Sayoni is hosting a 3-hour group discussion to understand LGBT persons' recent experiences of Singaporean secondary schools. The information collected will not be identifiable. If you are aged 16 to 21, and would like to participate, please register your interest here. Your participation will contribute toward an SMU student paper and, potentially, future advocacy by Sayoni.

For enquiries or if you prefer to speak to us privately, please email Xiu Xuan at xiuxuan.lim.2009@business.smu.edu.sg.

She is supervised by Kelly Then, who can be contacted at kelly@sayoni.com.

To Singapore’s LGBT Community and Friends,

Recent events have caused much grief to many of us. Issues surrounding being LGBT are once again cast in the limelight and being discussed in the media. Hateful words have been used, disinformation has been spread as fact, and our leaders' positions do not appear to be evolving. While many of us are understandably hurt, even angered, by some insensitive comments that have been made, and there is fear that justice and equality may not prevail, it is important that we stay rational and keep calm.

There will be little to be gained from responding to vitriol with more vitriol. In the words of Gandhi, “Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding.” Let us not devolve into the very image of the angry and intolerant, whose hearts and minds we ought to win over through love and kindness. Misinformation is best countered rationally, with facts.

At times like this, it is especially difficult for those of us who are not yet ‘out’ and feel like we are living with stigma on our own. The issue may be debated among our peers – at the workplace, in school or in National Service – or even with family members at home. It may be placing undue pressure on those of us who fear being ‘outed’ if we simply took a stand.

Remember, you are not alone. There is a strong community of people – straight and LGBT – who understand what you are going through. It is important that we lend support to one another at this difficult time. While the resources are few, they are available, thanks to the efforts of our own community. You can find links to some of them below.

Let us also keep reminding ourselves that the two constitutional challenges on Section 377a of the Penal Code are ultimately judicial processes. They are set to be heard in the Courts in a few weeks. We should allow Justice to run its course and respect the sanctity of the Judiciary. We urge the community to stay calm and await the court's decision. May justice prevail.

Meanwhile let us continue to reach out in our own personal capacities to those around us, to demonstrate and affirm that who we love should not make us less equal as sons and daughters of Singapore. And when opportunities arise for us to come together, let us be sure to stand up and be counted.

Some useful links for those in need of support:

§ Oogachaga’s CARE Counselling Service for LGBT people
http://www.oogachaga.com/congregaytion/website/care

§ SAFE Singapore: Support for family and friends of LGBT people
http://safesingapore.blogspot.sg/

§ Young Out Here: LGBT Youth Support
http://young-out-here.blogspot.sg/

§ Sayoni’s resources for lesbian, bisexual and transgender women
http://www.sayoni.com/glbt-resources/coming-out

§ Pelangi Pride Centre: Singapore’s LGBT community and resource centre
http://www.pelangipridecentre.org/

§ Pink Dot SG website & YouTube channel
http://pinkdot.sg/
http://www.youtube.com/user/pinkdotsg

Following our meeting with the Minister, many comments were made in public and in private.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but one comment on our website stood out. The comment started off promising, recognising the typical social roles and contributions of queer persons. It quickly degenerated into a vulgar and violent threat of severe physical assault. When a person incites violence against a minority, whether they are ethnic, religious or sexual minorities, it becomes hate speech.

We decided to make a police report because we are vulnerable, not just as individuals, but as a community. Many queer persons receive threats from persons they know or strangers, at school, in National Service or in casual, social settings. For some who look different, it is a common occurrence. Threats or acts of violence are usually under-reported, but by persons of stigmatised identities, even more so, because they face additional stigma and repercussions.

Hate speech can escalate into hate crime. The recent report in The New Paper about a gang rape is an example of a hate crime, where a person is targeted because they are perceived to be of a particular social group.

As a society, we need to signal that such threats and acts are not acceptable. They offend public decency and are unjust. We would like to encourage everyone to stand up against threats and violence, whether you are a survivor or a bystander.

Stay tuned for updates.

It all started on the 6th of October 2012 when, out of sheer frustration about the state of institutionalised discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons in Singapore, I left a note on the Facebook Page of the Minister for Law and Foreign Affairs, K Shanmugam.

I wrote of friends leaving and the National Conversation making no effort to remember that we are Singaporeans too. I highlighted our trip to the United Nations last year to present our shadow report detailing the kind of discrimination that the government so often denies. As I wrote, I got a little bolder and said that if LGBT citizens are not wanted, please tell us, so that we can all forget this struggle and move on to wherever we need to be.

Minister Shanmugam kindly replied, “There can be no suggestion that LGBT citizens are not wanted.” The bigger question is, with the diverse viewpoints in our society and often held strongly by various groups, the government is often caught in the middle trying to decide what would be acceptable to the majority.

I replied by speaking about retaining laws like 377A, which in turn informs or influences policies, creating a cascading effect felt deeply by every LGBT person in Singapore. The exchange went on a few more times and Minister Shanmugam suggested that we meet for a proper chat for him to hear us more on the issues.

On the 27th of November, Kelly, Irene and I met Minister Shanmugam. We shook hands and introduced ourselves. He is a soft-spoken man with eyes reflecting his intelligence and who listened closely to what was said to him. For privacy, selected parts of the conversation are reported here.

Minister Shanmugam started out by describing what he saw of the diversity of views in our society and how different segments of the population see the LGBT community. This is an issue of personal conduct and different people will have their own take on such conduct. It is not easy for the government to tell citizens what viewpoint to take – many people will have strongly held views based on religious and other beliefs. He went on to say that the debate won’t stop at the repeal of 377A. Debates on same-sex marriage and other issues would follow. All the culture wars which are being fought in the USA might be brought to Singapore. The government has been saying we should leave things be by letting people carry on with their lives and be tolerant. Even though 377A is kept on the books, charges have not been proactively brought on 377A.

Irene asked why a government that has made unpopular decisions when it felt the need to stays ambivalent on this subject.

The Minister replied that the government cares deeply about citizens’ viewpoints and that public opinion does matter very much. Precisely because of its focus on what people need and feel, the government has been successful. He went on to say that the state cannot govern without the consent of the people.

We described to the Minister experiences in the lifespan of an LGBT person and obstacles we faced from young to old age. The Minister paid close attention when we outlined the kinds of discrimination we face in a wide spectrum of areas, from employment, education, housing and social benefits to violence. We linked the cascading effects of laws and censorship that justifies the discriminatory policies and how they translate to simple day-to-day living circumstances.

Minister Shanmugam listened intently to what we explained and said that for there to be change, there has to be a majority’s social acceptance, which we agreed that we are working on. However, we countered that it is difficult with censorship looming over our media, banning neutral or positive portrayals of LGBT persons.

We noted that the LGBT community would prefer not to have an adversarial relationship with the government. If there are no concrete actions taken on these issues, it is very difficult for us with or without our children to justifying staying in Singapore. The practicality of life demands a solution.

When our time was up, we thanked him for hearing us out. The meeting was a good opportunity to establish mutual understanding.  He offered to meet again, with a larger group of us.


Editor's Update: This meeting was picked up by the Straits Times and their report was published on 5 January with the photo used here.