Category: Komentar

Send in your opinion to [email protected].
Kirimkan pandangan anda kepada [email protected].

Syed Danial: Challenge The Pink Dot Ideology, Engage In Civil Way And Help Those Struggling With Same-Sex Attraction

Dear friends (and various assortment of ‘spies’ from the other side),

We should offer thanks to God Almighty for all the Favours and Mercies He has bestowed upon us.

Although we are pleased with PM Lee’s remarks, we should not pat ourselves on the back. His statement is actually doubled-edged. And it is instructive of govt thinking on the matter. The operative phrase here is that SG is ‘still a conservative society’. And his remarks that it’s ‘changing’ offers sobering reminder not to rest on our laurels.

I think right now it’s important to act strategically. Our opponents are adept at media manipulation. The biggest mistake we can do right now is to appear too aggressive. They would play the victims card. We should therefore continue our activism in a civil way. Even polite. And we challenge the ideology. Not individual persons. We extend a helping hand of mercy to those struggling with same sex attraction.

There’s talk of wanting to ‘gatecrash’ Pinkdot to distribute pamphlets or carry placards etc.

My view is that would be a mistake. It would just make them look like victims.

Methinks we continue to engage in a civil way both online and off.

And let’s not rest on our laurels. We should do as much as poss to ensure that society does not change. And remain conservative.

We do what we can. God will do what we cannot.

Have a wonderful day in the Remembrance of God.

Syed Danial

Source: We are against Pinkdot in Singapore

June 7, 2015
Pink Dot SG: An Invitation To Lee Hsien Loong To Attend Pink Dot 2015

To Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong: an Invitation to Pink Dot 2015

It is very disappointing to hear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s response to the query on same-sex marriage at a recent interview with regional journalists.

Firstly, we respectfully differ with PM’s views that ‘we do not harass them (LGBT Singaporeans) or discriminate against them’. LGBT people in Singapore continue to be discriminated against through the existence of Section 377a of the Penal Code.

While it is claimed that Section 377a is not enforced, its presence alone encourages discrimination and reinforces prejudice, leading to censorship in the media and the aggravation of negative stereotypes, impacting the health and wellbeing of a significant segment of society. Young LGBT people grow up in fear of being bullied by schoolmates, and cast out by family members. Working adults hide their true selves because they fear being ‘outed’ would affect their chances at promotion, or even cost them their jobs and their means to survive. Transgender individuals are often called names on the streets, labelled as deviants, denied many mainstream jobs, and are sometimes assaulted.

In a recent study – Singapore’s first and currently only – of 450 LGBT respondents¹, a staggering 60% had said that they had faced discrimination or abuse in their lifetime. A significant majority of these individuals also reported an increase incidence of suicidal thoughts and behavioural issues.

Compounding this issue, is the dearth of information and resources available for community and social groups to provide proper assistance to those in real need of help – an added effect resulting from Section 377a and censorship regulations.

We hope Mr Lee can empathise with the LGBT community, who – despite the challenges they face: ridicule, verbal and at times even physical abuse from their own kin – continue to contribute faithfully to the Singapore dream, to the only home that they know.

We acknowledge the concerns raised by PM – given Singapore’s unique position as a multi-cultural, multi-racial and multi-religious society, there will be a plurality of viewpoints, some deeply entrenched. However, we disagree that this is something that should not be discussed – it is not a topic that can be swept under the carpet and allowed to fester.

We firmly believe that dialogue is our best way forward. As such, we would like to invite Prime Minister Lee to join us in celebrating the Freedom to Love, this Saturday, June 13, at Hong Lim Park, and meet with the individuals, families, and loving couples who form a vibrant part of Singapore’s social fabric.

In Singapore, racial and religious minorities are protected under the constitution. It is our hope that sexual minorities will one day be afforded the same protections, in order for us to live our lives without fear of being seen as less-than-equal in the eyes of the law.

Whether Singapore will eventually abolish Section 377a and create a society truly based on justice and equality, that values all contributing citizens regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity; a lot will depend on fostering goodwill and encouraging respect among groups and individuals.

It is also our hope that Singaporeans will one day all come together to celebrate inclusivity and diversity – for it is through this, and love for one another, that we show our true strength as a nation. – Pink Dot SG

¹Homophobia and Transphobia Survey by Oogachaga Counselling and Support

Source: Pink Dot SG

June 7, 2015
Sharon Au Apologises For Insensitive Remark

SINGAPORE – Former MediaCorp actress Sharon Au has apologised for her attempt at mimicking an Indian accent during Friday night’s SEA Games opening ceremony pre-show at the National Stadium.

Au, who shared hosting duties with actor Chua Enlai and television presenter Nikki Muller, wrote on her personal Facebook page on Saturday morning: “It was intended to be comic but in hindsight I realise how insensitive it was. I sincerely apologise to those whom I’ve inadvertently offended.”

Hi everyone, it was truly a magnificent SEA Games Opening Ceremony and I was really honoured to be part of it. Some of…

Posted by Sharon Au on Friday, June 5, 2015

Agence France-Presse (AFP) journalist Bhavan Jaipragas had accused Au of putting on a strong Indian accent to mock a young Indian girl sitting in the stands. He also said Au made fun of the girl’s name.

Jaipragas detailed the incident in a Facebook post on Friday evening, in which he called on Au and the organising committee to apologise.

“In an audience interaction segment before the start of the SEA Games opening ceremony at the National Stadium, emcee Sharon Au approached an Indian girl seated in the stands. The girl did not properly perform the act – saying aloud a line welcoming foreign contingents (others before her didn’t get it right too). Au, speaking into a mike and with the cameras trained on her, shockingly put on a strong Indian accent, and while shaking her head from right to left asked the girl: “What (Vat) happened? What happened?” he wrote.

‘Insensitive remark’ at SEA Games pre-opening ceremony activity: EDIT: Sharon Au has apologised for what she described…

Posted by Bhavan Jaipragas onFriday, June 5, 2015

Au had taken a step back from the acting and hosting limelight since returning from her overseas studies in 2011 to take up an executive position at MediaCorp.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

June 7, 2015
Walid J Abdullah: Sharon Au Incident Shows Racism And Majority Privilege Are Real Problems In Singapore

Sharon Au made an inexcusable mistake yesterday with her racist remarks. If it was a junior host/comedian, one could perhaps understand the mistake (though it still cannot be excused), but for someone as experienced as her, it is neither understandable nor acceptable. Truth be told, Indians (and other minorities) go through such situations on an almost daily basis.

For me personally, it is most disappointing when religious teachers and people who are called ‘Ustaz’ make such comments in mosques, under the excuse ‘oh, it’s just a joke’. Racism persists because we allow it to: i strongly believe we should call these people out whenever they make such stupid ‘jokes’ (yes, i say these are stupid, because an intelligent person usually does need to resort to racism to get a laugh from his/audience). Do not let them get away with it.

At the same time, Sharon has apologized unequivocally, and we should be forgiving. We should reserve harshest treatment for the recalcitrants, who perennially and unapologetically make racist comments despite being advised not to so. Many bigger names than her have made racist comments – including PAP Members of Parliament – and then used the excuses of ‘I was misquoted’, ‘You do not have a sense of humour’, ‘My words were taken out of context’, and so on, to
justify their chauvinism.

Hopefully, incidents like this remind Singaporeans not to delude themselves into thinking that racism is something ‘that happens in other countries’, and that majority privilege does not exist.

Source: Walid J Abdullah

June 7, 2015
Alfian Sa’at: Unfortunate That Racial Discourse Framed In Terms Of Sensitivity, But Sharon Au Has Apologise, Let’s Move On

I don’t know Sharon Au as a friend. But I have met her before, and I remember that we were both enthusing about how much we loved Haresh Sharma’s plays. (Au declared he was her favourite Singaporean playwright.)

I actually don’t like it when racial discourses are framed in terms of ‘sensitivity’, because the aggrieved parties–often minorities–are then cast as humourless and oversensitive. And that’s really quite wrong, because God knows how minorities have often used laughter to deal with…all the stuff we have to deal with! I’d much rather such comments be flagged as ‘inappropriate’ rather than ‘insensitive’. This is because the discourse on sensitivity vests all the authority in the aggrieved party to define where the line of offence lies and when it has been crossed–unfortunately breeding resentment. But when we describe something as ‘inappropriate’ there is a sense that a whole community (of Singaporeans) takes responsibility for defining what should be the norms in our multicultural society.

So when Au imitated an Indian accent when she spoke to an Indian member of the audience, was she being ‘insensitive’? Certainly it’s ‘lame’, ‘off-colour’ and even a little ‘tone-deaf’. It could have been funny in a situation, for example, if the girl had a chance to try on a Chinese accent (there’s such a thing, and it has given us choice phrases like ‘SQ me’ and ‘solly solly’ and ‘probrem sums’) as a way of getting back at Au. And this is what I believe happens when friends interact with each other. A close friendship gives you license to poke fun at each other–though you always take cues from the other person, who’ll lead with self-deprecating remarks: “Sorry, I’m very Chinese, I must insist the taxi driver give me my 5 cents change”; “Eh, I bring shame to the Malays lah, I really cannot play soccer”; “I’m very Indian, I cannot wear all this monochrome stuff, I must have at least three colours on me.”

I think as a very experienced host, Au’s instinct is always to establish rapport with the audience member. But I think she flubbed–and I truly think it is an honest mistake–because she might have assumed that it is the ability to make these racial comments that establishes rapport. This is getting it backwards: you build the rapport first, you gain the other person’s trust, before you get permission to say such things (and you should be able to take as good as you give). I think at the spur of the moment, Au might have looked at that audience member and immediately thought: ‘talk to her in that teasing, jokey way you talk to your Indian friend’. But of course the audience member was a total stranger (in a public setting), and which stranger could take kindly to such remarks?

Au has apologised, gracefully and sincerely, without attempting to justify what she did (which is more than I can say of those who might claim that they’re being ‘victimised’ by political correctness and that ‘people can’t take a joke anymore’–or worse, say that ‘I have many Indian friends so I can’t be racist’).

And now on to the rest of the Games!

(PS: Some people cannot read properly so let me summarise. This isn’t saying ‘she did nothing wrong’. This is saying, ‘she did something wrong and admitted it and made a voluntary apology’. There’s a difference k?)

Source: Alfian Sa’at

June 7, 2015