365Gay: Singapore gays plan massive rally (Nov 7)

(Singapore) Singapore’s LGBT community is planning a massive rally to celebrate gay pride and chastise the government for its tough stand on homosexuality.

The event will mark a loosening of tight controls on public demonstrations at Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park.

The rally is the brainchild of Roy Tan, a gay man who works in the health care industry. Tan, 50, originally planned to hold the event next week, but postponed it until next year, saying there had been such large LGBT interest he would need more time to organize it. Tan also said that he will form a committee with a number of those people who have offered help.

But he said that the event will be restricted to people from Singapore. Tan said that if foreigners were involved, it would require a police permit which might not be granted.

He said he hopes to hold a pride march around the park and then have speakers who would press for the repeal of anti-gay laws in Singapore.

Last October Singapore’s Parliament passed a sweeping revision of its penal law, eliminating sodomy as a crime for heterosexual couples but leaving in place provisions that could send gays to prison.

Under the law, anyone engaging in same-sex sodomy could face two years in prison, although police say no one has been charged in recent times.

Last August, Singapore banned a gay pride event, saying it ran counter to the city-state’s public morals.

In addition, censors refused to allow an LGBT book reading event that was to have been part of the pride celebration. A human rights forum was blocked. And a photography exhibit of of gays and lesbians was closed by police hours before it was to officially open.

The Media Development Authority balked at a book by author Ng Yi-Sheng about a young man’s fictional sexual adventures with older men including military officers and government officials.

The authority said that the book went beyond good taste and decency and disparaged public officers.

The human rights forum was to have featured Douglas Sanders, a professor emeritus in law at the University of British Columbia, Canada, and Thailand’s Chulalongkorn University.

The forum, titled “Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia,” was deemed contrary to public interest.

The censorship board ordered the photo exhibition closed because it showed photos of gay men and women kissing. The board said that the show violated Singapore law because it promoted “a homosexual lifestyle.”

Earlier this year, the government fined two television stations that showed gay content.

One aired an episode of a home and decor series called “Find and Design” that featured a gay couple wanting to transform their game room into a new nursery for their adopted baby.

The other ran a commercial that showed two lesbians kissing.

ST: 3.1% of men who have sex with men found to be HIV-infected in landmark HIV testing project in Singapore (May 23)

3.1% of men who have sex with men found to be HIV-infected in landmark HIV testing project in Singapore

Singapore – May 23, 2008 – 3.1% of men who have sex with men (MSM) were found to be HIV-infected in a landmark project to make HIV testing more accessible to the MSM community. Nine hundred and sixty MSM volunteered for the free and anonymous testing service at MSM frequented venues, of which 30 tested positive for HIV.

This HIV prevalence among MSM is one of the lowest in the region.

The objective of the initiative was to enhance HIV awareness, encourage HIV testing and gauge the acceptability of community based HIV-testing among MSM in Singapore. The project was conducted by AfA at venues and establishments frequented by MSM between December 2007 and February 2008, using the OraQuick test.

The effort was warmly received by people who participated in the outreach. Both members of the community and business owners were quick to praise the initiative, which was titled Take the Test. Take Control.

One participant remarked "Getting an HIV test can be a scary experience, but knowing one's status is really quite a liberating experience." It was his first HIV test, as it was for 27% of those who participated in the project.

"These findings suggest that while MSM are at high-risk for HIV infection, scaled up and targeted AIDS campaigns that include clear messages emphasizing correct & consistent condom use during anal intercourse and regular HIV testing have been effective in keeping the HIV prevalence among Singaporean MSM relatively low," says Mr Daniel Tung, Action for AIDS' MSM programme director.

"However the community must not become complacent, we cannot afford to drop our guard of adopting safer sex practices and specifically 100% condom use for anal intercourse. Complacency has been the case in many other cities that have recently documented alarming increases in HIV prevalence among MSM."

In a post-campaign survey following last year's *Think Again campaign, unprotected anal sex between men was found to have been reduced by between 22-27%compared to the statistics from the Behavioural Surveillance Studies (BSS) conducted by Fridae in 2006.

In the 2006 BSS, 46.9% of MSM surveyed had an HIV test in the preceding 12 months. The proportion of recent HIV testing is a result of community efforts to raise the awareness of the risk of HIV within the MSM community. AfA is aiming for this number to hit 80% by 2011.

To emphasise the message of personal responsibility, AfA, together with gay media company Fridae.com are launching a new campaign – We Can Stop AIDS Now. The campaign focuses on individual empowerment, and shows how HIV transmission can stop today if everyone plays their role. Campaign materials can be found at venues frequented by MSM, or by logging into www.stopaidsnow. info.

Action for AIDS would like to thank the community, business owners and volunteers who participated in this important project, and the Ministry of Health for providing the funding.

The Register: How Free Press breaks the citizens' network ( May 19)

How Free Press breaks the citizens' network
By Andrew Orlowski (andrew.orlowski@theregister.co.uk)
Published Monday 19th May 2008 16:15 GMT

In 2003 the journalist Ron Suskind captured one of the quotes of the decade when he cited an unnamed Bush administration official as saying:

"When we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality, we'll act again, creating other new realities."

On the web today, "political activism" has become a virtual reality game that anyone can play, whoever you are. To succeed, a campaign need not be reality-based at all: it can generate its own fictional cause, complete with symbolic heroes and villains. Eventually the "campaigners" bump into physics, or economics, or real electors - who may have different, more urgent priorities - and the "campaign" vanishes as quickly as it appeared.

But what's interesting is the real world consequences of the virtual campaign can be the complete opposite of the campaigner's stated goals.

For example, have a look at this exchange with Ben Scott. Ben is a policy director at Free Press. The outfit describes itself as a "national, nonpartisan organisation working to reform the media". A goal is a media more responsive to citizens, and more accurate too.

So we were intrigued when it sent out a press release last week titled "Comcast and Cox Caught Blocking BitTorrent All Day, All Night". Had one of the internet's most popular applications been KO'd for millions of users? Actually, no. BitTorrent was working just fine.

So we sent a brief note to Free Press, on the basis that if it wanted a more accurate media, perhaps it shouldn't send out inaccurate press releases, hoping the media reprint the inaccuracies without question.

"Blocking implies that Bittorrent exchanges are somehow prohibited," we wrote. "In fact, Comcast's Bittorrent sessions have run faster and more smoothly as a consequence of this network management. So it's inaccurate to describe it in such indiscriminate terms."

But there was a more disturbing aspect to this careless use of the word "block". Free Press had cited a study by students at the Max Planck Institute which showed network management techniques were being used by three ISPs: Comcast, Cox and Singapore's.

Now, Singapore is not the United States. The government monitors and controls internet use, with the policy of criminalising certain kinds of behaviour. Homosexuality is illegal, for example.

So "blocking", in Singapore, means that you can't read certain things, and can't write certain things either. In 2005, the government successfully prosecuted and jailed bloggers.

Doesn't equating a repressive block on free speech with network management techniques trivialise the issue? And consequently make it harder for genuine victims of censorship to make their case? But Ben Scott couldn't see the problem. He mailed us back:

"As you'll note, we mention only Comcast and Cox and discuss the issue explicitly in the context of US government policy in the Congress and at the FCC. We do not even mention the Singapore case, so I don't think we are equating the two countries. We do not have any knowledge about Singapore telecommunications practices and could not comment publicly on them."

He also defended the use of the word "block". Comcast blocks Bittorrent in the same way as a traffic light may block your road journey; you may actually arrive at the destination quicker. It doesn't detonate an IED by your car, and force you to walk.

As we've explained before, when Bittorrent's aggressive protocol is heavily used, other applications become unusable - so the cable operator tries to keep everyone happy.

Scott defended the inaccuracy:

"I would disagree with your characterization of RST packets. This is in fact blocking by definition. It think your analogy is inapt. It would be the equivalent of traffic stops sending me back home to start driving to work all over again."

Only it doesn't.

Scott produced a few names of "experts" to back up his case. But none of these seem to grasp the distinction, either - and none have experience of building real networks, ones that don't fall over when the real people use them, doing the things people like to do. Like running Bittorrent, or making VoIP calls.

"I am not opposed to network management. I’m not opposed to throttling heavy users that are dominating congested links. I’m not opposed to congestion pricing. I’m not opposed to network tools that are used to protect security, etc. All networks use these tools. They use them today. They will use them tomorrow."

What he objected to was less than clear. But it's hard to draw up a policy when the definition of network abuse is so flexible. The press release of the day said that Comcast's actions were inexcusable, but Ben had just excused those actions in an email.
Breaking the citizen's network

But there's another more profound and disturbing aspect to a citizen's group declaring what can and can't be done with technology.

This is how I pointed it out to Scott (apologies for quoting it at length):

The internet gives citizens control over the tools of communication in quite an unprecedented way. This, obviously, threatens institutions which depend on scarcity of information for their authority. I think this is a pretty unique moment in the history of communications.

But I think I'm beginning to see the problem, and it's a classic information cascade. The "experts" tell you something you want to hear; you provide something the "experts" wouldn't otherwise have. You get "evidence of abuse". They get media prominence and social relevance. It's a dependency cycle. But is it real, or fictional?

The question you must answer is - is the network you / I / we propose one that is sustainable ? One that citizens can use as a template for the future?

In other words, would a temporary injection of RTS packets ever be permissible, or not? We'd soon find out. Joe Public goes to make a VOIP call, and then discovers that Bittorrent has grabbed all the available bandwidth and sockets. And it's completely out of his control. He can run one application or the other, but not both. We've outlawed intelligent and benign network management.

The precedent to remember is The Anarchist's Cookbook. This was lauded as the ultimate recipe book for creating disruptive stuff - like bombs. But The Anarchist's Cookbook was created at the CIA. It contained so many bogus instructions that it destroyed far more readers than intended targets. It was designed to fail.

Are you sure you're not creating a network that's designed to fail too? If the citizen's network fails - who benefits?

So far, I haven't heard a reply.

With its campaign to "Save The Internet", Free Press may achieve two goals that I fear are the opposite of what its biggest backer, George Soros, intended when he financed the outfit.

One is that it makes the job of genuine free speech activists - who work to promote cases of real repression - much harder.

The other is that it mandates a broken network as the default technical standard for citizens.

You may recall the "Stuckist Net" arguments here several years ago, when readers discussed how feasible it would be to evade lockdown technologies and create computer platforms that remained free and open. That was in the aftermath of CPRM, when it looked like Vista would be a tightly controlled system. That nightmare never came to pass, but the internet retains the ability to be a genuine "citizens' network", with even the domain name system open to alternatives.

But for the public to adopt such a system, it must offer a genuinely compelling alternative to AT&T and Comcast. It's no good advertising yourself as "citizen owned" if your offering falls over as soon as people use P2P. Similarly, selling a network with important features missing - such as VoIP - hardly makes it more attractive. You might get the odd politically-correct masochist, but Joe Public will stay away.

So in banging the drum for the virtual campaign, Free Press makes the big guys even stronger. That's an odd result for an outfit that says its goal is "to promote diverse and independent media ownership".

And a hell of a legacy to leave behind. ®

Guardian: Singapore TV fined for showing gay couple (April 25)

Singapore TV fined for showing gay couple

* Ian MacKinnon, south-east Asia correspondent
* guardian.co.uk,
* Friday April 25 2008

Even as Singapore tries to shed its straight-laced image, one facet of life remains beyond the pale: homosexuality on television.

The city state's government-owned broadcaster was fined £5,500 for airing a lifestyle programme featuring a gay couple with their adopted baby.

The state regulator, the Media Development Authority, said the January 13 episode of the home decor show, Find and Design, "normalises and promotes a gay lifestyle".

It followed the hit programme's host as he helped the gay couple transform their games room into a nursery for their new baby, which was shown in several scenes.

The presenter congratulated them on their "unconventional family setup", a breach of the free-to-air TV Code that bans shows that "promote, justify or glamorise gay lifestyles".

The offence was compounded by the fact that it was aired at 7.30am on a Sunday, deemed inappropriate as it fell within family viewing hours.

It was the second breach of the code by MediaCorp TV. Last year it was fined £1,700 for depicting a kissing scene between two lesbians in the drama series, Without a Trace.

Earlier this month the authority fined cable television operator StarHub £3,500 for screening an advert that showed two women kissing.

Homosexuality is still illegal in Singapore. But in October last year the government declared that private, consensual, adult homosexual sex would no longer be prosecuted.

However, the offence remains on the statute book and anyone convicted of "an act of gross indecency" could face up to two years in jail.

There have few prosecutions for gay sex, though the authorities have banned homosexual festivals and censored films, not wishing to be seen to condone it as a lifestyle choice.

Before 2003, homosexuals were barred from "sensitive positions" in Singapore's civil service, a provision removed by the former prime minister, Goh Chok Tong.

AFP: Singapore TV fined for gay scenes (April 25)

Singapore TV fined for gay scenes

16 hours ago

SINGAPORE (AFP) — A Singapore television channel has been fined 15,000 Singapore dollars (11,200 US) for promoting a gay lifestyle, the media regulator said.

MediaCorp TV Channel 5 was fined for an episode of a home decor series, "Find and Design", which contained several scenes of a gay couple with their baby, the Media Development Authority said in a statement issued late Thursday.

In the episode concerned MDA said the host of the show helped a gay couple transform their room into a new nursery for their adopted baby and congratulated and acknowledged them as a family unit.

The episode, which aired in January, "normalises their gay lifestyle and unconventional family setup", MDA said.

This was in breach of the code governing programmes which are available free over the air, it said. The code disallows programmes that promote, justify or glamorise gay lifestyles.

Singapore, Southeast Asia's most advanced economy, maintains strict censorship laws.

Earlier this month, MDA fined a cable television operator 10,000 dollars for broadcasting an advertisement featuring lesbian kissing.

As part of major revisions of the Penal Code approved by parliament last year, Singapore legalised oral and anal sex between heterosexual couples but retained a law that criminalises intercourse between gay men.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong favoured the retention of the law, saying Singapore remains a conservative society -- with the traditional family as its main building block -- and homosexuals cannot set the tone for the mainstream.

Abolishing the law could "send the wrong signal" and push gay activists to ask for more concessions, such as same-sex marriage and parenting, Lee said.

AFP: Singapore censors say four films banned from film festival (April 4)

Singapore censors say four films banned from film festival

Apr 4, 2008

SINGAPORE (AFP) — Four film documentaries, including one by a gay Muslim and another about terrorism, have been banned from being shown at Singapore's film festival, the censor board said Saturday.

It said the films "exceed the Film Classification Guidelines".

Board of Film Censors chairman Amy Chua said "Arabs and Terrorism" and another film, "David the Tolhildan", were "disallowed on account of their sympathetic portrayal of organisations deemed terrorist organisations by many countries."

Since independence in 1965, Singapore has grown from an underdeveloped country to an Asian economic powerhouse. But critics say this has come at a price, in the form of restrictions on freedom of speech and political activity.

According to the film festival programme, "Arabs and Terrorism" presents a dialogue between right-wing American policymakers and Middle Eastern political factions.

"David the Tolhildan" is about a Swiss man who joins the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), the festival said. The PKK, listed as a terrorist group by much of the international community, has been fighting for self-rule in southeastern Turkey.

Another rejected film, "A Jihad for Love" by gay Muslim film-maker Parvez Sharma, is about homosexual people living within Muslim communities, the festival said. In a statement, Chua said the film was disallowed because of "the sensitive nature of the subject".

Japanese documentary Bakushi, which is about bondage, also failed to get classification because it "normalises unnatural fetishes and behaviour", Chua said.

Festival officials could not be reached for comment but a notice on the its website said "A Jihad for Love" and "Arabs and Terrorism" had been "disallowed". It did not elaborate but said "Arabs and Terrorism" had been set for a sold-out screening on Saturday.

Singapore's government says the city-state has been liberalising but maintains a conservative core.

About 200 films have been classified for the festival which runs until April 14, Chua said.

Reuters: FACTBOX: Facts about Singapore, winner of Youth Olympics (Feb 21)

(Reuters) - The International Olympic Committee on Thursday awarded the first Youth Olympics for 2010 to Singapore.

Singapore beat the only other contender, Moscow, for the Games, which will have around 3,200 athletes, aged 14-18, competing in 26 sports.

Here are facts about Singapore: * The island state lies at the southern tip of the Malaysian peninsula, just one degree north of the equator, and has a surface area of just 700 square kilometers (270 square miles) -- about eight times the size of Manhattan. The total population is 4.6 million, including foreigners. Among Singaporeans, about 77 percent are ethnic Chinese, 14 percent Malay and 8 percent Indian.

* A former British colony, Singapore became a republic in 1965, when it separated from Malaysia after a two-year union. The People's Action Party has had a stranglehold on parliament and the opposition has never had more than a few seats. Singapore is one of the world's few city-states, like Monaco and Vatican City.

* Singapore is the wealthiest nation in Asia ex-Japan, with a 2006 Gross Domestic Product of about $29,000 per capita, on par with G-7 member Italy. About 85 percent of its citizens own their own government-built apartment. The city is known for cleanliness, tropical greenery, and a low crime rate.

* Singapore's economy is driven by electronics manufacturing, financial services, and oil refining. The republic has the world's busiest port in terms of shipping tonnage and the world's largest container trans-shipment centre. In a bid to fight competition from low-cost China, Singapore is trying to build up new industries such as biotech and tourism.

* Singapore is famous for its tight social controls and restrictions on the sale of chewing gum. Homosexuality is illegal (but tolerated) and pornography is banned. Demonstrations are illegal, while public speaking and gatherings of more than four people require a permit. Reporters Without Borders' 2007 press freedom index ranked Singapore 141st out of 169 countries, after Azerbajian and Sudan, reflecting restrictions on the media and arts.

* Singapore has stiff penalties for drug use and a mandatory death penalty for drug traffickers. Singapore also practices caning for a variety of offences.

* The city-state has been trying to soften its image in recent years, with government ministers saying they want to create a "vibrant" city with more "buzz". It allowed some bars to stay open for 24 hours, permitted bar-top dancing, and held its first sex exhibition. In a bid to woo tourists and boost its image, Singapore legalized casino gambling in 2005 and is building two multi-billion-dollar casinos.

(Reporting by Singapore Newsroom)

The Morning After by Suchen Christine Lim (Dec 30)

For those who are interested, Film Formation's TV short film adaptation of the short story "The Morning After", by Suchen Christine Lim, will be telecast at the following time:

Arts Central
30 Dec 2007 (Sunday)
9.00pm
(*please check latest TV listings)

Brief plot: Divorced mom finds herself at the centre of major family changes, right at the time of her son's coming out as gay.

Readers would remember that "The Morning After" is the first story in Suchen's short story collection titled The Lies that Build a Marriage (Monsoon Books and Singapore Arts Council, 2007).

DPA: Record numbers undergoing testing for HIV in Singapore (Dec 1)

Record numbers undergoing testing for HIV in Singapore

Singapore - Nearly 6,000 people were tested for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, during the first nine months of 2007 in Singapore, a record number for the city-state, news reports said Saturday. The figure reflects the increasing options people have to be tested anonymously and quickly, health officials said.

By the end of October, there were 356 people who tested positive, one person less than the total for all of 2006, according to findings reported in The Straits Times.

More than half of those with HIV were in the late stages of infection, the Health Ministry said.

More than two-thirds of those testing positive in the first half of the year got the virus through heterosexual sex, while less than a quarter were exposed through gay sex, the report said.

Nine in 10 of the HIV cases were people aged 20 to 59.

Early testing enables HIV patients to start on medication that can help them live relatively normal lives much longer.

"Diagnosing for HIV is not difficult," Dr Roy Chan, president of Action for Aids, was quoted as saying. "The more avenues we have, the better."

He attributed delays in getting tested to the stigma still associated with the disease.

Speedy tests have become available at 100 clinics since August. More testing sites are planned.

AFP: Singapore OKs concert by US gay couple (Nov 23)

Singapore OKs concert by US gay couple

SINGAPORE (AFP) — In a rare move, Singapore has given approval for an American gay couple to perform next month as part of a concert to raise awareness of HIV/AIDS.

The Los Angeles-based Christian gay couple Jason and deMarco were barred in 2005 from performing in the city-state.

But the Media Development Authority (MDA) said it had approved a concert this time because organisers had given assurances that they aimed to highlight the HIV/AIDS issue.

"In 2005, a similar concert featuring the pop duo was disallowed because the concert was open to general members of the public," the MDA's deputy director for arts and licensing, Amy Tsang, said in a statement Thursday.

She said concert organisers have "given the assurance to MDA that the concert is targeted at the high risk groups.

"The organiser has also assured MDA that the aim of the concert is AIDS education and HIV prevention," she said.

The duo is to perform on December 13, the Today newspaper reported.

Vivian Balakrishnan, Singapore's second minister for information, communications and the arts, has said the city-state was liberalising but retained a very strong conservative core.

As part of major revisions to the Penal Code approved by parliament last month, Singapore legalised oral and anal sex between heterosexual couples but retained a law which criminalises intercourse between gay men.

Gamespot: Singapore unbans Mass Effect (Nov 16)

Singapore unbans Mass Effect
Media Development Authority has a rethink, decides girl-on-alleged-girl love is ok after all.

Yesterday news arrived that gamers in Singapore weren't going to be able to get their hands on the highly anticipated Xbox 360 sci-fi action role-playing game Mass Effect.

The game was banned in the country after the Media Development Authority objected to a scene in which the main character (if selected to be a woman) kissed and caressed an alien character of female appearance as part of a romantic subplot.

Today, however, The Straits Times is reporting that the ban has been lifted and the game has been issued an M18 rating instead.

The Board of Film Censors issued a statement saying it would be creating a games-classification system in January, and in the interim, it would be selectively using game ratings to "enable highly anticipated games to be launched in Singapore."

To date, Singapore has been the only country to ban Mass Effect, however temporarily.

EDGE Boston: Singapore Bans XBox 360 Game for Lesbian Content (Nov 15)

Singapore Bans XBox 360 Game for Lesbian Content
by Kilian Melloy
EDGE Boston Contributor
Thursday Nov 15, 2007

Gamers in Singapore won’t be seeing the new XBox 360 offering Mass Effect, it was announced Thursday. The reason: a scene showing two women in a lesbian encounter.

An AFP news item posted today cited a statement from Singapore’s Board of Film Censors, in which it was announced that because of "a scene of lesbian intimacy," the Board has determined that "the game has been disallowed" for consumption by Singapore residents.

Mass Effect is scheduled to the worldwide market next week, the AFP article said.

The statement was made by the deputy director of the Board, which operates under Singapore’s Media Development Authority. Singapore is known for its close censorship of media.

Mass Effect is not the only video game to be banned there. The statement reference precedents: a game called God of War II was barred from Singapore because of depictions of nudity, while another title, The Darkness, ran afoul of censors for its level of violent action, as well as for foul and religiously disrespectful language, the AFP article said.

The deputy director said that games for sale in Singapore are not allowed to "feature exploitative or gratuitous sex and violence, or denigrate any race or religion."

Microsoft, which manufactures the X Box gaming platform, answered AFP’s query via email, the story said.

Read the note from the US firm, "We strictly adhere to the laws, regulations and norms of the markets we operate in."

Besides its strong censorship, Singapore is known for its anti-gay legislation. Just last month, oral and anal sexual contact between heterosexuals was decriminalized, but sexual contact between gays remains illegal, AFP reported.

Kilian Melloy reviews media, conducts interviews, and writes commentary for EDGEBoston, where he also serves as Assistant Arts Editor.

AFP: Singapore bans Xbox game over lesbian scene (Nov 15)

Singapore bans Xbox game over lesbian scene

SINGAPORE (AFP) — Singapore has banned the sale of an Xbox video game that features an intimate scene between two female characters, a statement received Thursday said.

The "Mass Effect" game, a futuristic space adventure, contains "a scene of lesbian intimacy... as such the game has been disallowed," the deputy director of the Board of Film Censors said in the statement.

The board is part of the Media Development Authority (MDA), Singapore's media watchdog.

Under local guidelines, video games sold in Singapore cannot "feature exploitative or gratuitous sex and violence, or denigrate any race or religion," the official said.

"Mass Effect" is to be launched globally next week.

US software giant Microsoft, maker of the Xbox gaming console, said it respected the media watchdog's action.

"We strictly adhere to the laws, regulations and norms of the markets we operate in," the company said in an e-mail reply to AFP.

MDA said a new video games classification system to be introduced next year could allow titles such as "Mass Effect" to be passed and classified appropriately.

Singapore is Southeast Asia's most advanced economy but the government maintains strict censorship laws.

Earlier this year the city-state banned two other video games, "God of War II" for nudity and "The Darkness" for excessive violence and religiously offensive expletives, the statement said.

Vivian Balakrishnan, Singapore's second minister for information, communications and the arts, has said the city-state was liberalising but retained a very strong conservative core.

As part of major revisions to the Penal Code approved by parliament last month, Singapore legalised oral and anal sex between heterosexual couples but retained a law which criminalises intercourse between gay men.

DPA: Irate gamers blast banning of game with same-sex love scene (Nov 15)

Irate gamers blast banning of game with same-sex love scene

Nov 15, 2007, 2:28 GMT

Singapore - Irate gamers criticized Singapore's censors Thursday for banning a highly anticipated space adventure game containing a sex scene between a human woman and a female alien.

The game, called Mass Effect, is the first from Microsoft to be prohibited in the city-state. It was to be launched next week.

Microsoft submitted Mass Effect last week to the Media Development Authority (MDA) as part of the routine procedure to get games distributed.

'We respect MDA's decision,' a company spokesman said.

The scene triggering the ban depicts the human-alien duo in suggestive positions and ends with the alien saying, 'By the Gods, that was incredible, Commander.'

Homosexual scenes in other media such as films are rarely allowed and shown only if they do not promote a gay lifestyle.

Germaine Ong, deputy editor of a local website, told The Straits Times that she has received many complaints from gamers.

'Banning the game because of one scene has caused a huge backlash from gamers, and I don't think it is worth it,' she was quoted as saying.

'People will just try to buy it from overseas sites or download from illegal sites, which is a step backward for us.'

Two other games were banned in the past, one for nudity and the other for excessive violence and religiously offensive expletives.

© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

ST Online Forum: SMU students' launch of booklet on gays: We need to be more open minded (Nov 6)

Nov 6, 2007
SMU students' launch of booklet on gays: We need to be more open-minded

I AM writing in reply to Miss Low Xiang Jun's article, 'Allowing SMU students to launch booklet, event on gays sends wrong message' (Online forum, Nov 3).

Miss Low wrote to disapprove the launching of a booklet, done as a project by SMU first-year students, that discussed the discrimination faced by homosexual youths in Singapore. She said that the book launch condones an alternative lifestyle and will create a negative impression on the values of SMU students.

I am a conservative but I must disagree with her words.

I strongly believe that a university should be an environment within which any perspective and idea can be discussed. In that setting, our learned faculty will provide necessary guidance. For university students, this is the time to learn about the world and be exposed to new ideas and thoughts. We should understand that there are individuals within our society that pursue an alternative lifestyle.

The project was a booklet that sought to discuss the issue of homosexual prejudice as well as to facilitate understanding. It was not a parade that cajoled students into turning gay.

Being in a conservative society does not mean that we should isolate ourselves from what some may believe to be negative influences. While we must hold fast to our values, we do not gain from being insulated.

The liberality in United States colleges is not something granted to its students. It is a culture of tolerance born from a society that has grown and learned from a history of prejudice and racial segregation. I believe that this culture is a mark of strong values and ethics and is not an unwholesome symptom of a decayed moral compass. We are entitled to our views as conservatives but as members of a plural society, we must seek to understand others who may hold differing beliefs on sexuality, religion, politics, philosophy and so on. Let us come together and agree to disagree.

Seeking to understand the people we may disagree with draws the fine line between tolerance and ignorance. I believe that SMU students, being socially responsible citizens and future leaders, understand that tolerance is a necessary ingredient for harmony and peace. I also believe that we will continue to uphold this value with pride.

Ahmad Firdaus Daud
President
SMU Students' Association
Singapore Management University

ST Online Forum: Dictating to university students what views they should take insults their intelligence (Nov 6)

Nov 6, 2007
Dictating to university students what views they should take insults their intelligence

MISS Low Xiang Jun, in her online letter, had condemned SMU's decision to allow their students to publish a booklet and hold an event on gays.

I take particular exception to her view on how SMU should treat its students. She appears to imply that universities should impart 'right values' and 'wholesome ideals' and suppress those to the contrary, and that being 'socially responsible' implies conforming with the views of the majority of society.

Universities are institutions that should first and foremost emphasise intellectual and moral integrity. To dictate to university students what views they should take and what values they should hold not only undermines the process of intellectual and moral discovery, but also insults the maturity and the intelligence of the top 25 per
cent of our school cohort.

I have no doubt that the SMU students in this case are acting on their intellectual and moral conscience, which is the responsibility of citizens in a democracy. Singapore is a democracy and students, like all citizens, have the right to express their views, regardless of what the opinion of the majority may be. Going by her flawed argument, the unpopular but necessary policies of the Government such as CPF reform would be 'socially irresponsible'.

Indeed, instead of dismissing divergent viewpoints from our own, we should critically consider their merits and demerits and seek to question our own assumptions, and through that process form more enlightened and considered conclusions. And the ability to do so is exactly what a university education should impart.

Matthias Yong Peng Chew
Cambridge, UK

ST Online Forum: Homosexuals should know that change is possible (Nov 6)

Nov 6, 2007
Homosexuals should know that change is possible

I REFER to the letter, 'SMU students launch booklet, event on gays' (ST, Oct 31), where a booklet containing stories of young gays, lesbians and bisexuals was highlighted. The sadness and desperation portrayed by 'Fairus' in one of the stories has prompted me to respond.

While Mr Leonard Ng encourages more gays and lesbians to come out, he fails to understand that some of them, like Fairus, just do not want to remain gay. As someone who has had my fair share of sexual confusion, I fully empathise with Fairus and those like him, who do not want to remain gay, lesbian or bisexual.

I want to tell Fairus, and others like him, that change is possible for homosexuals. However, the degree of change depends on the motivation of the one seeking help, and the support that is given to him/her.

In Singapore, recovery support groups, such as CHOICES, do exist to help homosexuals and lesbians in overcoming unwanted sexual desires and behaviour. Although no one chooses to be a homosexual, one can certainly choose not to remain one. Unfortunately, very few people know that change is possible, but it is.

Shawn Tay Liam Yaw

ST Online Forum: Families and gays must keep an open mind (Nov 6)

Nov 6, 2007
Families and gays must keep an open mind

IN LIGHT of the recent debate over Singapore's gay sex laws, I have this much to say.

I myself have been gay for as long as I can remember. From the moment I became aware of my sexual urges, they had always been directed towards other males.

I never faced much direct oppression for my sexuality. My very much Christian family, instead of disowning or forcing change on me when I came out to them, were gentle and supportive, as they realised the extremely difficult and unjust position I was in.

Sin or not aside, I could face much prejudice from the public, who treated homosexuals like serial killers. My family understood that being homosexual did not make me one-dimensional. I was still everything else I was before sexuality ever entered the picture: the winner of a school science quiz, the teachers' pet, the artist, their eldest son.

I have gradually come to understand that, objectively, being gay may not be a permanent condition in me. But I also realise change does not come overnight. My family taught me to keep an open mind about everything, no matter what it was. I have a wonderful boyfriend and the both of us have reached mutual understandings with both our families. We both intend to stay together, but we are open enough to change that should time and tide prove otherwise, then we shall gladly pursue heterosexual relationships and remain good friends.

I am not asking for a legalisation of gay sex laws, or for complete freedom as a homosexual to do whatever I want. I merely ask for the majority to uphold the family values they so fiercely defended and love their homosexual members as any other member of the family.

Diseases are a product of promiscuity, not homosexuality. Gays do not deserve hate (or hell) any more than the average person. It's not a 'special' sin in any way. If God were to judge humanity the way we judge one another, we're all doomed, straight or gay. Do not force change either; gently coax it out and allow it to develop naturally.

I also, in turn, suggest to other homosexuals that they re-examine themselves and keep an open mind about their sexuality. Do not be so stubborn and shut to the prospect of change. If we muse to ourselves that straight people can be converted, so it is vice-versa as well.

Kevin Lu Zixian

Queery.com: Government Does Not Endorse Gay Lifestyle: Singapore Minister (Nov 5)

Government Does Not Endorse Gay Lifestyle: Singapore Minister

Singapore’s government does not want to endorse a homosexual lifestyle, a senior cabinet minister said Monday, as parliament debated a rare petition to repeal a law that criminalises gay sex.

A member of parliament filed the petition to repeal the relevant part of the Penal Code on the grounds that it is discriminatory and violates constitutional safeguards on equal rights.

It was the first time in more than two decades that parliament had heard a petition, local radio reported, and coincided with debate on the most extensive amendments to the city-state’s Penal Code in 22 years.

The MP, Siew Kum Hong, who is not gay, said the government’s proposed changes would allow anal and oral sex between two consenting heterosexual adults.

However refusing to decriminalise the same acts between homosexual and bisexual men is discrimination, said Siew, who filed the petition after an online campaign to repeal the section.

Arguing for the section to be retained, Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs, Ho Peng Kee, said Singapore remains a largely conservative society.

"While homosexuals have a place in society... repealing section 377A will be contentious and may send a wrong signal that the government is encouraging and endorsing the homosexual lifestyle as part of our mainstream way of life," Ho said.

Public feedback on the issue had been "emotional, divided and strongly expressed," he said, but most people wanted to retain the section.

"The majority find homosexual behaviour offensive and unacceptable," Ho added," noting that police nevertheless have been lenient in implementing the law.

However, Siew said private, consensual sexual acts between adult males would "not impact on the safety and security of society."

"Now is the time, not to do the pragmatic or easy thing, but to do the right thing," he said.

Stuart Koe, chief executive of the Asian gay portal, Fridae.com, and one of the people behind the petition, said that for gays in Singapore, Section 377A has been like "a gun pointed to their heads."

Singapore celebrities joined the campaign to repeal the anti-gay sex section by appearing in a rap video posted on the YouTube website.

ST: Debate on Homosexuality: It's not a big deal for most Singaporeans (Nov 3)

Nov 3, 2007
DEBATE ON HOMOSEXUALITY
It's not a big deal for most Singaporeans
By Andy Ho

IN THE recent debate over the decriminalisation of homosexual sodomy, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong observed, in passing, that HDB heartlanders weren't too concerned about the issue.

Mr Jeffrey Tan, a teaching fellow in the China division at the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), nuances the picture somewhat.

First, there is the Chinese intelligentsia here who are 'quite pro-gay', he said. These are the Nantah graduates and those who have gone to Taiwan or China to study, whose world views are coloured by their media and literature, which they continue to consume and which have become very libertarian in the 1990s in so far as same sex issues are concerned.

Secondly, there are non-cosmopolitan Chinese here who are non-confrontational when it comes to sexuality because their culture is suffused with Taoist and Buddhist values, wherein there is no concept of God or sin.

They would be like their compatriots in China and Taiwan, where 'most people do not find same sex attraction sinful or deserving of punishment, even when expressed physically', according to Dr Wu Cuncun who teaches at the University of New England in Australia.

Some might feel sad that a son or daughter might not grow up like 'other boys and girls', but the behaviour would not lead to disgust or them being disowned - unless someone deliberately set out to offend, she added.

Sexuality in traditional Chinese culture was regarded as part of life and not as something that spoke to some essence in one's personality. It did not define one's identity in society. That is, no one thought of a male who had sex with another as a homosexual - in the way Western activists push gay identity politics today, pitting
conservatives against liberals today.

Dr Wu said: 'In China, historically, homoeroticism had little to do with being conservative or liberal. Instead, standards of conduct were based on a world view encompassing the complementary forces of yin and yang.

'But yin and yang were never absolutely separate, so women and men fulfilled complementary roles and shared complementary places,' she added. Thus, there was no sense of sin if a man found another 'erotically attractive'. Such a male was just seen to be indulging in one possible form of sexuality.

Many emperors engaged in sex with both women and men, Dr Wu noted. Yet this guiltless relaxation towards same sex eroticism - famously depicted in Hongloumeng or Dream of the Red Chamber, one of the four great classics in pre-modern Chinese fiction - was largely something to be found within the upper classes. These dominated and used the
lower classes in the form of compliant bodies, male or female, for purposes both sexual and nonsexual.

Outside of the aristocracy and literati, for much of Chinese history, a man of commoner status was 'probably more likely to offend another man if he was incautious in approaching him with erotic intentions, and such a situation would usually be bereft of...romance', said Dr Mark Stevenson of Victoria University in Australia .

Yet, by the 19th century, more than any other time in Chinese history,in Beijing's world of theatre, at least, both young and old males from outside the scholar-official class, particularly merchants, were indulging in sex with young men quite openly.

Dr Stevenson thought that 'so many men felt unashamed about (this because there was) no Godhead in Chinese culture, so that the population as a whole was relatively free of hang-ups' around questions of sin in the forms that sexuality took.

Dr Wu agreed: 'In Chinese moral thought there is an absence of concern with God or sin.' Perhaps our immigrant forefathers brought with them this worldview which continues to animate the HDB heartlander.

In practice, everyone in the family knows about the homosexual son but no one talks about it. Mr Tan observed: 'In fact, it is the gays who are left behind to take care of ageing parents as their siblings get married and move out to start their own families.'

In such cases, it is 'very common in Singapore', Mr Tan said anecdotally, for gays to move in and stay with their boyfriends and their aged parents, who just accept the whole deal quietly.

This is reminiscent of Lee Ang's 1993 movie, The Wedding Banquet, in which a gay Chinese man who has a live-in white boyfriend fakes a wedding with a woman friend to please his ageing parents. Later on he 'outs' himself to his mother but not his father, who realises quietly that his son is homosexual.

The old man later invites his son's white boyfriend to go with him for a private stroll, during which he gives him an angbao as a gesture of accepting him as his 'child-in-law'.

This is perhaps the practical way in which many heartlanders deal with homosexuality in the family (which would be statistically rare at any rate) - a 'don't ask, don't tell; don't reject but don't promote' approach.

Finally, there are the heartlanders who are Christianised who reject homosexuality in the family vigorously, Mr Tan observed. These are the 'horror stories, where the gay son is hauled off to church to be exorcised and so on', he said.

Linking Christianisation to colonialism, Mr Tan lays it all down at the feet of the British, who brought in Section 377A of the Penal Code anyway. Dr Wu agrees that it is more likely to be Singapore's colonial legacy that explains any anti-gay attitude that may be found here.

But since there are more non-Christians than Christians in Singapore in general, the non- confrontational model is probably more widespread. For these folks, rice bowl concerns are paramount, added Mr Tan, which is why 'they don't give two hoots' for (any confrontation over) homosexuality.

andyho@sph.com.sg