----------------------------------
25 April 2009
Straits Times Online Forum
The truth behind the fracas surrounding the so-called leadership coup at Aware has finally come to light. A group harbouring anti-homosexual sentiments had become upset over the organisation's promotion of social equity for gays and lesbians, and wanted to reinstate 'traditional values'.
Is it not pungent with irony that a group dedicated to the promotion of equal rights for women should implicitly advocate social discrimination against another group? One would expect that individuals who undoubtedly appreciate the historical struggles women had to endure to free themselves of their societal shackles, also appreciate a similar, contemporary struggle for social acceptance. Have the oppressed become the oppressors?
But I understand that, for these individuals, it is a matter of morality. Their interpretation of their religion dictates that an innate sexual condition is grounds for opprobrium.
They might perhaps consider that even today, in certain societies, their counterparts continue to face unrelenting and imaginable prejudice, also because of an innate sexual condition - that of merely being a woman. Those who oppress them do so under the banner of perceived morality as well. Stories of how women are treated in some countries by the 'morality police' shock the conscience of women and men, straight and gay alike. Is it really moral or the fruit of a religion, whose early members were themselves persecuted as ideological deviants, to discriminate against people who are different?Ultimately, this is not just a battle between pro- and anti-homosexual factions. It is but one front in the larger war against discrimination of all kinds. But just as the tide of history turned in favour of women in Singapore, so too will it eventually turn in favour of other groups. As for the new leadership at Aware, they must now struggle to keep their heads above the choppy waters of irony.
Joel Nicholas Chua
No comments:
Post a Comment