Awareness of gay issues in S'pore: A political perspective
-
don't think im missing anything. the rationale behind its removal or rather, its removal from the "need to treat" list in the DSMV is because they have enuf evidence to believe its due to nature, and that where sexuality is concerned, that is not an abnormality that has to be cured. it wasn't simply removed because they decided its due to nature and not nuture. afterall, like he himself pointed out, some biologically influenced psychatric diseases still need to be treated.Originally posted by ben1xy:heng .. with all due respect hor... u r missing his point
how is that supposed to be missing the point? -
depression.Originally posted by HENG@:don't think im missing anything. the rationale behind its removal or rather, its removal from the "need to treat" list in the DSMV is because they have enuf evidence to believe its due to nature, and that where sexuality is concerned, that is not an abnormality that has to be cured. it wasn't simply removed because they decided its due to nature and not nuture. afterall, like he himself pointed out, some biologically influenced psychatric diseases still need to be treated.
how is that supposed to be missing the point?
it can be caused by stress, etc
those are external
but depression is a psychological illness nevertheless ... thankfully that can be cured -
Actually, there are some "protect the family-type" organizations in the US who believe that homosexuality can be cured. One website lists ten warning signs that a child would turn out gay so that parents can send them to their treatment facilities. Very funny or disturbing. Anyway, the implication is that homosexuality is an illness. But is it really? I admit depression is harmful to the person but being gay? How is that actually harmful?Originally posted by ben1xy:but depression is a psychological illness nevertheless ... thankfully that can be cured
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/08/14/what_makes_people_gay/?page=1
It's an article that shows that scientific evidence is clearly pointing towards the biological difference as the cause of being gay.
However, I don't think the issue would resolve even if there is concrete evidence. This is afterall a moral issue. Just because scientists find that a certain biological aspect that increases violence in a person, doesn't justify that person being violent. Or that a person that has a genetic eating disorder shouldn't be cured. This is of course assuming that being gay is a bad thing.
I don't think we can choose to be homosexual. I certainly can't apply my human reasoning and logical capabilities to decide whether I love this girl or not. It's a natural feeling. But what separates humans from animals is that we are able to control these feelings. But is there really a need to in this case?
Personally, I think that this moral issue should be judged on whether homosexuality has a harmful effect on society and certainly not based on texts from a book which people tend to pick and choose from anyway... -
A way to be accepted
Everybody kows smoking is wrong.But we accept smokers.Smokers don't argue there is no right or wrong about smoking.They also don't argue smokers are born.They don't form an association to fight for their rghts.Yet society accept smokers despite their wrong habbit.Homosexuals,I think you all can learn from them. -
i agree with u ... esp. the moral issue predicameny. the debate could stretch for eons and we will still find no conclusionOriginally posted by kheldorin:http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/08/14/what_makes_people_gay/?page=1
It's an article that shows that scientific evidence is clearly pointing towards the biological difference as the cause of being gay.
However, I don't think the issue would resolve even if there is concrete evidence. This is afterall a moral issue. Just because scientists find that a certain biological aspect that increases violence in a person, doesn't justify that person being violent. Or that a person that has a genetic eating disorder shouldn't be cured. This is of course assuming that being gay is a bad thing.
I don't think we can choose to be homosexual. I certainly can't apply my human reasoning and logical capabilities to decide whether I love this girl or not. It's a natural feeling. But what separates humans from animals is that we are able to control these feelings. But is there really a need to in this case?
Personally, I think that this moral issue should be judged on whether homosexuality has a harmful effect on society and certainly not based on texts from a book which people tend to pick and choose from anyway... -
Originally posted by PRP:
the fundamental fallacy of your argument is that, u can choose to smoke but u don't choose to be gay. Don't make yourself a presumptuous fool by issuing that statement.
[b]A way to be accepted
Everybody kows smoking is wrong.But we accept smokers.Smokers don't argue there is no right or wrong about smoking.They also don't argue smokers are born.They don't form an association to fight for their rghts.Yet society accept smokers despite their wrong habbit.Homosexuals,I think you all can learn from them.[/b] -
and homosexuality is internal. thus i think u would do well to stop linking up 2 comparisms which do not match up, neither in context, nor in its impacts or effects.Originally posted by ben1xy:depression.
it can be caused by stress, etc
those are external
but depression is a psychological illness nevertheless ... thankfully that can be cured
i think kheldorin has put it as precisely as it can get. -
i have to ask, if there is truely a harmful effect on society? There will never be a case when all humans are gay. Our diversity amongst our genes see to that. So there is no need to worry about humans dying out due to non reproduction. If anything in fact, we have to worry about humans increasing at a rate which will one day be no longer sustainable by our planet's resources. This homosexuality trait in certain humans seem to be nature's way of staving off that unwelcome and inevitable fate.Originally posted by kheldorin:Actually, there are some "protect the family-type" organizations in the US who believe that homosexuality can be cured. One website lists ten warning signs that a child would turn out gay so that parents can send them to their treatment facilities. Very funny or disturbing. Anyway, the implication is that homosexuality is an illness. But is it really? I admit depression is harmful to the person but being gay? How is that actually harmful?
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/08/14/what_makes_people_gay/?page=1
It's an article that shows that scientific evidence is clearly pointing towards the biological difference as the cause of being gay.
However, I don't think the issue would resolve even if there is concrete evidence. This is afterall a moral issue. Just because scientists find that a certain biological aspect that increases violence in a person, doesn't justify that person being violent. Or that a person that has a genetic eating disorder shouldn't be cured. This is of course assuming that being gay is a bad thing.
I don't think we can choose to be homosexual. I certainly can't apply my human reasoning and logical capabilities to decide whether I love this girl or not. It's a natural feeling. But what separates humans from animals is that we are able to control these feelings. But is there really a need to in this case?
Personally, I think that this moral issue should be judged on whether homosexuality has a harmful effect on society and certainly not based on texts from a book which people tend to pick and choose from anyway... -
obesity is a greater problem that homosexuality..why not bash fat people?
-
hear hearOriginally posted by vito_corleone:obesity is a greater problem that homosexuality..why not bash fat people? -
Hi Kheldorin, thank you for your interesting post. I will address your concerns in 2 segments.Originally posted by kheldorin:Actually, there are some "protect the family-type" organizations in the US who believe that homosexuality can be cured. One website lists ten warning signs that a child would turn out gay so that parents can send them to their treatment facilities. Very funny or disturbing. Anyway, the implication is that homosexuality is an illness. But is it really? I admit depression is harmful to the person but being gay? How is that actually harmful?
How does being gay harmful to oneself?
In contrary to what the "gays can be cured" org proposed, the gays under treatment will be in greater harm if he forces himself to be straight. Since it has been shown that reparative therapy doesn't work (from many many health organisations whose professional ethics dictate them to adopt a position that well help others), it becomes dangerous if gays on the one hand, hate gays (internalised hatred). But on the other hand, can't remove their attraction towards the same gender. You see the dilemma there. -
An article about the so-called "reparative therapy"
washingtonpost.com
Vowing to Set the World Straight
Proponents of Reparative Therapy Say They Can Help Gay Patients
Become Heterosexual. Experts Call That a Prescription for Harm
By Sandra G. Boodman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 16, 2005; HE01
Nicholas Cavnar said he tried everything he could think of in his 30-
year quest to become heterosexual. He spent years in therapy, paying
thousands of dollars for treatment designed to overcome his
homosexuality. He faithfully attended meetings of Christian self-help
groups for "strugglers." He married and fathered three children, a
metamorphosis featured on the cover of a Catholic magazine.
Yet every day, the 54-year-old Washington publishing executive
recalled, he had to suppress his deepest feelings about who he really
was -- emotions he thought he had left behind at 20 when, to the
delight of his devout family, he abruptly renounced his openly gay
life in San Francisco.
Three years ago, Cavnar said, after soul-searching prompted by the
Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, he decided his days of "white-knuckling
it" were over. "I told my wife I couldn't not be gay anymore,"
recalled Cavnar. His biggest regret, he said, was the devastating
impact ending their 26-year marriage had on the woman who had
struggled with him.
Cavnar's odyssey -- from gay to ex-gay to ex-ex-gay -- is
inextricably linked to his long involvement in reparative therapy, a
controversial form of psychotherapy aimed at making gays straight.
While its supporters cite success stories from their clinical
practices as well as a recent and much debated study showing that
conversion therapy can work, the treatment is opposed by virtually
every medical and mental health organization, including the American
Medical Association, the U.S. Surgeon General and the American
Psychiatric Association (APA), which removed homosexuality from its
list of mental disorders in 1973.
Until the early 1990s the treatment, also known as reorientation
therapy, was largely relegated to religious groups or to the fringes
of mental health. Mainstream therapists have been taught to help
patients distressed about their homosexuality work toward self-
acceptance, to overcome the internalized homophobia thought to be the
cause of much emotional turmoil.
Reparative therapists reject the views held by an overwhelming
majority of mental health practitioners. They regard homosexuality as
a pathological preference forged in the crucible of a troubled
childhood and not, as most scientists believe, an inborn orientation
significantly influenced by biological factors such as genetics and
exposure to hormones in the womb.
"I don't think sexual orientation is genetically determined, but like
a lot of preferences we have in life is a complicated and
idiosyncratic mix of temperament and experience," said Warren
Throckmorton, a supporter of reparative therapy who is an associate
professor of psychology at Grove City College in Pennsylvania and
former president of the American Mental Health Counselors
Association. "The other reason I think change is possible is that
I've worked with a lot of clients who've done it."
In the past decade, the growing influence of religious conservatives
and the national debate over gay rights, especially gay marriage, has
revived interest in the therapy, significantly raising its public
profile, spawning new practitioners and igniting debate about a
matter that had been considered settled, supporters and critics agree.
"Reparative therapy is the laetrile of mental health," said New York
psychiatrist Jack Drescher, referring to the quack cancer cure banned
in the United States in the 1970s.
To gay rights activist Wayne R. Besen, the author of "Anything But
Straight," a 2003 book that tracks the history of ex-gay groups, the
therapy is "a kinder, gentler form of homophobia. The argument has
shifted from 'You're harming society' to 'You're harming
yourselves.' " -
The Campaign
Web sites with names like "inqueery" and "freetobeme" have sprung up,
directing confused teenagers and frantic parents to reparative
counselors. Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), a
national group headquartered in Fairfax County, has sponsored highway
billboards in Rockville and Richmond that state "Ex-Gays Prove That
Change Is Possible."
PFOX, founded seven years ago to counter PFLAG -- Parents, Families
and Friends of Lesbians and Gays -- was active in the recent battle
over sex education in Montgomery County. Central to the dispute was
the way homosexuality would be taught.
As a result of a lawsuit, PFOX has won a seat on the board that will
help rewrite the health curriculum, and its officials say they plan
to push for inclusion of reparative therapy.
Reparative therapists have their own organization, the 1,000-member
California-based National Association for Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH), founded in 1992. Its leaders often appear
at "Love Won Out" workshops that draw more than 1,000 participants
and are sponsored by Focus on the Family, a group founded by
conservative psychologist James Dobson, a staunch opponent of gay
rights who has ties to the Bush administration.
Mental health experts are alarmed by the resurgence of a treatment
they say has been discredited.
In the view of Drescher, chair of the APA's committee on gay, lesbian
and bisexual issues, reparative therapy's ascendance resembles the
resurrection of creationism, a religious belief at odds with science
that has been rechristened with the more scientific-sounding
name "intelligent design."
"Many people who try this treatment tend to be desperate, very
unhappy and don't know other gay people," said Drescher, who has
treated about a dozen men who previously underwent conversion
therapy. (Men are far more likely than women to receive the
treatment.)
"I see people who've been very hurt by this," said Drescher, who said
some people do manage to temporarily change their behavior, often by
becoming celibate, but not their sexual orientation. "They spend
years trying to change and are told they aren't trying hard enough."
Catherine Wulfensmith, 46, a family therapist in Monrovia, Calif.,
said she attempted suicide several times after reparative therapy
failed to alter her attraction to women. "I bought it hook, line and
sinker," she said. "If you don't change, what are you left with?"
The 'Fix'
Reparative therapy typically involves once- or twice-weekly
psychotherapy sessions lasting a minimum of two years; it may be
covered by insurance if it is listed as being for a "sexual disorder
not otherwise specified." Patients are encouraged to delve into their
childhood relationships, especially with the same-sex parent; to
cultivate straight friends and "gender-appropriate" activities such
as sports or sewing; and to avoid anything, or anyone, gay. Prayer is
often recommended.
NARTH co-founder Joseph Nicolosi, a clinical psychologist in Encino,
Calif., who coined the term reparative therapy and is one of its
leading practitioners, emphatically rejects the view that it is
ineffective and potentially damaging. He points to a study published
in 2003 by Columbia University psychiatrist Robert L. Spitzer which
found that therapy seemed to work for some highly motivated patients.
"It can only be damaging if the agenda of the therapist supersedes
that of the patient," said Nicolosi, who added that it should never
be forced on unwilling participants.
Although no rigorous outcome studies have been published, Nicolosi
estimates that one-third of patients treated at the Thomas Aquinas
Psychological Clinic, of which he is founding director,
experience "significant improvement -- they understand their
homosexuality and have some sense of control" but may still have gay
sex. Another third, he said, are "cured": They don't have gay sex and
the intensity and frequency of their same-sex desires is diminished,
but not necessarily gone. The other third fail to change.
Hector Roybal, a 52-year-old financial consultant in Los Angeles,
spent four years in intensive treatment with Nicolosi, who considers
him to be cured. Roybal concurs, but said he still sometimes
struggles with sexual feelings for men, although he has remained
faithful to his wife, the only woman to whom he says he feels
physically attracted.
"I saw myself as someone who had a problem with homosexuality but was
meant to be straight," said Roybal, who, like Nicolosi, is a
conservative Catholic. "This is about making a choice."
Although reparative therapists sometimes differ about the causes of
homosexuality, they are united in saying it is not inborn and it is
never normal.
Nicolosi maintains it is the result of a defective bond with the same-
sex parent. Boys who feel rejected by their fathers develop
a "defensive detachment" -- they reject them and identify with their
mothers and other females. Because opposites attract, he theorizes,
they are sexually drawn to men, even though what they are searching
for is their lost masculinity. Once they find it, he said, their
attraction to women will follow, although lifetime vigilance is
required to avoid slipping.
Even though reparative therapists say they support "free choice,"
they see nothing contradictory in their view that homosexuality is
pathological. Nor do they regard as incongruent their refusal to work
with a straight or bisexual client who thinks he or she might be gay.
In their view, homosexuals are doomed to miserable, unhealthy lives.
"We say to patients, 'Your true self is heterosexual,' " Nicolosi
said. He said he tells male patients, "Look at your body: It was
designed to fit a woman, not a man." -
The Study
Robert Spitzer sounds weary when discussing the study published two
years ago in the Archives of Sexual Behavior that earned him the
enmity of many of his colleagues and the admiration of reparative
therapists.
Spitzer's study has special resonance: In 1973 he was the driving
force behind the removal of homosexuality from psychiatry's
diagnostic manual.
Thirty years later, he said, he decided to test the widespread
hypothesis that reparative therapy never worked. "I like to challenge
conventional notions," he explained.
Despite the active cooperation of NARTH and ex-gay religious groups,
Spitzer said it took him more than 16 months to recruit 200 people
who had undergone treatment. He conducted 45-minute telephone
interviews and found that 66 percent of 143 men and 44 percent of 57
women, all of whom Spitzer described as "highly motivated" and almost
all of whom were "extraordinarily religious," had achieved "good
heterosexual function" lasting at least five years. They were in a
committed relationship, had satisfying heterosexual sex at least
monthly and said they were rarely or never bothered by homosexual
feelings.
In an accompanying commentary, former APA president Lawrence
Hartmann, a professor at Harvard Medical School, called Spitzer's
study "too flawed to publish." Hartmann noted the study was
retrospective, that it lacked controls or independent measurements,
and was based entirely on self-reports by people who were motivated
to say they had changed because of their affiliation with ex-gay or
anti-gay groups.
While Nicolosi and others frequently cite the study as proof
reparative therapy works, Spitzer said his results have been
misrepresented. "It bothers me to be their knight in shining armor
because on every social issue I totally disagree with the Christian
right," he said.
"What they don't mention is that change is pretty rare," he added,
noting that the subjects of his study were not representative of the
general population because they were considerably more religious.
And Spitzer calls "totally absurd" the twin hypotheses that everyone
is born straight and that homosexuality is a choice.
Drescher agrees. "There are probably a small number of people with
some flexibility in their sexual identity who can change," he
said. "Out of the hundreds of gay men I've treated, I've had one." · -
What I hope to highlight is this paragraph:
Although no rigorous outcome studies have been published, Nicolosi
estimates that one-third of patients treated at the Thomas Aquinas
Psychological Clinic, of which he is founding director,
experience "significant improvement -- they understand their
homosexuality and have some sense of control" but may still have gay
sex. Another third, he said, are "cured": They don't have gay sex and
the intensity and frequency of their same-sex desires is diminished,
but not necessarily gone. The other third fail to change.
Even for someone who had huge beliefs in reparative studies. He can have only:
1) 33.3% totally unchanged
2) 33.3% "significant improvement but still have gay sex" I find this statement hilarious. It's an oxymoron.
3) 33.3% diminishes in same-sex desires. Err, due to the fall in sex drive as one ages? We all know that 25 year-old is the peak in sex drive when testesterone level is the highest. But then, these people do not change in the gender category in which they feel attracted to. So is this a real change? Can you change from sexually aroused by one gender to the other? NO! -
I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. Let's examine moral issues (without a religious undertone). The following is the most well-known moral development theory by Kohlberg:Originally posted by kheldorin:Personally, I think that this moral issue should be judged on whether homosexuality has a harmful effect on society and certainly not based on texts from a book which people tend to pick and choose from anyway...
Kohlberg's stages of moral development were developed by Lawrence Kohlberg to explain the development of moral reasoning. He created it while at University of Chicago when becoming fascinated with children's reactions to moral dilemmas. He wrote his doctoral dissertation there in 1958, outlining what is now his stages of moral development.
Kohlberg's theory holds that moral reasoning, which he thought to be the basis for ethical behavior, has developmental stages. Building upon Jean Piaget's previous work, he concluded that there are six identifiable stages of moral development. Later his model was revised and reduced to five stages given there was a lack reponses in studies owning to a clear boundary of the last stage of moral development.
Stages
Kohlberg's stages were broken into 3 different levels, pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional. According to his model it is not possible to regress backwards in stages. It is also not possible to 'jump' stages; each stage provides new perspective and is "more comprehensive, differentiated and integrated than its predecessors."
Other models resemble Kohlberg's, including James Fowler's six stages of faith and Jane Loevinger's nine stages of ego development.
Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation
2. Self-interest orientation
Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity
(a.k.a. The good boy/good girl attitude)
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation
(a.k.a. Law and order morality)
Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles
(a.k.a. Principled conscience)
to be continued... -
Pre-Conventional
The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners in the pre-conventional level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stage of moral development.
Stage one, individuals focus on the direct consequences that their actions will have for themselves. For example, they think that an action is morally wrong if the person who commits it gets punished.
Stage two espouses the what's in it for me position; right behavior being defined by what is in one's own best interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it might further one's own interests, such as "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours." Concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect in stage two.
[edit]
Conventional
The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. Persons who reason in a conventional way judge the morality of actions by comparing these actions to social rules and expectations.
The conventional level consists of stages three and four of moral development.
In Stage three, individuals whose moral reasoning is in stage three seek approval from other people. They try to be a good boy or good girl having learned that there is inherent value in doing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person's relationships.
For Stage four, it is important to obey the laws and social conventions because of its importance to maintaining society. Moral reasoning in stage four is thus beyond the need for approval exhibited in stage three.
[edit]
Post-Conventional
The post-conventional level consists of stages five and six of moral development.
In Stage five, persons have certain principles to which they may attach more value than laws, such as human rights or social justice. In this reasoning, actions are wrong if they violate these ethical principles. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than dictums, and must be changed when necessary (provided there is agreement). By this reasoning laws that do not promote general social welfare, should be changed. Democratic governments are ostensibly based on Stage five reasoning.
In Stage six, moral reasoning is based on the use of abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. One way to do this is by imagining oneself in everyone else's shoes, imagining what they would decide if they were doing the same. While Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he had difficulty finding participants who use it. It appears that people rarely if ever reach stage six of Kohlberg's model.
[edit]
Other
Kohlberg also observed that there is a stage 4½ or 4+ which is a transition from stage four to stage five. This stage is where people have become disaffected with the arbitrary nature of law and order reasoning and become moral relativists. This transition stage may result in either progress to stage five or in regression to stage four.
Kohlberg further speculated that a seventh stage may exist (Transcendental Morality) which would link religion with moral reasoning (See James Fowler's stages of faith). -
Examples
Kohlberg used moral dilemmas to determine which stage of moral reasoning a person uses. The dilemmas are short stories in which a person has to make a moral decision. The participant is asked what this person should do. A dilemma that Kohlberg used in his original research was the druggist's dilemma:
A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $4,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused.
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
From a theoretical point of view, it is not important what the participant thinks that Heinz should do. The point of interest is the justification that the participant offers. Below are examples of possible arguments that belong to the six stages. It is important to keep in mind that these arguments are only examples. It is possible that a participant reaches a completely different conclusion using the same stage of reasoning:
Stage one (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine, because he will consequently be put in prison.
Stage two (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine, because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.
Stage three (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine, because his wife expects it.
Stage four (law-and-order): Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the law prohibits stealing.
Stage five (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine, because everyone has a right to live, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the scientist has a right to fair compensation.
Stage six (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because that violates the golden rule of honesty and respect.
Stage seven (transcendental morality):Heinz should choose to spend more time with his wife in their remaining days, both acknowledging the cycle of life-and-death which is a part of the human condition.
[edit]
Theoretical assumptions
The stages of Kohlberg's model refer to reasoning, not to actions or to people themselves. Kohlberg insists that the form of moral arguments is independent of the content of the arguments. According to Kohlberg, moral reasoning is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for moral action. Additionally, Piaget's stages of cognitive development are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the development of moral reasoning. It is important to remember that he posits justice as the a priori summum bonum (justice is assumed to be equal with moral virtue).
According to Kohlberg, a person who progresses to a higher stage of moral reasoning cannot skip stages. For example, a person cannot jump from being concerned mostly with peer opinions (stage three) to being a proponent of social contracts (stage five). However, when persons encounter a moral dilemma and find their current level of moral reasoning unsatisfactory, they will look to the next level. Discovery of the limitations of the current stage of thinking promotes moral development. -
From Kolhberg's theory, it not difficult to see that moral reasoning goes beyond laws. Yes, laws might help to set things most right but, it is just an approximation of justice, but never justice itself.
If we can see the homosexual issue from this angle, we will realise that an argument like "all straights are good; all gays are bad" has no ground. True, there's a sub-culture within the gay community that seems to be promiscuious. But you can still promiscuity in the straight population too (e.g., geylang. 70% of HIV patients are straight.)
There is a higher percentage of gays who are not promiscuious (me! me!) who are not that visible, because we are just like common folks who lead a normal life like everyone else. The only difference is that my life partner is a guy, not a gal. -
For those who argued that homosexuality is against the traditional asian values, it's impt to know that even China is more progressive than Singapore when it comes to the issue of homosexuality:
1) One of the best University in China is offering a course in homosexuality as an attempt to educate undergrads abt homosexuality. A positive move to increase awareness of gay issues.
2) And China has decriminalised homosexuals in 1997. While it's still illegal to practice anal sex in Singapore.
August 17, 2005
news around the world 17-aug-05
By News Editor
Chinese university offers undergraduate gay course
Previously only open to medical and graduate students, Shanghai's prestigious Fudan University will offer a course on homosexuality to undergraduates for the first time next term.
A local newspaper on Tuesday reported that several hundred students have applied for the one hundred available places for the course which started in 2003. Past classes have drawn more than 1,700 students, including some gay and lesbian people from outside campus.
Gay activists have read the universityÂ’s move and overwhelming response from students as positive signs that Chinese society is becoming more tolerant. Many Chinese still consider homosexuals as equivalent to HIV/AIDS patients.
Set to start in September, the course will examine the health, legal and social issues relating to homosexuality.
Instructor Gao Yanning was quoted as saying the course aims to break down widespread ignorance and prejudice against gays in China.
The new undergraduate course and original course has been sponsored by the Hong Kong-based Chi Heng Foundation, a charitable organisation which focuses on education about sexual orientation as well as support for people with AIDS.
Although homosexuality has been widely documented in classical and historical Chinese texts, gays are said to have become persecuted after China's 1949 communist revolution which condemned homosexuality as a product of corrupt western and feudal societies.
In 1997, China moved to decriminalise homosexuality and in 2001, the China Psychiatric Association struck homosexuality off from its list of mental disorders. -
Another positive move, this time from Japan.
August 17, 2005
news around the world 17-aug-05
By News Editor
Lesbian legislator comes out at Tokyo Pride
A Japanese politician came out as a lesbian at Tokyo's first Gay Pride event in three years during the weekend.
Kanako Otsuji, an Osaka Prefectural Assembly legislator, came out as a lesbian at Tokyo's first Gay Pride event in three years during the weekend.
In a move rarely seen in Asia, Kanako Otsuji, a 30-year-old Osaka Prefectural Assembly legislator, revealed to reporters last Friday that she is a lesbian, and called for more understanding of sexual diversity in the country.
Otsuji has been in the 112-seat Osaka Prefectural Assembly since 2003 which represents the countryÂ’s second-largest city with a population of 9 million people. She is a member of the "Shuken (Sovereignty) Osaka" group of independent assembly members.
"I don't want children troubled by being homosexual experiencing the same (hardships)," she told the Kyodo news service.
"Homosexual people have often kept silent for fear of discrimination and prejudice. By declaring I'm homosexual, I would like to highlight the problems and put an end to a vicious circle of discrimination and prejudice," Otsuji said.
"I believe that coming out as a homosexual is the best thing I can do to encourage numerous people," Otsuji says in her book soon to be published.
About 3,000 people celebrated gay pride on Saturday with a march through Tokyo's Shibuya and Harajuku districts – the main shopping and entertainment areas of the city. -
with such a large population china could use some homosexuals to reduce breeding..india should and has to have more homosexuals they're really churning out too many people. whereas here, the dynasty wants the peons to produce more babies to provide the dynasty with generations of slaves to come..
-
An innovation "library" concept. Hmm, just wondering whether the concept can be brought to Singapore.
Hey wait, there will need to be at least 99 "items" here than the 9 "items" for loan in Sweden. e.g.,
1) NKF staff
2) Member of opposite party
3) Foreign expatriate
4) Indonesian maid
5) Member of CHC
The list goes on.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1439257.htm
Library offers imam, gypsy, gay person for 'loan'
If you think all lesbians are sexually frustrated or all animal rights activists aggressive, then a Swedish library project that allows you to 'borrow' a real live human being may provide some useful insight.
Ulla Brohed, of the Malmoe Library in southern Sweden, says the Living Library project will enable people to come face-to-face with their prejudices in the hopes of altering their preconceived notions.
"You sometimes hear people's prejudices and you realise that they are just uninformed," she said.
Nine people, including a homosexual, an imam, a journalist, a Muslim woman and a gypsy, will be available at the Malmoe Library for members of the public to "borrow" for a 45-minute conversation in the library's outdoor cafe.
"Maybe not all journalists are know-it-all and sensationalist, just unafraid and curious," Ms Brohed said.
"Maybe not all animal rights activists are angry and intolerant but intelligent and committed."
Mr Brohed says the nine "items" on loan were not hard to find but admits that they will be paid "a small sum" for their efforts.
If the experiment is a success, the Malmoe Library may repeat it later this year. -
Are u an intellectual?Do u want to discuss rationally or to quarrel?Originally posted by HENG@:the fundamental fallacy of your argument is that, u can choose to smoke but u don't choose to be gay. Don't make yourself a presumptuous fool by issuing that statement.
Yes,a person may has an inclination to becomes a homo when young.But if his parrent tell him that such behaviour is wrong and give him a right sex education,then he may not develop into gay when he grows up.But for u,u keep saying homo is born & homo is right.If the majority of the society accept your belief,then all youngsters who have homo inclination would not be taught to change their sexual behaviour.
Is homosex a learned act?So am i a fool? -
Originally posted by PRP:
[b]A way to be accepted
Everybody kows smoking is wrong.But we accept smokers.Smokers don't argue there is no right or wrong about smoking.They also don't argue smokers are born.They don't form an association to fight for their rghts.Yet society accept smokers despite their wrong habbit.Homosexuals,I think you all can learn from them.[/b]