The reason why this news story was especially satisfying is because the far right religious bigots in America are nasty and scary. Oh boy. People in Europe look at the far right in America and think, that's why we don't wanna live in America. Heck, people who are considered right wing in Europe are probably classified as left wing in America because their right wing loonies are off the scale in a way that would make them arrested for hate speech in somewhere like the UK. America is also a lot more religious than most European countries and for an atheist like me, that's a very good reason not to want to live in America. So for a ruling to come like this and for the American government effectively give these religious bigots the middle finger, I can't help but feel so much joy as I fucking hate those American religious bigots. Oh the hate goes both ways: they hate the gays and the gays hate them too.
I'm sure some of you would have heard of the saying, "前人栽树,后人乘凉" (To enjoy the benefits of the hard work of one's predecessors.) Perhaps I would rather be the person enjoying the shade rather than the person planting the trees. Life is short and I have chosen to move to more progressive democracies rather than stay to try to make change happen in a place like Singapore. As I looked at what happened to people like Amos Yee, I just despair at the way things are in Singapore. I salute those who are staying and fighting for change, but I just don't have that kind of patience. Perhaps I am a very selfish person, but I pick my battles in life and these are my choices. Congratulations to America and we'll never ever see a president quite as awesome as Obama in my lifetime. Many thanks for reading.
This is indeed going to have a huge impact on Singapore - what is going to happen to gay American expats in SG, considering SG ambition as a smart nation? Will their marriage be recognised in Singapore? Will they be able to bring their spouse over? If their spouse is hospitalized, can they make decisions for them? If they have children, are they considered the legal parents of their child? Or even.. GASP, they will even be allowed in Singapore because their love is considered a crime in Singapore?
Okay, going out for breakfast! This is a good time to alive indeed. :)
Dakota, as a married gay man, I've visited Singapore many times with my partner and there has never been any fuss. But then again, there's nothing in my passport that states that I am either gay or married.
Then again, as long as the PAP is in charge, things won't change in Singapore.
No, I don't think so. Imagine this: a gay founder of a top technological company wants to live in Singapore. If he moves his company here, the company will be able to employ a lot of Singaporeans and give Singapore an edge in the technological market.
Now is the SG govt going say, "No homo, natural family only.", and ask for the founder to move out? Or are they going to recognise foreign gay marriages?
Limpeh, I would like to ask, was your partner recognised as your family member in Singapore? Was your partner given the same privileges as any other foreign married couple in SG? I don't know anything since I am not even married yet, hahaha.
The SG Govt does not ask any questions about the sexuality of the expatriates: indeed, if you wanna work in Singapore as a foreigner, your case is evaluated on the strength of your merits (ie. what your business proposal is, or how much you stand to earn, how many jobs that would generate etc) and never does the question about sex or sexuality come up.
The SG govt will never recognize foreign gay marriages - when I worked in S'pore back in 2011, my civil partner (we had a civil partnership as back in those days, it was a civil wedding, not a full blown marriage - same thing, just different name until 2014 when we could then call it a marriage) didn't but flown in from time to time to say hello to me and take advantage of the fact that I had a lavish pad a stone's throw from Somerset MRT then. He didn't require a visa to enter Singapore as a British tourist - many nationalities enjoy visa-free access to Singapore as tourists. So, because he was just a tourist (and not a resident), our status was not of consequence to the authorities though if anything happened, then I'm sure the British embassy would have assisted us.
Hi Alex, for once I have to disagree with you in principle on your point that as long as PAP is ruling, things won't change. I think that fundamentally, it is Singaporeans who are the key problem - afraid of rocking the boat, conditioned fear to not speak up, "outsourced" thinking to only authorities and unwillingness / inability to see that their (in)actions have led to the current stage.
I have read the various reports on the US advocates for marriage equality and a few points are notably conspicuous. Constitutional rights are enforced through due judicial processes; judges have the moral and legal courage to acknowledge changing social conditions and interpret constitutions in context; individuals, academia and media have the independence and permit to assemble, rally and argue their case without political and legal ironfists banging from the state; politicians have to be clear on the values they stand for, not just a simple "ruling" vs "opposition". Depressingly, I realise that none of these are present in Singapore. The courts have never strayed from the official line and have never displayed any of the courage seen in democratic countries. Freedom of expression that stray from official stance is abbreviated or swept under the carpet. Media players and academics have likewise self censored and been really neutered when it comes to social issues, including gay rights. Even most MNCs that support equal rights to LGBT issues stay low key in Singapore (e.g. IKEA) despite their obvious progress elsewhere.
I personally find both PAP and opposition politicians bland and uninspiring outside of economic bread and butter issues (housing, cost of living, CPF etc). Social issues and values are all avoided or only loosely addressed instead of taking a firm stand and taking a clear lead. Other than the Singapore Democrat Party's Chee Soon Juan, none have been clear on sociopolitical issues. Unfortunately, the PAP govt has over the years been labelling CSJ as a social pariah. I guess he was just too far ahead and too threatening for the socially conservatives.
These handicaps apply not just to LGBT issues but to all social and rights-linked topics. The Singapore mindset is strongly biased to status quo and inertia rather than pushing boundaries. Even with a new ruling non PAP govt, does the people have the mindset and the creativity and moral courage to advance things? I really doubt so at this point in time. Social prgress is far more constricted than in the US, the latest bastion and microcosm of the constitutional rights scene. The US bravery in pushing for equal rights to marriage once again shows the strength of democracy and rule of law. In contrast, Singapore is not a real democracy and I seriously doubt that a change of govt will result in social improvement if the DNA of the people remains as fossilised.
Am heading away next year but I really do sympathise with those who have no means to leave. My sister has been ironically saying that those who can leave and get a well paying job elsewhere are also likely the same who can live very comfortably in Singapore while those who suffer the most will also be the least mobile. Sad but true.
Hi Shane. Perhaps I am being too negative, in my previous piece I did say that mortality was the key component to social change - ie. older conservative folks die and younger kids grow up a lot more liberal because of the media; this process is going to be accelerated because of the pace of change with IT. My parents are not on the internet at all, whilst my nephew is totally tech-savvy; so perhaps it's just sufficient to leave mortality to do it's job with time (but then this is a process which takes decades). It took the UK nearly 50 years to get from decriminalizing gay sex to gay marriage and well, I am not sure I will be alive in 50 years given that I am 39 today - I can't wait 50 years or more for things to change in Singapore. So I am pretty much looking at things from a 'in my lifetime' perspective.
I do get the drift Alex. However, it is not just a case of waiting for the conservatives to die out as the social mindset of even the younger tech savvy lot borders on the indifferent, not in my backyard, not my problem. The whole gay issue is about the wider acknowledgment of rights, I.e. Equal rights, not special rights. Taiwan as an autonomous entity only came about in 1949 but their social progress is way advanced despite the PRC looming always in the background. The people fought for their rights. I am just not sure Singaporeans including the younger are ready and prepared for that. I will be 40 in less than 3 months, so I guess I am also not mentally prepared to wait, having experienced living in Taiwan and down under and the US.
Some other countries are not much better than Singapore in the aspect of tolerance though. Look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMF9aKjNzcc
It was kind of funny, if the argument the protest was organized around--a defense of Korean traditions and morals--was directly tied up to Christianity, a faith that is arguably of foreign roots to many Koreans, and took root mainly because of the work of American missionaries in Korea during the Korean War and Second World War. All the placards of "Homosexuality=AIDS", with the assumption that AIDS is a foreigner-borne disease, as well as the attempt to crowd out noise with noise, rather than engaging someone in polite conversation, make Singapore's "don't ask, don't tell" approach seem like 'homophobia lite' compared to South Korea.
Hi Kevin, thanks for sharing that post. I have gotten into a fair bit of a spat with some (former) friends whom I had to unfriend on FB ever since #Lovewins. A few of these folks have been circulating a more subtle anti gay marriage message by trying to draw pity to children. Example: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/02/14370/
The assumptions - all children are happy only with a father and mother; that being deprived of one or both natural parent = negativity, pain and social loss; two same gender parent = cannot make up for the pain and loss of the child. Conclusion = no no to gay marriage. The example above is even more insiduous as it had been written by a woman who was brought up by her two gay mums. All sounding really emo and peachy until you realise that there are people raised by adoptive heterosexual parents, children in single parent family who turned out ok. Even if father and mother are intact, what happens if one parent is a hopeless addict and beats up the spouse? Happy family = father and mother living together? Pity the child in a father + mum living together but mum is a drunkard? Or rather the poor child who only had mum as father passed away before she was born and she had to be lovingly housed with a doting mum and grandma?
Unfortunately, so many ignorants are so easily enamoured by simple surface explanations they stop thinking. Sorry, homophobic, racist and silliness = unfriend. To me, I rather have those crazies like Lawrence Khong than stealth bombers - you can see how loony the former type is but for the latter, it is a sly subtle brainwashing.
Shane, I mean, I am by no means liberal in my convictions, but people have to learn to know the difference between being rude (and disrespectful) and being cordially diplomatic (and knowing where to draw the line at agreeing to disagree). If the disagreement is going to become a case of each side trying to use noise and pageantry to drown out each other's voices, then you can be sure that neither side is even listening anymore even if they hear anything. That was what went on in the case of the two "camps" at 2015's Seoul Queer Culture Festival. The bad press received by the ones who tried to stop the parade seemed to be somewhat more overwhelming than anything else, especially when you see people using rather outrightly offensive gestures in one form or another.
It was rather enjoyable watching the religious bigots twisting their knickers. But I hope the joyfully garish outburst of colors dies down soon. My eyes are hurting.
Me too! I am so happy that #LOVEWINS.
ReplyDeleteThis is indeed going to have a huge impact on Singapore - what is going to happen to gay American expats in SG, considering SG ambition as a smart nation? Will their marriage be recognised in Singapore? Will they be able to bring their spouse over? If their spouse is hospitalized, can they make decisions for them? If they have children, are they considered the legal parents of their child? Or even.. GASP, they will even be allowed in Singapore because their love is considered a crime in Singapore?
Okay, going out for breakfast! This is a good time to alive indeed. :)
Dakota, as a married gay man, I've visited Singapore many times with my partner and there has never been any fuss. But then again, there's nothing in my passport that states that I am either gay or married.
DeleteThen again, as long as the PAP is in charge, things won't change in Singapore.
No, I don't think so. Imagine this: a gay founder of a top technological company wants to live in Singapore. If he moves his company here, the company will be able to employ a lot of Singaporeans and give Singapore an edge in the technological market.
DeleteNow is the SG govt going say, "No homo, natural family only.", and ask for the founder to move out? Or are they going to recognise foreign gay marriages?
Limpeh, I would like to ask, was your partner recognised as your family member in Singapore? Was your partner given the same privileges as any other foreign married couple in SG? I don't know anything since I am not even married yet, hahaha.
OK Dakota, here's the answer to your questions.
DeleteThe SG Govt does not ask any questions about the sexuality of the expatriates: indeed, if you wanna work in Singapore as a foreigner, your case is evaluated on the strength of your merits (ie. what your business proposal is, or how much you stand to earn, how many jobs that would generate etc) and never does the question about sex or sexuality come up.
The SG govt will never recognize foreign gay marriages - when I worked in S'pore back in 2011, my civil partner (we had a civil partnership as back in those days, it was a civil wedding, not a full blown marriage - same thing, just different name until 2014 when we could then call it a marriage) didn't but flown in from time to time to say hello to me and take advantage of the fact that I had a lavish pad a stone's throw from Somerset MRT then. He didn't require a visa to enter Singapore as a British tourist - many nationalities enjoy visa-free access to Singapore as tourists. So, because he was just a tourist (and not a resident), our status was not of consequence to the authorities though if anything happened, then I'm sure the British embassy would have assisted us.
Hi Alex, for once I have to disagree with you in principle on your point that as long as PAP is ruling, things won't change. I think that fundamentally, it is Singaporeans who are the key problem - afraid of rocking the boat, conditioned fear to not speak up, "outsourced" thinking to only authorities and unwillingness / inability to see that their (in)actions have led to the current stage.
DeleteI have read the various reports on the US advocates for marriage equality and a few points are notably conspicuous. Constitutional rights are enforced through due judicial processes; judges have the moral and legal courage to acknowledge changing social conditions and interpret constitutions in context; individuals, academia and media have the independence and permit to assemble, rally and argue their case without political and legal ironfists banging from the state; politicians have to be clear on the values they stand for, not just a simple "ruling" vs "opposition". Depressingly, I realise that none of these are present in Singapore. The courts have never strayed from the official line and have never displayed any of the courage seen in democratic countries. Freedom of expression that stray from official stance is abbreviated or swept under the carpet. Media players and academics have likewise self censored and been really neutered when it comes to social issues, including gay rights. Even most MNCs that support equal rights to LGBT issues stay low key in Singapore (e.g. IKEA) despite their obvious progress elsewhere.
I personally find both PAP and opposition politicians bland and uninspiring outside of economic bread and butter issues (housing, cost of living, CPF etc). Social issues and values are all avoided or only loosely addressed instead of taking a firm stand and taking a clear lead. Other than the Singapore Democrat Party's Chee Soon Juan, none have been clear on sociopolitical issues. Unfortunately, the PAP govt has over the years been labelling CSJ as a social pariah. I guess he was just too far ahead and too threatening for the socially conservatives.
These handicaps apply not just to LGBT issues but to all social and rights-linked topics. The Singapore mindset is strongly biased to status quo and inertia rather than pushing boundaries. Even with a new ruling non PAP govt, does the people have the mindset and the creativity and moral courage to advance things? I really doubt so at this point in time. Social prgress is far more constricted than in the US, the latest bastion and microcosm of the constitutional rights scene. The US bravery in pushing for equal rights to marriage once again shows the strength of democracy and rule of law. In contrast, Singapore is not a real democracy and I seriously doubt that a change of govt will result in social improvement if the DNA of the people remains as fossilised.
Am heading away next year but I really do sympathise with those who have no means to leave. My sister has been ironically saying that those who can leave and get a well paying job elsewhere are also likely the same who can live very comfortably in Singapore while those who suffer the most will also be the least mobile. Sad but true.
Hi Shane. Perhaps I am being too negative, in my previous piece I did say that mortality was the key component to social change - ie. older conservative folks die and younger kids grow up a lot more liberal because of the media; this process is going to be accelerated because of the pace of change with IT. My parents are not on the internet at all, whilst my nephew is totally tech-savvy; so perhaps it's just sufficient to leave mortality to do it's job with time (but then this is a process which takes decades). It took the UK nearly 50 years to get from decriminalizing gay sex to gay marriage and well, I am not sure I will be alive in 50 years given that I am 39 today - I can't wait 50 years or more for things to change in Singapore. So I am pretty much looking at things from a 'in my lifetime' perspective.
DeleteI do get the drift Alex. However, it is not just a case of waiting for the conservatives to die out as the social mindset of even the younger tech savvy lot borders on the indifferent, not in my backyard, not my problem. The whole gay issue is about the wider acknowledgment of rights, I.e. Equal rights, not special rights. Taiwan as an autonomous entity only came about in 1949 but their social progress is way advanced despite the PRC looming always in the background. The people fought for their rights. I am just not sure Singaporeans including the younger are ready and prepared for that. I will be 40 in less than 3 months, so I guess I am also not mentally prepared to wait, having experienced living in Taiwan and down under and the US.
DeleteSome other countries are not much better than Singapore in the aspect of tolerance though. Look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMF9aKjNzcc
DeleteIt was kind of funny, if the argument the protest was organized around--a defense of Korean traditions and morals--was directly tied up to Christianity, a faith that is arguably of foreign roots to many Koreans, and took root mainly because of the work of American missionaries in Korea during the Korean War and Second World War. All the placards of "Homosexuality=AIDS", with the assumption that AIDS is a foreigner-borne disease, as well as the attempt to crowd out noise with noise, rather than engaging someone in polite conversation, make Singapore's "don't ask, don't tell" approach seem like 'homophobia lite' compared to South Korea.
Hi Kevin, thanks for sharing that post. I have gotten into a fair bit of a spat with some (former) friends whom I had to unfriend on FB ever since #Lovewins. A few of these folks have been circulating a more subtle anti gay marriage message by trying to draw pity to children. Example: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/02/14370/
DeleteThe assumptions - all children are happy only with a father and mother; that being deprived of one or both natural parent = negativity, pain and social loss; two same gender parent = cannot make up for the pain and loss of the child. Conclusion = no no to gay marriage. The example above is even more insiduous as it had been written by a woman who was brought up by her two gay mums. All sounding really emo and peachy until you realise that there are people raised by adoptive heterosexual parents, children in single parent family who turned out ok. Even if father and mother are intact, what happens if one parent is a hopeless addict and beats up the spouse? Happy family = father and mother living together? Pity the child in a father + mum living together but mum is a drunkard? Or rather the poor child who only had mum as father passed away before she was born and she had to be lovingly housed with a doting mum and grandma?
Unfortunately, so many ignorants are so easily enamoured by simple surface explanations they stop thinking. Sorry, homophobic, racist and silliness = unfriend. To me, I rather have those crazies like Lawrence Khong than stealth bombers - you can see how loony the former type is but for the latter, it is a sly subtle brainwashing.
Shane, I mean, I am by no means liberal in my convictions, but people have to learn to know the difference between being rude (and disrespectful) and being cordially diplomatic (and knowing where to draw the line at agreeing to disagree). If the disagreement is going to become a case of each side trying to use noise and pageantry to drown out each other's voices, then you can be sure that neither side is even listening anymore even if they hear anything. That was what went on in the case of the two "camps" at 2015's Seoul Queer Culture Festival. The bad press received by the ones who tried to stop the parade seemed to be somewhat more overwhelming than anything else, especially when you see people using rather outrightly offensive gestures in one form or another.
DeleteIt was rather enjoyable watching the religious bigots twisting their knickers. But I hope the joyfully garish outburst of colors dies down soon. My eyes are hurting.
ReplyDelete