Rilek1Corner

Tag: Pink Dot

  • 5 Local Companies We’d Love To See Supporting Pink Dot

    5 Local Companies We’d Love To See Supporting Pink Dot

    Pink Dot, with the help of Darius Cheung (CEO of 99.co), has turned to local companies for support for its annual event. The campaign, Red Dot for Pink Dot, aims to be a platform for local businesses to lend their voices to advancing the values of diversity and inclusiveness. Around 50 companies have already done so, and we expect that the target of 100 will be reached with ease.

    At the same time, we found ourselves with a niggling sense that something is still missing. Most of the companies that have come forward are hip, contemporary, and millennial-oriented (and driven) brands. Their backing, while praiseworthy, still feels a little like we’re preaching to the choir in terms of corporate support for LGBT rights.

    In our opinion, it would be a truly powerful statement if brands we didn’t expect—brands that are familiar, traditional, “uncool,” and mass-audience oriented—actually stepped forward to show their support for the community; brands like the ones below.

    1. Sheng Siong

    If you think about it, Sheng Siong has kind of always been the anti-NTUC. Their sponsorship would hence be symbolic in its tongue-in-cheek opposition of the Singaporean government and its stand on LGBT rights. For homegrown brands like these, pledging support can only lead to good publicity. After all, it’s not like anyone is actually going to boycott the brand.

    2. POPULAR

    Unlike companies like Edible Garden City and Carrie K., there is nothing trendy about POPULAR and its bookstores. Instead, they serve a very essential and utilitarian need. In the same way, the goal for LGBT rights has always been for them to eventually become banal and commonplace. Nothing captures this aspiration better than the support of a regular, unsophisticated brand like POPULAR.

    3. Eu Yan Sang

    Here we have a brand that was literally built by one of Singapore’s founding fathers. Apart from the fun fact that Eu Tong Sen Street is right down the road from Hong Lim Park, how cool would it be for them to show that their values have progressed along with their business? Even their company slogan is ‘Caring since 1879.’

    4. TungLok Group

    If companies like The Lo and Behold Group can show their support for Pink Dot, why can’t TungLok Group? The restaurant group, with more than 15 brands under its portfolio, has always been known for the family-centric dimension of its restaurants. As such, the brand is aptly positioned to acknowledge the importance of familial support in the lives of queer folk who often struggle with coming out.

    5. Kim San Leng

    Nothing is more central to Singaporean life than the humble coffee shop. The Kim San Leng group, with more than 30 food centres across the island, is the very definition of mass-appeal. This is exactly why its support would go a long way towards demonstrating that queerness is nothing bizarre. Instead, it’s perfectly normal, just like our undeniable cravings for hawker fare.

    For these brands, there’s nothing to lose by doing this. You might get a few idiots talking shit online as a result, but trust us, they’re still going to be eating at Kim San Leng and shopping at Sheng Siong.

    Source: http://ricemedia.co

  • Pansexual Local Teen To Christian Parents: Watching Movie With Gay Characters Won’t Make One Gay

    Pansexual Local Teen To Christian Parents: Watching Movie With Gay Characters Won’t Make One Gay

    Twitter user @bxbyqueen shared a conversation she and her mother had on a private Whatsapp group. In the conversation, the mother referred to a Straits Times reportt on the National Council of Churches of Singapore’s (NCCS) letter to churches which urged pastors to “alert” their congregation about the homosexual content in Disney’s remake of the movie Beauty and the Beast. The mother suggested that it is an attempt by Disney to influence young minds that gay relationships are normal.

    @bxbyqueen who describes herself as pansexual in Twitter replied to her mother that watching a movie with gay characters in it won’t make the person gay. And that by the parents’ logic, Jesus would love gay people the most.

    The user said that her parents are hardcore Christians and that they were going to get very upset with her for making public their private conversation, but that she could not ignore it. The teens tweet has gone viral with over 3.1K retweets.

     

    Source: www.theindependent.sg

  • LGBT Community Given A Lot Of Public Space In Singapore, Why Pushing For More?

    LGBT Community Given A Lot Of Public Space In Singapore, Why Pushing For More?

    Dear All Singapore Stuff,

    This is what I saw this Sunday on my MRT ride back home. Two men openly kissing on the train. Everyone was looking at them. I was kind enough to take the pic without a direct shot of the boy’s face.

    I respect everyone’s rights, but this is Simply Disgusting in a public space.

    What if my children saw this and asked “Mummy, why are the two men kissing?”

    Would I have to answer “It’s the same as normal love and marriage. The only difference is that one man opens his buttocks for the other man to put his private part inside but in the end, no babies come out. They only get AIDS”?!

    Is this another publicity stunt by the gay community?

    Most people in SG already know they exist but would prefer that they just go back inside the closet and stop seeking attention.

    Recently, Minister Chan Chun Sing bravely spoke out against public displays of homosexuality in Singapore. These were his words “I’m not going to discriminate … (You’re free to do) whatever you do behind your bedroom doors … It’s not my problem. I’m not a sex policeman … But if you tell everyone to champion pro-LGBT or anti-LGBT (causes), it (might) cause social divisions, so (I have to step in) to be the policeman in the middle.” (source: http://m.todayonline.com/singapore/chan-chun-sing-urges-youth-go-beyond-…)

    It seems that we really need sex policemen like Mr Chan and stricter laws to keep the urges of the gay community in check. The gay minority can do whatever they want in their bedroom but they should not be going around promoting the gay lifestyle and demanding for gay marriage. They can be gay but we have our right not to accept their behaviour in public. A vast majority of Singaporeans do not approve of gay marriage and are unlikely to change our minds anytime soon. Singapore should not degenerate into a free-for-all where gay men can brazenly go around wrecking young boys’ buttocks in the name of love, without fearing the consequences of their actions.

    Homosexuals should be thankful that they have their annual Pink Dot. We as the moral majority have already given them enough public space. What more do they want? Gay sex parties? Gay parades? To be able to teach kids about gay sex? Some of them are not contented with Pink Dot and intimacy in private. Instead, they want to flaunt their gayness in public and ‘confront’ normal heterosexual couples until they accept them as normal and see them as equally ‘married’. No, homosexual relationships are not normal and therefore will be never be equal to a real marriage between a man and a woman. We have to draw the line at some point. For many of us, life is not just about fulfilling sexual fetishes that are falsely attributed to genetics.

    Melinda
    A.S.S Contributor

    Source: www.allsingaporestuff.com

     

  • MHA: Foreign Companies Need Permit To Sponsor, Promote Or Participate In Speakers’ Corner Events

    MHA: Foreign Companies Need Permit To Sponsor, Promote Or Participate In Speakers’ Corner Events

    Foreign companies will need a permit to sponsor, publicly promote or get its employees to participate in events at the Speakers’ Corner, stated the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Friday afternoon (Oct 21).

    For the first time, the ministry made clear what a Singapore entity was: those incorporated or registered in Singapore and controlled by a majority of Singapore citizens.

    The entity’s directors must be mostly Singaporean, and the majority of its ownership must be held by Singaporeans or one or more Singapore companies.

    Meanwhile, the ministry is loosening rules for local entities organising events at the Speakers’ Corner. From next month, Singapore companies or non-government organisations no longer need permits to hold events at the Speakers’ Corner. Now, only Singapore citizens are exempted.

    In its news release on the amendments to the rules, the ministry reiterated that the Speakers’ Corner was set up in 2000 for Singaporeans to express their views on issues that concern them.

    “The Government’s position has always been that foreign entities should not interfere in our domestic issues, especially those of a political or controversial nature,” said the MHA. “The amendments reinforce the key principle that the Speakers’ Corner was set up primarily for Singaporeans.”

    MHA is also extending the rules to those who participate at Speakers’ Corner events through remote means. So foreign entities will also need a permit if they speak through teleconferecing or pre-recorded messages at the Speakers’ Corner.

    These changes come on the back of reviews to Speakers’ Corner rules which the MHA started in June. The ministry had wanted to “make it clear that foreign entities should not fund, support or influence” events held at Speakers’ Corner, such as June 4’s Pink Dot – the annual lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rally.

    This year’s Pink Dot – the eighth such – attracted 18 sponsors including multinational companies such as Google, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Visa and General Electric.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Championing LGBT Equality Does Not Necessarily Mean Being Pro-LGBT

    Championing LGBT Equality Does Not Necessarily Mean Being Pro-LGBT

    I refer to the report “Chan Chun Sing urges youth to go beyond relying on good grades for jobs” (Sept 24).

    Offering his personal views on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Chan Chun Sing said: ““I’m not going to discriminate … I’m not a sex policeman.”

    When we have a law like Section 377A, however, which criminalises male gay sex but not female gay sex, then it is effectively a “sex policeman” and discriminates against gay males. Mr Chan’s comments seem incongruous with the current situation.

    Also, people supportive of LGBT equality are not “pro-LGBT” per se, not in the way that it would be seen as elevating LGBT people above others nor be seen as morally equivalent to those who are “anti-LGBT”.

    For example, if some people are racist against blacks, and there are laws or social programmes that promote general racial equality, then it would be inaccurate to claim that equality legislation is pro-black.

    Likewise, it is incorrect to portray equality for all, including LGBT people, as being pro-LGBT.

    LGBT activists tend to speak out against bullying of LGBT people and also bullying in general because they tend to see or experience the harm of bullying first-hand and are inclined to try to stop it.

    Let us not confuse this with being pro-LGBT per se. People who speak out against bullying of blacks or racist bullying in general are not generally seen as being pro-such-and-such a race.

    I also see support for things like proper relationship and marriage equality not so much as pro-LGBT but as pro-marriage.

    Decades ago in the United States, some areas outlawed mixed-race marriage, but when that was overturned, it helped to improve the relationships of those couples. And this has a positive knock-on effect on society.

    As a married heterosexual Singaporean, my marriage would not be affected if same-sex marriage were ever allowed. It is not as if mine would suddenly crumble because some other same-sex couple could marry.

    There is no rational basis for claiming harm to marriage where same-sex marriage is allowed.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com