Letters to the Stonewall Society

Furthermore, gay movements are always on the defensive, it’s not good enough, we ought to go on the offensive, charmingly, militantly or whatever way, why do you think some people become terrorists, because of oppression and tyranny of the majority. That is not to say we should start an armed struggle against the Establishment, but to educate everyone young or old, what we stand for and what we are. Also the age-old, well-worn stereotypical notion of the promiscuous gay man. Not everyone leads a life of debauchary, gay or straight, most want to be loved and to love.

Just two days ago in Singapore’s Parliament, the Minister for Home Affairs was tabling the admendments to the Penal Code (Chapter 224). Widely expected revisions were provisions for racial or religious hate crimes, removal of mandatory punishments and changes to the archaic unnatural sex statute. However, one significant part of the unnatural sex law have again failed the review. This time however, the Penal Code is being refined in definition, which is much needed. For instance, rape was previously defined as forced sexual intercourse on a woman by a man, now sexual intercourse will be defined as the penetration of the penis into the vagina only, and previously it was impossible to rape a man, now there is a new section for sexual assault by penetration (Section 376). This new provision however further punches holes into the Government’s argument for the retention of Section 377A, for in future sexual intercourse with a male minor with or without his consent, will be persecutable under Section 376 and Section 377A, resulting in possible double jeopardy, and more so if the male minor is under 16 (Section 376A). Not only is having consensual sex with a male minor illegal henceforth but also the communication prior to the act is punishable, even if the act never did happened.

Many groups have called for the repeal of the archaic unnatural sex laws, including from sectors within the government itself, so why did the Ministry only introduce admendments to Section 377 and not Section 377A? This is without a shadow of doubt, the high-handed government-endorsed oppression and discrimination of the gay community. The government is never one to be held down by public opinion, not even by opposition to their unpopular policies no matter how sensitive it may be, willingly sacrificing any sacred cows in the name of progress, so why have they been so attentive to the anti-homosexual camp on this one particular sensitive issue? Interestingly, anal and oral sex is perfectly fine for heterosexuals but not for homosexuals, for reasons that cannot hold any water. Previously, the criminalisation of unnatural sex acts was justified by that Singapore is a conservative society and that all religions and cultures in Singapore don’t endorse such unnatural and unproductive practices. If so, why have such anti-conservative and unproductive sexual acts be permissible between heterosexuals now? Need I say more.

This is not part of the “homosexual agenda”, nor is it about the gay minority, but it is an issue of civil liberties. If the government can choose to refuse a law-abiding group such fundamental rights, what else can they not do? The government is clearly using the Law to discriminate and oppress the gay minority, otherwise how do you explain this situation? The Law is supposed to protect the discriminated and the disadvantaged, not to perpetuate their suffering and indignation. Like how the US Supreme Court held up civil liberties during the 60′s in the face of majority opposition for equal rights for the blacks and other minorities, similarly the government should make full use of their high moral ground and strong mandate, and work towards a more inclusive society and for the good of every citizen, gay or straight. 

Recently a science teacher from Raffles Institution, which is a prestigious and reputable school in Singapore, “came out” as gay online on his blog. But unfortunately due to pressure from school administration, he was “forced” to remove the article. Most including his former students voiced their support for him and felt that it was unnecessary and that he shouldn’t be bowing down to bigotry, prejudices and official discrimination. However, he did what he did, for he didn’t want to blow it out of proportion and causing a potential confrontation with the parents of the school or even the Ministry of Education.

A blog is very much a private space, more so if it was available to a select few. Even though it maybe for public view however, if one doesn’t wish to see or hear anything about it, there isn’t a need to. It isn’t like the newspaper, the television or the radio, where it’s readily available, to all ages and segments of society. It is much like the theatre or the cinema, which is why the government allows for restricted films and plays to be shown, and not broadcast on mass media. The internet is also known as the World Wide Web, which implies that it’s wide and big enough to “cover” the world. Being so huge, I hardly can see how the internet or any blog can intrude on anyone’s private space. Why aren’t these people going after the virtual terrorists whom may have orchestrated the deadly 911 attacks or the Bali bombings? Or why aren’t they going after those churning out child pornography? Or those scam-artists? Why not? It’s because they are out to bully those they can, and gay men are the easiest to bully, because we wouldn’t commit terrorist acts in retaliation, it’s homophobia personified.

I don’t see how writing on your blog about your own sexuality has anything to do with imparting values and knowledge to students. Are they saying that by staying in the closet, that the teacher would be able to impart values and knowledge “inconsistent with his sexuality” to his impressionable teenage students? This is absolutely baseless, because whether a person is closeted or out, he is still GAY! In fact, I strongly feel and think that it will be better if people knew about it, otherwise there can be instances of blackmail and deceit. Imagine what it will do to our national security, not forgetting our armed forces is heavily reliant on reservist forces.

Furthermore, I believe with strong convictions that students from secondary level onwards should be educated not only in sex, but also sexuality. It is extremely wrong for the school administration and the Ministry to still think and assume that everyone is straight, which is highly laughable. What can be more wrong? Abstinence, who are they kidding? Haven’t they heard the statistics on teenage pregnancy? This isn’t the only failure in the public health programme. They have kept homosexuals out of many public health programmes progressively over the years. Why can’t they be more pragmatic about this, which is causing many lives, if not more.

Ignorance is bliss, but in this day and age, highly impractical. Just because they don’t allow their kids to know, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t know. Or do they seriously think that if their kids doesn’t know, they wouldn’t do it or try to attempt to do it? This is just plain denial. At present the internet is at your fingertips, especially for the younger generation. Who doesn’t know how to google? If you are reading this, you should and must. Which is why is is vitally important that teachers need and ought to educate children on this, to set the record straight and what their choices should be. Children need guidance, not ignorance or denial.

Conservatism is highly impractical in this modern society. What is considered a good role model? A straight male teacher who commits adultery? Or a straight male teacher who commits rape or molest? I’m guessing that those conservative and bigoted people still thinks that gay men are sexual deviants, paedophiles, child molesters or perverts? I wonder where they got the basis for saying all these? If it’s anything to compare, I dare say straight men are a worst bunch, murderers, thieves, burglars, rapists, polygamists, terrorists and all, just because I read about them in the newspaper! Can’t straight men be all those, sexual deviants, paedophiles, child molesters and perverts? Shouldn’t heterosexuality be criminalised and persecuted then?

What is considered normal or the norm? The yardstick for each society and each circumstance is different. Some societies approve of polygamy, most don’t. Some societies approve of holy war, most seek eternal peace. Some societies approve of honour killings, most don’t. So are these societies abnormal? What’s considered the norm? My norm or your norm? Like everything, it differs from individual to individual, like dietary habits, amount of exercise, educational level and so on.

Many Singaporeans, including the Government, always rave about Singapore’s mixed identity and cosmopolitan cultures, but in reality, are we Singaporeans that accepting about someone a little more different from the rest of us? All talk about diversity is futile, if we don’t embrace every single minority, even ex-offenders. If ex-offenders get a chance to change people’s perception of them, shouldn’t we?

Unnatural offences.
377. Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animals, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Outrages on decency.
377A. Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.

The above two ordinances are the oft-quoted Section 377 of the Penal Code (Chapter 224) of the Republic of Singapore. This section criminalises any ”unnatural” sexual activity; i.e. sodomy, fellatio. As these activities are the sexual activities male homosexuals engaged in, thus by extension, male homosexuality is being criminalised.

For a government that goes “law-by-law” so to speak, it is extremely laughable and discrediting to have the Minister for Home Affairs announce that although Section 377 is on the books, the law enforcement agencies do not actively enforce this statute. All laws made have and ought to be enforce, or the Law itself becomes a joke, for there are no double standards in the eyes of the law. If a government cannot enforce their Law, how can they effectively govern? Moreover, if the government do not actively enforce this part of the Penal Code, are they not implying that this law is superfluous (i.e. obsolete, excessive, unnecessary).

The rationale given by the Singapore government for retaining Section 377, is for use to prosecute child molesters and rapists, which is extremely convenient, for we do have provisions in the same Penal Code to prosecute child molesters (Section 354) and rapists (Section 375), although Section 375 have to be expanded in definition, which is antiquated, as rape is define as ‘a man who has sexual intercourse with a woman either:
1.  against her will
2.  without her consent
3.  with her consent that has been obtained by putting her in fear of death or hurt
4.  with her consent when the man knows that he is not her husband and her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married or to whom she would consent
5.  with or without her consent when she is under 14 years of age.’ In this age and time, it is highly probable that a man or woman can be forced to have sex with either.

Therefore, I strongly urge the Ministry of Law and the Ministry of Home Affairs to look deep and carefully review the archaic provisions in the Penal Code, not just Section 377 or even Section 375. The Law is not suppose to discriminate but to protect all individuals, especially minorities. It is shameful that in today’s world, there are still sections of society who are systematically and officially discriminated against, it is more than sufficient that homosexuals get discriminated against socially.

I tried a personality test or something on what kind of guy I would be with or have a crush on, apparently he is the Boy Next Door.

Whoever said nice guys finish last was wrong. Whether he lives next door or across town, an honest and hunky hottie will win the heart of a sweet thing like you. You’ve got your eyes open for a good guy who’s responsible and trustworthy. The kind who’ll call when he says he will, make you mix CDs, take you out to the movies (and always offer to pay), and treat you like gold — as any guy should!

Nice doesn’t have to mean boring, after all. You and your crush will have loads of fun whether you’re goofing around at the mall, tearing it up on the dance floor, renting a movie, or sharing a romantic walk. Now that’ll get the neighbors talking!

I may have dated numerous times and I’m not those who goes for the muscular or handsome ones but rather I go for that “feeling”, rarely do I get the one guy which I have chemistry and could communicate very well. Everytime I like a guy and the other guy acknowledges it too, I thought maybe this might be the one, then out of the sudden, they would say they have their restrictions, their values, their contraints, their aspirations or their commitments. They would then say sorry, but the damage done can hardly be covered by just an apology. When I asked them what has happened between us, they would say it’s not because of me but themselves or something about it happening too fast. If I didn’t interest them, why didn’t they just say so? What is all this ambiguity about? I can’t accept it nor comprend it nor take it either. I thought by sacrificing all I can give and that all I have, I’m able to get at least some reciprocration. LOVE can’t be forced, I know that, then why in the first place were they interested in a relationship and seems so into me.

A friend of mine just asked me not long ago about what I thought about love, the definition and all the other odds and ends of love. I gave him my input on the subject dutifully, then something came to my mind, my first and only Love (hopefully not for life).

Yes, I still love him very much and was the one who initiated the break-up and ended the relationship after more than 2 years in it. Why you might ask? It’s complicated but the answer is perfectly simple, it was not meant to be. Questions again. How we even begun? It’s was mutual love at first sight, rare in straight relationships, even more so in gay ones. If both of us were mutually and are still in love, why break up? Love doesn’t come as a package. This package lack certain crucial components for success, this one being communication (He’s Chinese-speaking, while I’m English-speaking). In effect, it was miscommunication to be accurate, because we had alot to talk about and shared many the same ideals, thoughts and philosophies. We were never bored in each other, spoke long hours on the phone and had our fair share of comfortable silence. If it was so good, why end? Relationships aren’t easy, in this case, our temperments were characters were incompatible (an example will be being at loggerheads with dad or mom), irreconcilable differences such which could not substain a long future even though we had so much in common. We had chemistry but not compatibility. 

To me, love is a multi-faceted feeling that is stronger than liking or adoration, that last forever in the heart and mind, which is indescribible and undescribible. One thing is certain, love is blind, for beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.  

I like guys who are initiative, adventurous, interesting, thoughful and love the outdoors (charming, intellectual and chivalrous if possible). At present, I’m interested in getting sporting buddies, friends (especially straight, confused or bisexual guys), dating and long-term relationships. 

Recently, I have been asked frequently on various dates what I really wanted in a guy and very often during online chats with potential dates and guys I have met online. I never really put much thought in it but here’s the list, I sincerely hope it isn’t much.

1) Caring & Concerned
2) Loving & Warm (Compassionate or Passionate?)
3) Intellectual enough to hold a conversation and many conversations to come
4) Adventurous in everyway (Don’t think dirty), including being athletic
5) Similar wavelength in thoughts and interests
6) Compatible in most sense
7) At ease with self with a bit of suaveness
Good-looking, cute or handsome if possible
9) Toned body, muscular if possible
10) Able to commit and faithful to a single guy, ME
11) Chivalrous or gentlemanly (Manly included)
12) Initiative at times
13) Able to read me at times and vice versa
14) Lovable and kind (Boyish kind but not childish please!)
15) Generous in all ways and not self-centered
16) Good-tempered and able to tolerate my nonsense (Haha! I’m not that bad ok!)
17) Tall (I’m 180cm, but I’m fine with guys that are 175cm and above)
18) Not sex-obsessed and romantic in his own way
19) Attentive & Respectful of himself and myself of each other’s space
20) Clean, neat, well-groomed and hygienic (Very important! I’m allergic to bad odours!)
21) Have a sense of humour
22) No Smokers or Compulsive Gamblers or Alcoholics
23) Trustworthy, righteous and courageous
24) Have a unique character of his own (Not just some guy who likes every single music he hears or whatever he sees)
25) The most important of all: Special Connection & Chemistry and later Mutually in Love!

I just hope this extensive list doesn’t scares off any potential dates or boyfriends.