I have been following the Aware saga from the newspapers and it’s been a very entertaining drama (a la Hong Kong TVBS serial drama storylines) so far. However I see many people just been drawn into making a stand (either for or against the ‘new guard’) with totally irrational and biased standpoints. It seems that many people are rooting for or against the ‘new guard’ simply based on one criteria – ‘pro-gay’ or ‘anti-gay’.
From a totally non-biased (I’m not gay, not pro nor anti gay, not pro Christian nor anti Christian, no vested interests of any sort) point of view, I think it is quite clear which side is wrong. Allow me to summarize the facts briefly. I don’t intend this to be a comprehensive coverage of what happened so far, just what I observed.
1. The Aware new guard claimed they were not ‘anti-gay’, but they are, coincidentally, linked to a church that has strong views against homosexuality. Further, in some of their church emails which are circulating on the Internet, staff and members of the church referred to the Aware ‘old guard’ as ‘pro-gay’.
2. Ms Thio, the self-proclaimed ‘feminist mentor’ of the new Aware exco, claimed that she had been a supporter of Aware in its early days but the founding members did not remember her at all. Further, in emails circulating on the Internet, Ms Thio’s email to gather support for the now infamous AGM did not mention much (if anything at all) about feminism. Nor did any other of those emails the church members and staff sent say anything about feminism. It seemed to be all about furthering their own hidden agenda of forcing their anti-gay views through using Aware, a secular organization, as a vehicle. Further, why the secrecy, if they were not having a hidden agenda? In one of those emails, Ms Thio mentioned that her identity could not be exposed, and asked those who wanted to join Aware to write nothing on the portion of the Aware membership application form that asked who referred them to Aware.
2. The new guard claimed that they were not bringing religion into Aware, but it emerged later that it was quite clear that they had a religious agenda, and that, worse still, they were trying to hide this agenda by denying it. My opinion is that by taking over a secular women’s organization, they are showing a blatant disrespect for the existence of other religions in Singapore… trying to impose their religious beliefs onto others forcefully. See below for excerpts of those emails:
“Right now we should pray for the COOS members who are being put through scrutiny and invasion of their private lives by the media. Pray that God’s Word will prevail over the values of the world. Homosexuality isn’t God’s design and we pray that those who stand up against it and are discriminated will be delivered. Praise God for COOS’ stand and He who aids us as we stand firmly upon His Word.”
“The pro-gay old guards are retaliating by calling for an Extraordinary General Meeting where they intend to amend the Constitution to only allow members who have been with AWARE for more than 2 years, to vote. If this change is passed, then only the pro-gay old guards and their cohorts will have the power to do what they want.”
“Right now we should pray for the COOS members who are being put through scrutiny and invasion of their private lives by the media. Pray that God’s Word will prevail over the values of the world. Homosexuality isn’t God’s design and we pray that those who stand up against it and are discriminated will be delivered.”
“From: smthio@xxxxxxx.sg
..Please ask your like-minded friends to join Aware so that you can give the vote to those who wish to be an agent of change for the Lord. They could also contribute to the activities of the oprganization as there is much to be done for women and families in this dowturn of the economy. Unfortunately, I cannot surface but shall be assisting in the background . I attach the Aware membership application form for your use. The Aware application form has a section as to who ( if any) told you about Aware. You can just leave it blank .”
3. The new guard exhibited classical signs of consumer behavior – they seemed to be looking for confirming information about the old guard so as to ‘prove their point’ that the latter were advocating ‘pro-gay’ lifestyles, and painted a ‘pro-family’ picture of themselves (and thus justifying their ‘anti-gay’ stance) so as to justify their coup. This was evident from the fact that they only highlighted the more ‘pro-gay’ activities that the old guard held, which might have only comprised of a small percentage of all the activities Aware organized. Further, they seemed to have ignored the disconfirming information… they highlighted that ex-leader Constance Singam attended a gay event last year… but omitted the fact that she had been unwilling to do so previously for fear of being seen as advocating homosexuality…
4. Of course, the new guard, upon knowing that an EOGM would be held next week to bring them down, naturally wanted to protect their positions by garnering more voters on their side… and in the meantime they served themselves another blow with the email asking church members and friends to support their fellow members in the new guard (thereby admitting that Aware is now controlled by the church).
5. Guess whose side the Government is on? The Government has repeatedly said that they would not intervene in this saga. Kind of a dilemma for the Govt, which made clear it’s stance not to legalize homosexualism some time ago. Makes sense, since the Govt would not want to be seen as supporting one religion in a multi-religion society like Singapore. On the other hand, they don’t want to contradict themselves by appearing to support the pro-gay community. But subtle comments were made by various ministers… about how religious organizations should not make use of secular ones to forward their agendas… and now MOE is jumping into the fray by defending the talks on sexuality delivered by the old Aware, which was criticized by the new guard as promoting homosexuality.
Interesting to see how grown-ups with children can be so immatured in fighting over differences in opinions like that. This episode shows that 1. senior executives and professionals can be very childish too 2. better not offend women… as they say, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned =) 3. Singapore is confirmed to be VERY far from being an inclusive society at this point.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens as we move towards the EOGM next week… meanwhile, I am enjoying the dramatic twists and turns in this classic TVBS style catfight on my copy of the Straits Times, over a nice cuppa every morning.
Update: I just read an article on TOC which says that the church pastor made some comments about homosexuality and the new Aware. I was upset when I read that Pastor Hong made some comments to make it seem like the church is trying to impose their religious beliefs on everyone in Singapore. I have sent an email to them to seek clarifications. We’ll see if they respond.
- Hi
I am not gay, nor am I religiously affiliated. As a concerned citizen of Singapore I would like to seek clarifications on Pastor Hong’s recent comments on the Aware saga.
As all of us know, Singapore is a multi-religion and multi-racial society (and prides itself as being so). However, Pastor Hong commented that “the new team’s actions are not “a crusade against the people,” but instead a move to ensure that the nation does not cross the line drawn by God.”. I am curious as to why Pastor Hong termed it this way when Singapore is not a Christian country. It serves to disconfirm and disrespect the presence of other religions in Singapore – that the line drawn by God should be adhered to by the nation – which implies everyone in Singapore.
I would appreciate your clarifications on the above.
Update as of 30 April: I have heard nothing from COOS with regards to the above email I sent them. I see this very seriously, since it is a statement that presents their religion as superior to the other religions, by saying that there is a line drawn by God which should be followed by the nation (i.e. Singapore).
Related posts (auto generated):
tsk tsk, how dare you question them?
tsk tsk. I sure dare to question them, because, in their own words … “Why are you afraid if you have not done anything wrong?”
(recall the ST article that said one of the new exco members’ husband was recording conversations in the AWARE premises and he defended himself by saying this)
[...] of AWARE – this lush garden within: The Aware Conspiracy – facts – Almost Infamous: My Humble Suggestions involving the AWARE EOGM and the presence of Rajah and [...]
This is completely biased against the new guard. Not the least bit objective and does not explore what the old guard has done wrong at all. It is slanted in producing the facts from only one side of the story, while hiding the facts from the other side.
How is this biased?
It is completely based on facts.
Church of Our Savior, Thio, Lau and all the rest of the clowns should step down now graciously while they can before the bomb explodes in their faces.
Catholic Writer – Being someone with no interest in sticking with either camp, I see no reason why I should “hide” facts as you so accuse me of doing.
If there are any “facts” that you think I have missed out and is critical to the issue, pray tell me so that I can assess it and make a response. And also let me know in what respect is my writing “unfair” to the new guard. I am sorry, but I found nothing in favour of supporting the new guard, from the point of view of a generally non-religious and non-gay person.
If I am biased, I will not bother to email COOS for clarifications.
It is very easy to throw accusations at me, but please justify them so we both have a chance to clarify.
Catholic Writer – to add on, I must say that unlike myself, you seem to have a clear reason for taking sides, based on what I see on your blog.
The greatest mistake that people embroiled in this saga is to align themselves (or see other people who comment on the issue) as being EITHER PRO-GAY or ANTI-GAY. This is a very convenient way to organize our thoughts… however, is VERY DANGEROUS and WRONG.
Pro-gay and Anti-gay can be seen as two polar ends of a single measure. A lot of people would fall somewhere in between pro and anti… while few extremists would take sides on the extreme ends.
Indeed, another way to view it would be that both pro-gay and anti-gay beliefs can exist at the same time in the same person. Again, this is subject to the extent of belief and a convenient label of EITHER you are ‘pro-gay’ OR you are ‘anti-gay’ does not do justice.
I think the point of contention of many people now is that, AWARE is a secular organization. It should not be used to support values based on religious beliefs.
Just because the OLD AWARE is NOT AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE PRO-GAY, as the Christian fundamentalists from COOS have conveniently, unjustifably labelled them as so… by using a few examples to support the claims (out of the so many activities AWARE held)
Regardless of the outcome, AWARE will no longer be as effective as it used to be.
I agree…
I think Catholic Writer was being sarcastic. I hope.
homsexuality is illegal, if you are not against it, means you give it a higher status quo, means you are pro-gay. Understand?
Richard, so you mean to say that one is either pro-gay, neutral or anti-gay? Nothing in between?
If that’s how you look at things, then in your world there would be 3 types of people… good, neutral or bad people… nothing in between?
If that’s not the way you look at things in general, then you must be prejudiced against homosexuals since you look at this particular issue with a coloured lens.
Your facts are not “facts”, as much as you assert they are. I was at the EGM. Josie team already said they are supportive of all inclusive approach and intend AWARE to be secular. Plus, Josie’s team also clarified many times that none of the EXCO members stated their religious beliefs. It was the Press that played that up. What’s wrong, strictly speaking, even if many people from the same church join? You mean it is ok for many lesbians to join AWARE, but not ok for many people from same church to join AWARE.
Walker — so your facts are based on what comes out of Josie’s team members’ mouths?
If that can be considered as facts then we should judge accused people based on what they claim?
Josie team speaks one thing do another. They say they are for woman rights but the first thing they did when they took over was to fire a woman.
It’s convenient for Josie to push everything to the press when the facts is so clear that a Pastor had used his pulpit to garner support for Josie and gang.
What’s wrong you ask? Guess you didn’t even know what this whole saga is about then. For people like you, it’s a spiritual battle against homosexual. This is what the saga is about. For the rest of us, (or a majority of us) this saga is about a group of people from a religious group joining an organistion which they had played no part whatsoever with no clear intention and many hidden agenda.
The new guard’s action is so blatant even when their hidden agenda is not revealed. They basically fired everyone who they feel is ‘pro-old-guard’. I think action speaks louder than word.
Josie is all about words, lies and deceit. Where were Josie all the while when she claimed that she is for woman rights? Any records? None. Only records Josie had is her clear repulsion and objection for homosexuality. You might want to research on Josie’s past contribution to the press about this matter.
IN my opinion, Josie just wanted to blame the press because she thought it’s so easy to just take over la. No press, easily done, just call on their sisters and brothers from church, vote them out, take over, fire everyeone, turn AWARE into pro-christian. Simple and easy.
But no, the press just had to be involved. And spoilt her intention. By the time she realized it, it’s all about damage control. That’s what she is basically doing just to say her tarnished image.
There is so many doubt cast on Josie and gang’s credibility. Their intention is not clear. And yet they still want to take credit for the increase of membership? Ok, I give Josie the credit of giving bad publicity to AWARE. That’s about it. Now that she had made enough damage, then just bye bye lohz.
Do more research and u’ll find that Josie is ‘Very Glad about certain thing’.
Tsk tsk.
fxJH78 iaydgquakpcn, [url=http://jbnivxazjibb.com/]jbnivxazjibb[/url], [link=http://jehzigylgxcv.com/]jehzigylgxcv[/link], http://dnnjelroqkdz.com/