Singapore gays allowed a step forward, but pushed two back
-
LHL's speech in parliament about sums up the sentiments of most Singaporeans and the decision taken is a right one. To their credit, even the WP is not supporting this repeal motion. Sylvia is smarter than many Opposition leaders ...she understands how the majority of Singaporeans feel about this issue and it is the majority's view that prevails at the ballot box. As I have said before and echoed by LHL, all that the gay community has done with this motion is to invite a backlash against them. They will find that there will be less room for them in future.
Homosexuals have been emboldened by the lattitude given to them so far. It's as the Chinese saying goes, 'de chun jing chi', give them an inch and they want a yard. The gay community has awakened the sleeping giant of the conservative majority who will now seek to oppose them and reduce whatever freedom they have been given. -
See, that's gender discrimination. No bones about it. No one condones it, yet it is not criminalised.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Not unless you do it like many homosexuals do...with other men
Oh, let's not forget that men are not protected from heterosexual outrage of modesty at this juncture as well.
However, the extra-territorial laws that apply to child sex tourism and terrorism should be applauded. -
Is this discrimination ? you bet your ass (no pun intended :lol
it is .....
why ? cos this is the attitude the majority of our society has towards homosexual activities, if you happen to swing for the other team, tough ... this is what democracy is about, the rule of the majority ... the majority decides on the norms and permissible boundaries of the society ....
there is no point referring to the attitudes of other societies in history to look for precedents .... once upon a time, an 80 years old man taking on a 14 years old girl as concubine in ancient china was not considered child abuse, it was considered the norm .... once upon a time, it was alright to keep slaves, once upon a time, widows were burnt at the funeral pyres of their husbands ... yada yada ... it's all been said before ...
... we have no problems discriminating against these practices, no ? ....
end of the story, it's been a good lesson for all .... especially those who agitates for certain liberties inherently incompatible with our conservative asian roots; we shouldn't and wouldn't swallow wholesale whatever is considered the norm in other societies ... -
Fatum,
The issue of "Conservative Asian roots" is merely a cage of normative values built to limit discourse. Let's not fall into the trap of assuming that just because we hail from a particular ethnic group, or geographical area, our values must always be fixed at a particular point in time.
The essence here is about consent and informed adult consent. Your example of an 80 year old man with a 14 year old concubine is definitely breaking the test of consent, and you're right that cultural norms did move on. So did slavery as well.
Don't forget women's lib too.
So there is no reason to believe that the space for people with different sexual orientation will not open up in the future. What they have is time..perhaps this is why those chest-thumping opponents feel so hard-up in this debate, because perhaps there is an innate fear that the proponents of repealing Section 377A will eventually win.
Having said that, if there's one current positive outcome, it's that the space for public debate and advocacy has been widened on both sides of the fence. Singaporeans are less likely to shy away from making their point known, and are willing to lobby for what they believe in.
And that, should be something we can all agree on. -
is that a cage ? ... or a societal framework ? ... all laws have to be viewed from the framework of a particular society, no ? ... you suppose, for example, the liberal attitudes of say, new york or LA would fly in the bible belt of the same country ? I've seen guys here who stared at other people's trodgers while peeing in the men's room get hammered afterwards ... true, a society's values are not always fixed, but the society's permissible boundaries are always defined by her CURRENT values ...Originally posted by LazerLordz:Fatum,
The issue of "Conservative Asian roots" is merely a cage built to limit discourse. Let's not fall into the trap of assuming that just because we hail from a particular ethnic group, or geographical area, our values must always be fixed at a particular point in time.
The essence here is about consent and informed adult consent. Your example of an 80 year old man with a 14 year old concubine is definitely breaking the test of consent, and you're right that cultural norms did move on.
So there is no reason to believe that the space for people with different sexual orientation will not open up in the future. What they have is time..perhaps this is why those chest-thumping opponents feel so hard-up in this debate, because perhaps there is an innate fear that the proponents of repealing Section 377A will eventually win.
and that's the whole point of keeping the law, which I think, many are missing ... this law is kept as a reflection of the society we live in, we don't see police squads breaking up sunday night discos, we don't see taskforces and vigilantes rounding up brokebackers ... we don't have surveillance teams busting into brokebacking people ...
so why keep it on the books if it's never, or rarely going to be used (I can think of some examples perhaps, say gay rape ? ) ... cos this law reflects the acceptable norms and permissible boundaries of our society, I don't see it as limiting the space for people of different orientation, but preserving the space of people in the mainstream, as the powers that be has mentioned before, brokebackers are now employed as civil servants, etc etc ... they are not being driven underground, they even have their own parades now ... so what's the problem ? I don't see it as an intrusion of privacy ... let me give you another example, there's another obscure piece of law in the books that criminalizes intercourse with animals ... I have a friend who worked in emergency services, and he has a whole collection of stories about responding to calls from women(especially rich tai tais), who got stuck with their pet doggies while bonking them ... do we see these women being hauled up through the court system ? ... do we see them being splashed on the newpaper ? ...
nothing has changed for anybody, really ... but the larger society has certainly spoken on where she stands ... -
Geys,please fill in the blank of the following sentence in less than 15 words (I am a verbabose phobia):
Homo sex is right because (_________________________________). -
you are also homophobicOriginally posted by PRP:Geys,please fill in the blank of the following sentence in less than 15 words (I am a verbabose phobia):
Homo sex is right because (_________________________________).
tell mi. is the only reason why you have sex to have kids?
is there no pleasure involved? edit: maybe you dunno cos u neber had sex before? P.S. are u bery religious?
and btw, what does 'i am a verbabose phobia' mean? -
Homo supporters are right to say that the govt discrimiante against geys in retaining the rule but repealing other unnatural sex law for heterosexuals.
By right,both rules shouldn't be abolished.If so, there wouldn't be any issue of discrimination.
Taking it more positviely,perhaps the geys should think the govt love them more so they keep the rule for them.Anal sex may increase the chances of getting AIDS.Better don't do it! -
Values and norms of a soceity do evolve, and the laws along with them. What you and the gay community fail to understand is that the laws of the land must reflect the norms and values of a society at a given point in time, not run ahead. Gays and the liberal leftists have shown in this matter that they do not respect the rule of the majority. As the PM said, they will find that they will be given less space, not more, as a result of this debacle.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Fatum,
The issue of "Conservative Asian roots" is merely a cage of normative values built to limit discourse. Let's not fall into the trap of assuming that just because we hail from a particular ethnic group, or geographical area, our values must always be fixed at a particular point in time.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a website dedicated to exposing the identity of the gay community....parents will want to know if their children's teachers are gay...a witch hunt may well have been started by the homosexuals themselves. -
Just because you don't think it's right doesn't mean you should discriminate against it. If that was the case then you should be discriminating against those who believe in religions that differ from yours.Originally posted by PRP:Geys,please fill in the blank of the following sentence in less than 15 words (I am a verbabose phobia):
Homo sex is right because (_________________________________). -
And such a move will be liable for incitement of hatred and sedition if a witchhunt occurs. Whoever tries to do something of that sort will be singled out for charges and prosecution, plain and simple. There's a difference between moral objections to a lifestyle, and exercising state legislative power to enshrine that objection through non-action.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Values and norms of a soceity do evolve, and the laws along with them. What you and the gay community fail to understand is that the laws of the land must reflect the norms and values of a society at a given point in time, not run ahead. Gays and the liberal leftists have shown in this matter that they do not respect the rule of the majority. As the PM said, they will find that they will be given less space, not more, as a result of this debacle.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a website dedicated to exposing the identity of the gay community....parents will want to know if their children's teachers are gay...a witch hunt may well have been started by the homosexuals themselves.
There is space for civilised debate, and those who have seen information not privy to the media will know that the debate was pretty much calm until a certain academic decided that slippery slope arguments and normative statements that are religiously aligned were in vogue again.
Everyone wants to enlarge the common space, but some individuals want to shrink this space.
It is not a crime to be born a certain way, and though I am definitely not going to appreciate homosexual activity, it rankles me to think that one's orientation is enough to classify one as a criminal.
How's that for a slippery slope. Ironic isn't it. -
I don't discrimate against geys.Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Just because you don't think it's right doesn't mean you should discriminate against it. If that was the case then you should be discriminating against those who believe in religions that differ from yours.
If homo is right,then one can advocate it.Is it right? -
Straits Times has published an article which says that it is not known whether geys are born or not.Originally posted by LazerLordz:And such a move will be liable for incitement of hatred and sedition if a witchhunt occurs. Whoever tries to do something of that sort will be singled out for charges and prosecution, plain and simple. There's a difference between moral objections to a lifestyle, and exercising state legislative power to enshrine that objection through non-action.
There is space for civilised debate, and those who have seen information not privy to the media will know that the debate was pretty much calm until a certain academic decided that slippery slope arguments and normative statements that are religiously aligned were in vogue again.
Everyone wants to enlarge the common space, but some individuals want to shrink this space.
It is not a crime to be born a certain way, and though I am definitely not going to appreciate homosexual activity, it rankles me to think that one's orientation is enough to classify one as a criminal.
How's that for a slippery slope. Ironic isn't it. -
so being straight is right????? do not bring religion into this.Originally posted by PRP:I don't discrimate against geys.
If homo is right,then one can advocate it.Is it right?
what makes things right and what makes things wrong
or issit just because other people say that 'A' is right and therefore you believe so too? -
What a baseless generalisation. Have you been taking Hard Gay too seriously?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Not unless you do it like many homosexuals do...with other men
Gay people are just as capable of monogamous relationships as other people of their own gender. Making such sweeping statements accusing them of promiscuity and paedophilia fuels the paranoia even more than heavy-handed activism. -
Anyone thought of this possibility?
With the advent of the Pink Dollar, perhaps in the near future 377A will be amended to decriminalise intercourse between foreign men, yet retained against citizens to protect "family values".
After all, most rich gays are foreigners. The government claims it treads a tightrope between pragmatic economics and heartland Asian values, and this is a perfectly plausible way to maintain the balance.
Just like in Korea(?) where locals are forbidden to enter casinos. Double standards are certainly very familiar to our govt. -
To hell with the Straits Times. They've never been known to be paramounts of journalism anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if they took the side of the paranoid conservatives.Originally posted by PRP:Straits Times has published an article which says that it is not known whether geys are born or not.
Movers and shakers don't listen to what they have to say, the ST, with the exception of Life, Sports, Defence and Review sections, are frankly meant for "nation-building". -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Originally posted by udontknowme:you are also homophobic
tell mi. is the only reason why you have sex to have kids?
is there no pleasure involved? edit: maybe you dunno cos u neber had sex before? P.S. are u bery religious?
and btw, what does 'i am a verbabose phobia' mean?
I agree with you...
Miss PRP is homophobic is a fact !
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -
Starting of insulting & name calling from a homo supporter.Originally posted by happieman:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree with you...
Miss PRP is homophobic is a fact !
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -
Homo supporter,just fill in the blank for the above msg!Originally posted by PRP:Geys,please fill in the blank of the following sentence in less than 15 words:
Homo sex is right because _________________________________. -
There is one writer of ST who is sympathetic to homo and wirtes articles on the subject too.Originally posted by LazerLordz:To hell with the Straits Times. They've never been known to be paramounts of journalism anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if they took the side of the paranoid conservatives.
Movers and shakers don't listen to what they have to say, the ST, with the exception of Life, Sports, Defence and Review sections, are frankly meant for "nation-building". -
Official records of homosexual activities do not mean Chinese society condoned such activities. If you read Water Margin, revolution against local authorities might be common at that time, but you think it was ever something acceptable in the society? If you read "jin ping mei", or stories about Emperor Qian Long visiting prostitutes, don't you believe that prostitutes were ever accepted in Chinese society, try marry a prostitute and see how your folks respond. Homosexuality is recorded as one of the 10 sinful acts in Shan Shu, and is always an act of "corrupt public morals" "shang feng bai su". Han Wu Di was recorded to have favored a second wife, instead of the emperess, and it was his son who became emperor after he died, not another man. Was he born a gay? hardlyOriginally posted by wisefool83:Ok, I'll fill in the Chinese part. The Chinese civilisation traditionally do not discriminate against homosexuality. A number of Emperors including Han Wu Di had official history records in which they engage in homosexual activities. The Chinese Idiom of Long Yang Zhi Pi or Ge Xiu Zhi Pi all derived from incident in which rulers engaged in homosexual activity. Homosexual activities were only seen as a problem if the ruler engage in it excessively, but that applies to heterosexual too. The above idioms were no doubt negative in their meanings, but were mean to criticise the rulers for over-doing it rather than just doing it.
Among the people, gay prostitues were common activities, if you read Dream of Red Chamber, you could see that boy prostitutes and occasional homosexual activities were common among the society. In fact, people don't tend to classify gay as a separate issue and most people who engage in homosexual activities see no meaning to the word gay. They are just largely Bi-Sexual as Xue Pan, Jia Bao Yu and most other male characters in the novel are. You might think that a novel is not a good source of reference, but it is rather the way which the novel was written in which the writer himself, do not seem to think that homosexuality was an issue that provided the clue to the society then.
Gay, rather than being "imported" from "demoralised" western society as often perceived was actually being "discriminalised" by western society. The current 377 code was a product of Victoria Era British penal code. The Chinese throughout their 5000 years of history had not even think of discriminating against homosexuality. They almost don't even differentiate it. Modern China's stand against homosexuality was also likely to be an import along with Marxism. -
One writer will still have a hard time trying to undo the damaged reputation of the newspaper.Originally posted by PRP:There is one writer of ST who is sympathetic to homo and wirtes articles on the subject too.
If he writes true to his heart, then I'll say at least he has the guts. -
Oh we're not taking the right to condemn away, we just believe that condemnation cannot form part of the legislation of a nation.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Official records of homosexual activities do not mean Chinese society condoned such activities. If you read Water Margin, revolution against local authorities might be common at that time, but you think it was ever something acceptable in the society? If you read "jin ping mei", or stories about Emperor Qian Long visiting prostitutes, don't you believe that prostitutes were ever accepted in Chinese society, try marry a prostitute and see how your folks respond. Homosexuality is recorded as one of the 10 sinful acts in Shan Shu, and is always an act of "corrupt public morals" "shang feng bai su". Han Wu Di was recorded to have favored a second wife, instead of the emperess, and it was his son who became emperor after he died, not another man. Was he born a gay? hardly -
this isnt about what is right and what is wrong.Originally posted by PRP:Homo supporter,just fill in the blank for the above msg!
i guess you are a 'hetero supporter'????
ok then, YOU tell me why heterosexual sex is right. (and again, do not bring religion into the picture. thanks)