and investments.

EL: I think what will happen in the near future is that 377 of the Penal Code which is about anal sex between straight couples will be repealed, and a few years after that Singaporeans will recognize how ridiculous it is to retain 377A, which targets MSM [men having sex with men], and the government will repeal it. So instead of having a big ceremony to repeal 377A, they will try to ease our society into this so that one day, sexuality won't matter anymore. That's how the
government works here – using a slow incremental process. For instance, after what the Minister Mentor said about the gay issue, there have been press interviews with two or three members of parliament [MPs], and they have been gay affirmative.

AA: But they [the two MPs] are nailed by other MPs who say they are not doing their job because they should be reflecting the views of the people, the assumption being that people's views are conservative.

GP: What is coming out like in Singapore? Is it difficult because of the conservatism?

AA: Generally gays and lesbians don't have a very hard time telling classmates. From anecdotal information that I've heard, people with the hardest time coming out are those whose families are Christian. Their parents tend to be the most homophobic. The Confucianist understanding of family is very patriarchal, and continuing the family line is critically important. When a family has no daughters, to keep the family name going, they happily adopt sons from other families to
continue preserve the surname. So the Chinese idea of family is very different from the usual nuclear idea of family, it's a very extended family, lots of adoptions. Traditional families were polygamous as recently as two generations ago. Men had many wives. But not any more.
So to use the word conservative to us does not apply. Singaporeans are not necessarily looking at family as self-procreating.

EL: I came out to my mother 10 years ago. At the start she was as homophobic as anyone I know but she has come a long way. With availability of information it's easier for me to help her understand. I have friends over to the house. I expose her to the work I do and give her the opportunity to interact with gay men and women in my life. She now gives talks at the Pelangi Pride Centre and also for SAFE, which is Singapore's version of PFLAG.

GP: What were some of the barriers your mother had about accepting you?

EL: Her barrier was needing to know that I'd be okay – because in her mind gay relationships can't be long term. There's a big barrier in our society to accepting us because the homosexual relationship is not seen as a loving relationship but a deviant and overtly sexual relationship.

GP: What's the LGBT movement doing in Singapore to change the social climate?

AA: There are those working on the HIV health front who I believe are building good bridges with the health ministry to persuade them that there are rising rates of HIV and AIDs in Singapore and they should stop the homophobia and repeal the sodomy laws and engage with gay people. There are people like me who write blogs and raise our opinions freely so that those who are monitoring the blogs see that people proposing the repeal of the sodomy law are outnumbering the anti-repeal people.

EL: Right now people think the gay issue is a separate issue. It is not. We are a part of the family unit. Those against us constantly keep invoking the phantom conservative majority. What gay people need to do is more grassroots lobbying and reach out to the heartlanders. And we all have to come out to people we love and they are the people who will lobby for us because their voices will be heard better and their voices will be louder.

Rev YKH: We are trying to mobilize the liberal Christians. On September 29, NGOs and churches together are holding an AIDS awareness program. The government is sending a key person. To avoid AIDS being associated with gays, we are looking at how AIDS affects women and children. We are also encouraging prominent gay people to come out so they can be role models. We are trying to encourage the Free Communities Church to have a public discussion about the issue. And we are asking gay people to project the positive aspects of gay life not
only the sorrows.

GP: You're a non-gay Christian pastor, and you support LGBT people. How do you respond to your fellow Christian critics?

Rev YKH: It's reinterpretation of the biblical teachings. Charismatics know from an intellectual standpoint that there are many different interpretations of the teachings [of Christ], Roman and Greek interpretations for example. Yet, they have to keep saying that there is only one interpretation, the literal one. They also like to say, hate the sin and love the sinner, yet they hate people who support gays. They feel anyone who supports gays people is trying to promote
the gay lifestyle, and they believe that gays can convert heterosexual people to become gay. That's their fear. And I say, why would heterosexuals convert to homosexuality? As for the non-Charismatics who oppose gays, I say, once upon a time, marrying a divorced person was an abomination to the Church. The Church has changed its position on this. So why not on the gay issue?

GP: What contributed to you not being homophobic?

YKH: It was a natural transition for me because I have always been interested in marginalized people and influenced by liberal missionaries. So when the gay issue came out five years ago, I was invited to be part of the movement.

NOTES
============ ========= ==

1- Article 377 of the Singapore Penal Act, 1871, states, "Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animals, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine."

2- Article 377A of the Singapore Penal Act, states: "Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years."

3- In response to a caller on a CNN radio show on December 11, 1998, former prime minister and current Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew said: "Well, it's not a matter which I can decide or any government can decide. It's a question of what a society considers acceptable. And as
you know, Singaporeans are by and large a very conservative, orthodox society, a very, I would say, completely different from, say, the United States and I don't think an aggressive gay rights movement would help. But what we are doing as a government is to leave people to live their own lives so long as they don't impinge on other people. I mean, we don't harass anybody." In April 2007, Lee said in a Reuter's report: "If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors
this, that you are genetically born a homosexual -- because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes -- you can't help it. So why should we criminalize it? …Let's not go around like moral police ... barging into people's [bed] rooms. That's not our business… So you have to take a practical, pragmatic approach to what I see is an inevitable force of time and circumstances. " A month later, Lee said, "Eventually the law against homosexual sex would have to be repealed."

Feeling the fear but doing it anyway: Interview with Eileena Lee, gay activist in AWARENESS

Feeling the fear, but doing it anyway

What does it take to start an internet-based group for lesbians and bisexual women, create a resource centre for the gay community, and "come out" to your family? Awareness catches up with lesbian activist and active AWARE volunteer Eileena Lee.

By Tan Hui Yee

Tell me about yourself.

I am a 35-year-old lesbian, born and bred in Singapore. I've lived most of my life here, apart from one year when I worked in Taipei, something I enjoyed tremendously. I think all of us should experience working and living outside of Singapore at some point of our lives. For me at least, I came back loving Singapore more. If I were ever to leave Singapore, it would be because of the weather - I can do without the heat! Like most Singaporeans, I live in an HDB flat, with my mum and my eight-year-old Shihtzu, Cheeky.

Every other week, my nine-month-old nephew, Taylor, stays over for a couple of days so that my brother and sister-in-law get a bit of time off from looking after him. Some years ago, just as I was "coming out" to myself and "coming out" to the world as a gay woman, I also developed an interest for Buddhism. I like how simple it is. Interestingly, it was Buddhism (and also my dear friend Charmaine) that taught me how to appreciate Christianity. Recently I've taken an interest in photography. I like how it makes simple and ordinary things pretty.

How did you come to be involved in AWARE?

In 2001, two women committed suicide and there was a bit of hoo-ha over their lives prior to their tragic demise. What we read in the press, mostly the tabloids, were very scandalous and sensationalised. At that time I had already started "RedQuEEn!" (http://www.geocitie s.com/red_ qn/) - an internet discussion group for lesbians and bisexual women and women who are
questioning their sexuality - for about two years, and the tragic deaths of the two women got us thinking about what we could have done to prevent their deaths. We contacted Vera Handojo, then coordinator of the AWARE helpline, to help us train our volunteer counsellors. On a personal level, I wanted to give back to AWARE the kindness that Vera had extended to us at a time when
not many people were openly gay-affirmative. And so I've been with AWARE since then.

Why did you start "RedQuEEn!"?

Back then, there was absolutely nothing for gay women to turn to for support. The internet was their best bet. For women who were not "out", the internet was a safe haven for them to connect with each other. By "out", I mean being ready to tell people that they are gay. You see, we live in a
very heterosexist society and there is this unconscious assumption that all of us are heterosexual. Put yourself in the shoes of a gay woman: You grow up with only heterosexual role models around you. Your school environment is heterosexual. Your work environment is heterosexual. Your gay identity is never acknowledged. How would you feel? That was my personal experience.
When I was "coming out" as a gay person, I felt very alone and I felt that there was a need for a group to empower and support women like myself. That's why "RedQuEEn!" was formed.

Have things changed since you started "RedQuEEn!"?

In 1998, when I started "RedQuEEn!", I never thought it would grow to what it is today. We started with 17 women who responded to my email in a mixed gay mailing list. Now, we have over 1,300 subscribers. Back then when I did a search for "Singapore Lesbians" on the internet, the only links that showed up were links for pornography, nothing on support or empowerment for sexual minorities. Now, we have so many groups out there catering to the various needs of the people who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or transsexual. It is a vast improvement from what I came out to in the 1990s. Now we even have The Pelangi Pride Centre (http://www.pelangip ridecentre. org/) which incorporates a Resource Library for people to go to for information and support. Instead of just bars and discos, we now have regular places for gay people, or for people who are questioning their sexual orientation, to hang out in.

What sort of challenges have you faced along the way?

Setting up the group itself was a huge challenge. At that time, there were hardly any openly gay people around. I had a lot of fear when I started the group. I had no idea if I would be breaking the law because the internet laws were so broadly worded. I was mindful to be a law abiding citizen,
though.

How did you deal with that fear?

I guess the need to go out to lend support to people who were isolated was greater than my own fear. I took a deep breath and did it.

What have you learnt from the work you do?

I think sometimes Singaporeans limit themselves by grumbling about this and that, instead of finding ways to solve the problem. I've learnt that anything can be done.

How do the people you encounter tend to respond when you tell them that you are gay?

Most of the time, people are supportive. I have "come out" to my heterosexual friends and all of them try to be supportive. We are still friends -- none of my heterosexual friends have cut me off after I've "come out" to them. I have to admit, though, that I was really afraid initially that my disclosure would end the friendships. Disclosing it to my family was a little more tricky, I took a few years before I told my parents that I was gay. It was challenging because I knew I had to deal with a lot of emotions and disappointments. Parents automatically assume that their children are heterosexual, so when you tell them otherwise, there is bound to be some disappointments - mainly because they have to readjust their expectations, but I am glad I "came out" to them. To me, honesty is essential to a good relationship. And because I love my family, I want to be honest with them.

Some people say that there is no need for gay people to "declare" their homosexuality, just like heterosexual people don't need to tell others that they are straight. What are your thoughts on this?

People need to know that just because we don't talk about gay people, it doesn't mean that they don't exist. And so to (those people who make this statement), I would say, why not? Often when people think about "coming out", they imagine gay people marching in parades and demanding rights. To me, "coming out" is simply sharing a part of myself which I don't have to be ashamed of. In my interactions with people, it is not uncommon for them to ask me "Are you married?" or "Do you have a boyfriend?" I don't really want to cook up some tale about a non-existent boyfriend or pretend that I am attracted to men. That would be when I tell them that I am gay. I feel that
once I start with a lie, I will have to come up with more lies to cover up that first lie, so why start in the first place? The bigger question is, will I be able to live with myself if I lie?

In a broader context, because we all grew up in an environment where gay people are laughed at and made fun of, "coming out" is necessary. It allows people, through their interactions with openly gay persons, to learn that these gay persons just as normal as them. When we keep quiet about our homosexuality, we help protect the environment which makes it okay for people to be unaware of gay people. It is this lack of awareness that keeps and limits us to an environment where people assume that being gay is wrong, when it is not.

What do you hope to see come out of the work you do?

I hope that one day no one will bat an eyelid when the words "gay", "lesbian," "bisexual", "transgender" , and "transsexual" are mentioned. I hope that one day no young person who identifies as a sexual minority will have to grow up feeling unsupported and alone.

How far are we from having that kind of environment now?

There's still a long way to go. We're just at the start of the journey now.My solution to get to there is very simple - but difficult to do. We just need every gay person to "come out" to his or her family. When that happens, there will be more people out there who know someone who is gay. When more people know someone who is gay, people will see that gay people are just normal people.

The current issue of AWARENESS "March 2007, Volume 13" is a collection of articles on topics like - HIV/AIDS, Teenage Sex Education and Homosexuality.

To Order AWARENESS ($15) or to make a donation to AWARE - Please call or write to:

Association of Women for Action and Research
Block 5, Dover Crescent, #01-22, Singapore 130005.
Tel: +65 67797137
Email: aware@aware. org.sg
Website: http://www.aware. org.sg