National Day, Nation Party & PLU
Come this national day, the Singapore GLBT community will be celebrating with a series of parties and plays. Top and Bottom, and Mardi Gras, two productions by The Necessary Stage coincides with the Mergers and Wills, a lesbian themed theatre by Toy Factory; Make Love not War (Military Ball) Party, Nation Party, and a Closing Party at Zouk. These events do not include the usual parties held at the regular gay nightclubs and saunas.
In fact, Singapore’s gay entertainment establishments and parties such as Nation have acquired such a reputation that, even Bangkok, feels threatened. They are afraid that we are giving them a run as Asia’s gay capital; competing for the tourists’ pink dollar.
No one denies the importance of the pink dollar which indirectly means increasing tourism and thereby benefiting the economy.
Yet, therein lies the rub. While our gay boys and girls fight for the right to party and thoroughly enjoy themselves at these “feel good – friend making - community bonding ” events, what is being done on the social and political front to advance the gay cause in Singapore?
Before someone shoots me down with a “let’s not create trouble because the gay community in Singapore is already enjoying enough liberties” or “we cannot do anything because the government does not allow” rhetoric, it is fundamental that we view things in an enlightened perspective.
Sure, it is easy to argue that so called “rights” are not important. After all, we are relatively “well to do” and there are already enough “gay outlets” for patronization.
However, these large scale parties and plays that have been permitted to run their course have already drawn the ire of the mainstream conservatives. One Straits Times reader wrote in to complain about Nation party, saying that it is an insult to Singapore. Straits Times has also published letters from homophobic or misinformed readers who condemned the “gay lifestyle”, whatever that means. Lianhe Wanbao, a local Mandarin tabloid ran a series of articles “exposing” the gay saunas, sensationalizing and painting gay culture as one of promoting sexual promiscuity.
Under the pressure of the public, the government may reduce or ban some of these gay establishments that has been enjoying brisk business. Plays and parties with risqué themes may also be prohibited or censored, which will return us back to the dark ages.
This option might seem a distinct impossibility but it can STILL happen because we are still surviving as an “underground” culture; and surviving on the kindness of the system. The authorities are doing a balancing act as they allow gay business to survive so that they generate money, while, at the same time, trying to placate to the majority conservative. This equation can however be tipped against the unfavourable for GLBT if public pressure increases or due to any unforeseeable circumstances.
If a society like PLU is formed, we would have a more coordinated and representative voice to educate the public, government and counter the sensational news mongering of irresponsible tabloids.
PLU’s second application to form a society was rejected after an appeal. They have published a book and organized a forum; but because of membership and legality issues, are unable to reach a considerable part of the population and hence, achieves limited desired effect.
It is with this in mind that forming PLU becomes more pressing because without a group, no organized resources can be mobilized and very little can be achieved. We can hardly go beyond the stage of issues discussion within the community. In fact, in the replies of the Registar of Society with regards to PLU’s appeal, which can be found in their website, members have been warned to “cease all activities in connection with the society”.
The flourish of the “gay entertainment” sector may work against gay causes. As explained earlier, when these events become more popular, overflowing to the consciousness of the mainstream majority, the conservatives are more likely to step up anti-gay messages and accuse the GLBT community as nothing more than a group of “perverts” who are out to have fun; and corrupting the young impressionables.
The proliferation of gay events and establishments create the mirage that Singapore is becoming a tolerant society. It may blind the GLBT community into complacency, believing that there is no urgent need to address any underlying socio-political issues, when the reverse is true.
Instead of vying with Bangkok as the Asia’s gay capital, Hong Kong’s gay advancement is a more sustainable model, based on achieving equal treatment. According to a recent fridae.com article, they are on the edge of conducting a survey which may lead to the enactment of legislations that covers sexual orientation discrimination, that is, if the results shows that more than 50 percent of the population supports them. If that happens, the irony will not be lost on us; that they are under the governance of capitalist communists.
Ultimately, raising community and national consciousness of GLBT issues are important not just of what I have mentioned; but primarily because it alleviates the misery and difficult process of coming out for GLBT teenagers and youths, trapped in a mainly straight and homophobic society.
It is time that the GLBT community in Singapore recognizes the importance of having a political voice.
One way for PLU to overcoming the barriers is to work with other local NGOs in getting endorsements. They could participate in forums organized by these groups to highlight common underlying issues. E.g. Lesbian issues can be highlighted in women’s talks or workshops. In this way, the legitimacy of PLU can be achieved through networking and inter-group support. By raising our issues in conjunction with other mainstream groups, we will be able to successfully integrate GLBT into mainstream Singapore.
National Day is an occasion to celebrate being Singaporean. One of embracing diversity. And there is no reason why GLBT should not be part of this festivity.
A National Day 2004 Essay – Are we a Progressive Society?
The theme for Singapore’s 39th National Day Parade is “A Progressive Society”.
According to the website, the theme:
“illustrates the current progress of the nation amidst the uncertain and gloomy outlook both locally and
globally. To echo PM Goh's rally call, our situation is no worse than the early days of nation building.
With collective faith and fighting spirit to face our problems head on, we will be able to overcome our
challenges. We have done it before and we can do it again. Besides that, "A Progressive Society" demands a paradigm shift in our mindset. It requires an open mind and the willingness to adapt and adjust to changing conditions. More importantly, the future of our nation depends very much on the passion and commitment of all Singaporeans.”
Is this year’s National Day theme appropriate? Are we a Progressive Society, aiming to be one or taking measures to become one? What do we mean by progressive?
“Progressive” can refer to an advance in social conditions or efficiency with rapid reforms (which is
the term that the National Day Committee has chosen to emphasize)
It can also describe
1. broad or liberal-mindedness and tolerance
2. favouring civil liberties and social progress
3. ahead of trends and norms
and a progressive person is someone who has a liberal political opinion.
The latter definition is downplayed by the authorities who believe that politics has no place in Singapore. We remain a third world country when it comes to politics and liberalism.
It is the result of years of PAP indoctrination – that economics should exceed politics in importance; that we should sacrifice our civil rights for the welfare and stability of the population.
Hence, after 39 years of independence, it is not ironic that the population has been “depoliticized”. What we have is a silenced Opposition and weak civil society, unable to flourish and compete with the government in providing socio-political alternatives.
However, over the years, PAP has come to recognize that globalisation and the inevitable waves of
democratisation has influenced and will continue to affect many countries. The region, including India, Taiwan, Indonesia, Philippines, Hong Kong and Malaysia have all embraced democracy in one form or another and reaping the benefits.
To counter the tides of change and retain one party dominance, the PAP has taken various measures to “soften” the authoritarian image of Singapore with projects such as the formation of feedback committee and Singapore 21. Yet, the progression has been cosmetic in many instances.
Lest we mistook introduction of film rating classifications, bungee jumping, extension of nightclub hours as signs of a more open consultative government, the true indicator is the willingness to create a strong civil society.
The much feared Internal security act is still being used, most recently to detain alleged JL terrorists.
Online political dissent has been curbed with compulsory registration for political websites. Election boundaries are redrawn constantly to prevent Opposition from effective electioneering. The media
continues to act as a propaganda mouthpiece of the government. These are just some of the preventive
measures that PAP has set up to discourage the formation of strong alternative and oppositional politics.
One of the reasons why Singapore has not caught on the tides of democracy, unlike our neighbours, is
the lack of political education and the wide-spread belief that democracy is chaotic and invalid for multiracial Singapore. This is coupled with a deep-seated belief that the government can provide us with material well-being, as long as we sacrifice some of these fundamental rights, such as the freedom to associate or speech.
It is this mindset that is troubling for the benefits of democracy will far outweigh what we are getting.
Our material achievements may appear to surpass our neighbours and some of the world’s most developed nation. Yet, they do not suffice and cannot substitute what we lack in other areas.
Our management towards minorities or human rights issues, remains awkwardly backward. It is in heed with this year’s national day theme of “progressivity” that I wish to highlight the inconsistencies between words and actions.
Racial and religious topics are still taboo. Something as basic as wearing a tudung to school for a Muslim girl has been banned because the authorities believed it can cause segregation.
The sexual minorities in Singapore continue to be portrayed as “abnormal” and prevented from forming a legal group.
While the government acknowledges gender inequalities, women are still very much marginalised in various sectors, including political representation. Our women continue to be seen as “bearers” of the children; and not individual adults. There are no laws to prevent women’s workplace discrimination or sexual harassment.
Children rights are ignored and hardly mentioned. Singapore remains one of the two countries yet to sign an international protocol, the 1996 Stockholm Declaration and Agenda for Action, which aims to reduce the incidence of child sexual exploitation.
The plight of foreign workers and maids who are lowly paid, work long hours and sometimes being mistreated, has raised concerns. TWC2, which is formed in response against maids’ abuse face problems with legal formation as a society. They have been told to amend their constitution. Not too long ago, a construction firm has held back the salaries of foreign workers that they have earned. The Nicoll Highway tragedy highlights the importance of workplace safety, especially, in construction sites, which employs mostly foreign workers.
Workers in Singapore are not represented because of the lack of strong and vocal unions. There is no minimum wage legislation and maximum working hours are violated to the detriment of family life.
On the international front, it is our government’s relationship with the Burmese military regime that requires scrutiny. We need to show our concern and contribute to international pressure in demanding the house release of Aung San Suu Kyi, who is the democratically elected government of the country.
Singapore is not a signatory of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty or commonly known as the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer or Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction. In an article, entitled, “History of Landmine” on the website of “International Campaign to ban landmines”, Singapore remains one of the mine producing countries.
Our government’s univocal support for the US - Iraqi war include sending troops to post war Iraq. Our strong support for the US puts us on the map for terrorists’ attack. When a small group of individuals stood outside the US embassy to protest against the war, they were detained by the police and given a warning.
This National Day will be a significant year for Singapore because our Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Lee
Hsien Loong, will take over as Prime Minister on the scheduled 12 August. Unhindered, uncontested and officially approved. We will wait with abated breath if Mr Lee will push for genuine social and political reforms; or stick to the adage PAP guidelines that has kept the ruling elites in power.
No doubt, the sanctioned theme of “A Progressive Society” will be believed as “truth” and embraced by the majority of the population. However, this National Day is also a good time for us to reconsider and examine the significance and importance of what it means to be progressive.
I hope for the day when National Day means celebrating diversity regardless of one’s gender, race or sexual orientation. The day, when we can say our pledge, without any hint of remorse.
We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity andprogress for our nation.
