Lost

It's just one of those times, where I will seek my blog for refuge, simply because I do not really know how I can express my thoughts spoken, unless I keep it in words, written, to finally work things out with myself while I'm thinking of what I can write.

I don't seem to be able to appreciate what I have now, simply because I can't. I am debating with myself if it is even worth appreciating, because when I think of it, it didn't even make my heart tinge a single bit, when it's supposed to be.

I made comparisons. I know its unfair, but I still did. Sigh, I wished I could elaborate more, but this post seemed like another of my vague ramblings, simply because I didn't want to rake up my personal issues for public viewing.

Mother Don't Allow

Mother Don't Allow (MDA) me to see so many things! Like an exhibition of same sex kissing she don't allow. Discuss about sexual laws discriminating against homosexuals she don't allow. She don't allow people to see a piece of art (sketches) depicting lesbian sex. She don't allow me to see art documentary by award winning Israeli filmmaker. She also don't allow me to hear a healthy talk by a gay pastor.

My mother also go and tell other people not to allow people to go to Botanic Gardens, a public place, wearing pink and have a simple gathering picnic where I can meet my friends and chill.

She's such a bitch!!!

Indignation programs: http://plu.sg/indignation/

I'm 68% Megatron

Take the Transformers Quiz

Megatron is the leader of the Decepticons. He will stop at nothing to establish his empire and destroy the Autobots, starting with Optimus Prime.

Like Megatron, you are not compassionate and harbor evil thoughts. You are inspiring, confident, and a natural leader. The Decepticons have chosen well. In addition, you enjoy being one step ahead of your friends as far as trends and technology.

And I think that makes me evil hahaha!

Original Hanazakari no Kimitachi

This is something worth catching: This is Japan's adaptation of "Hanazakari no Kimitachi e", done previously by Taiwan as 《花样少年少女》, popularly known as Hana-Kimi. 《花ざかりの君たちへ》, also 《偷偷爱着你》, is another adaptation of the comic, although I do not know if this version sticks more accurately to the original plot in the comic since this is a Japan adaptation. There are a total of 23 volumes in that comic, but I think there are 11 episodes all in all.

Why watch this when you have already watched the Taiwan version? Well, looking at the photo above, you might just figure out why I am watching it. =P

The plot is quite different in its own way as I could tell (cuz you wouldn't wanna know how many times I re-watched the Taiwan version). But, the basic storyline and names still sticks to the ones you've already heard of, so it's not too hard identifying the characters.

Still, it's funny, with a change: lots more guys to drool after.

FUJI Television site: http://wwwz.fujitv.co.jp/hanakimi/index.html

Letter to Raffles Institution regarding Otto Fong

To whomever it may concern,

I am writing in support of Otto Fong, one of your colleagues whom had recently came out on his personal blog, but only to have deleted the posts under pressure from the ministry.

Personally, I am a student currently pursuing my diploma in Information Technology in Ngee Ann Polytechnic. I am openly gay, and I am one of the founding members of Plume.sg, a GLBT support group for teenagers below 25 seeking a safe environment to explore and reconciliate their sexuality and their struggles as a gay person.

I must say that I am deeply touched by Mr Fong's article. It really reminds me of my secondary school days, facing attraction towards the same sex, yet without peers I can share this new and alien experience with, much less teachers or authority figures that could most probably guide me. It was frightening, because I never knew that there are other people just like me, thinking that it's just me alone experiencing such attractions towards my own gender - something that is not accepted by the society at large.

I know that this is a difficult issue to tackle, since many conservative parents would most likely target the ministry for a reason of why a gay teacher is in the teaching profession, "corrupting" their kids with the wrong values of homosexuality. Well, my take will be that it doesn't seem that their kids would grow taller if he hanged around their tall friends. I don't personally blame the ministry or the school for the actions taken, but I believe it is about time the ministry accepts that there will always be homosexuals in the teaching profession - just like any other profession. If the pressure are constantly coming from the conservatives, I would think that they would want us out of Singapore, let alone seeking employment here. There is no point to stop someone with such passion to teach from doing a great job just because of his sexuality.

I would believe that the school will have a group of gay students that are also seeking a teacher that could guide them: something I've always yearned for back then, so that I will not be pressurised by my peers, or other factors due to the harsh homophobic climate we have in the education ministry. Many gay and lesbian teens would want to seek help - as many of my personal gay friends had once lanced into depression or thoughts of suicide just because they were different and couldn't fit into the straight environment in school, with people calling them names like "queers".

Lastly, I hope that the school can continue to use such a great teacher in your teaching team, for his sexuality is no reason one should judge him for, as he is still someone that is passionate about teaching.

Thank you for your time.

I am a criminal

Or at least that's what the Singapore Government says to people like me that are contributing equally to society and economy.

Except for the law abiding part, and the pro-creation part... Now I don't think I'm very law abiding, am I?

I don't steal, fight, kill, cheat, harassed others or has violated any clause in the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (Chapter 167A) unlike some people whom had most probably done so without being prosecuted.

I'm gay.

According to the proposed amendments to the penal code after the first parliamentary reading on 17 September 2007 (published by the Ministry of Home Affairs), proposed changes to the law governing restriction of "gross indecency" between gays (Section 377A) has not only gone unamended, but "suffered double insult" as the law sits in between proposed laws against necrophilia and bestiality.

Whatever huge sinful act had we done to be held up as criminals, and be damned even till death?

I'm not quite getting it here. A citizen that contributes to the wealth and economy of Singapore, and is part of aminority group seemingly far larger than 2% of the population, constituting about 89,600 of the population (based on 2% estimate), yet all of them had been categorised as citizens with unconfessed criminal offences. The numbers quoted above is an extremely conservative estimate, unlike published estimates on demographics of sexual orientation that indicates more than 8% of a population may have attractions towards the same sex.

Religion is an issue that is inescapable, since the government and conservative religious organisations had been voicing opposition to the penal code's amendment, based on arguments that the proposed amendment are conflicting with their beliefs. Christianity, Catholicism, Islam and Sikhism forms a large group of people voicing out against homosexuality, but not all views are united. Views on this matter are further divided in Hinduism, since some believe that a variation in gender types and sexual orientation are considered to be "holy". Part of ancient Hinduism belief is that gender-variants will be the "pure of heart and tongue" -SQ21, Shelia Rajamanikam, page 178, line 15. However, such beliefs are not popular in the Singapore Hinduism culture.

Taking into account statistics of religious demographics in Singapore published in 2000, 14.6% of the population are Christians, 14.9% are Muslims, 4% are Hindu, and 0.39% are Sikhs. That forms 33.89% of the population that are supposedly against homosexuality, not taking into account that views on the matter are divided within these religious groups, affirming or opposing.

33.89% is too troublesome to type. Let's round up it shall we? 33.9%? No... We can round up it further. Let's say 34% are the "conservative majority".

Buddhism and Taoism were however, much more vague in matters dealing with homosexuality. Practitioners in different places believe in different spiritual regulations for or against homosexuality. However, unlike Christianity or Islam's deep motivation for evangelism and ex-gay ministries, as "commanded" in Biblical texts, Buddhism draws the line well between applying such spiritual regulations to practitioners of Buddhism only, and not applying them to the unbelievers. In the case of unbelievers, Buddhism emphasises on the need to embrace people that are different, promoting human rights over Buddhist scriptures. Taoism, on the other hand believes in the Yin and Yang energies, for in this case a gay couple would be a yang on yang, opposing the foundations of Taoism. Yet, Taoism scriptures do not explicitly forbid homosexuality.

Buddhism forms 42.5% of the population, and Taoism 8.5%. In total, 51% of the population are somewhat gay-tolerant (noting that 8.5% of the number is a grey area in the case of Taoism). I said only somewhat gay-tolerant. Personal opinions cannot be calculated, and therefore, similiar to the opposing religions of homosexuality, one belonging to this group may also be an opposition to homosexuality due to difference in beliefs or personal views.

But comparing 34% of the opposing voices (with divided views) to 51% of supporting voices (again with divided views), don't you think it's laughable that the opposing don't even form half of the population, while Buddhism alone had far exceeded the number of believers in the opposing voices? What makes anyone think Christianity is more tolerant than Buddhism with explicit mention of homosexuality as a sin in the Bible?

That is why I believe that categorising the opposing voices as a significant minority is more than appropriate.

Don't you find that 2%, or 89,600 people do form a significant minority too? So, why are our voices being ignored, out-shined by another significant minority, and gain no recognition at all?

The government has always quoted "Asian values" and a "conservative majority" as the primary reason why Section 377A of the penal code is here to stay. What are those "Asian values"? I always hear about them, but have there been any elaborate written documentation of "Asian values" like how the law does, further approved for ISO-certification or something? What are those values?

The values are divided, I would say. Who determines what is a morally right conduct? Loving someone of the same sex wrong? Expressing love through sex wrong? What is right, and what is wrong?

Conservative majority? What conservative majority? 34% of a conservative significant minority it is.

One may argue that personal opinions on the matter can always differ, but if a certain portion of the claim can be proved using statistics, that the "anti-gay majority" is indeed just a significant minority, how much variation will we be expecting that some individuals have opinions that are similiar or contrary to their religious values?

If my friends and I, age ranging from 18 to 25, can already see the big picture in this matter, I don't see how the entire government chose to look elsewhere for answers.

If you noticed, I didn't even add the non-religious group of the population (which forms 14.6% of the population). 14.6% of divided views, ungoverned by any religious beliefs. What tells the government that most of these people are conservative too, when they believe in nothing?

If gays can procreate and produce geniuses that will be future millionaires, I think the government will not hesitate to decriminalise homosexuality. So much for equal human rights for everyone.

The Lees aren't that bad afterall

At the beginning, I thought the problem is "a personal matter".

It is, however, in a different way. I always thought that the reason why 377A of the penal code always meet road blocks is that the Lees are homophobic too.

The way I see it now, things are certainly changing.

Both Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong had both recently commented that they believe homosexuality is "mostly inborn", and that the government always go with the flow of society, as they believe that the society are mostly "comfortable with [their] position" of leaving 377A "alone" in the penal code.

I will drop 2 arguments:
1. Gays and lesbians represent a large community of at least 8% of the total population, and therefore possesses a large voting power. Change of opinion may be fueled by this reason.
2. Opinions are changing, and the higher powers in the government are hinting us (queer community) to do something to help the government get rid of 377A, because only the power of creditable statistics can outweigh powerful religious opposition getting in the way of gay liberalisation.

Opposition exists when the government wants to setup Integrated Resorts (IR). Why was it passed then? Clearly, economic benefits are vital to Singapore, and using the IR is one good way to strike a many-fold return. The benefits became such a clear indication for the government to argue its way out of opposition.

I will not say that its hard for the government to argue the immediate benefits of gay liberalisation. It's tough to argue that this is a human right, for the religious opposition don't even recognise this as a right. We should be put to death in biblical times.

I can see gay liberalisation taking place in Singapore within my lifetime, and you should too. Whatever made the government take the stand that homosexuality is "mostly inborn" does not matter. They said it, and should be accountable for it.

What we need now is to unite the community. Sadly, a lot of people in the community don't even care. All they do is to tell us that we are doing a great job in gay activism, but doesn't really care if the government considers them as a criminal or not. They get their sex, clubs, drinks and income; that's all they care about.

Do something. Imagine the possibilities opening up for us if 377A is repealed: MDA will not be so uptight about censorship of gay content, we may get the equal employment opportunities law to include sexuality, and double-standards may get lifted in the army too. Much more things can be changed, only IF you do something.

If the entire community can unite to do a signed petition for the repealing of 377A for at least half the population of Singapore, and present that to the government, I do believe change can happen. Sure, the opposition can come out with their own petition to criminalise homosexuality, but should that stop us?

My idea is a huge one. How do you get half the population of Singapore sign a petition? It will take years, if not centuries to get it all done. Even the countries that have repealed the anti-gay sex law do not have to go through such lengths to get it done.

But if you believe that change can happen, it will.