SPG Supports Gay, Pre-Marital Sex, Dulan New Aware

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Leaders' acts reveal exclusionary stance
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to yesterday's reports about the press conference by the new executive committee (exco) of Aware, 'Lawyer's key role in Aware coup', 'New exco members tell of death threats', 'Long-time member and new exco lock horns' and 'Locks at Aware offices changed'.
My point is simple: Women who discriminate against other women should not lead an organisation meant to help all women. And it is clear that new Aware president Josie Lau and her fellow exco members discriminate against lesbians, women who choose premarital sex, and women who defend the right to have abortions, for a start.
That they have accused Aware of becoming a gay rights group only reflects their own homophobia and severely diminishes the vast portfolio of Aware's work in advancing the rights of all women.
Their actions since the election are telling of their direction away from Aware's spirit of inclusion - they have excluded committee member Chew I-Jin from an important press conference and excluded many more by changing the locks on the Aware centre without informing all members, causing confusion and forcing distressed women there for counselling to leave abruptly.
It appears that building a fortress against an imaginary siege is more important for Ms Lau and her fellow exco members than ensuring the smooth day-to-day functions of Aware, which include counselling distressed women.
I cannot see the new exco helping women who are retrenched from work or facing harassment as a result of their sexual orientation or their views on premarital sex and abortion. And that is just for a start. What other hidden discrimination do they harbour against other groups of women?
Aware gives help to many women that not everyone supports or approves of. Aware's gift to Singapore women is not that it toes the line of public consensus, but that it bravely pushes against the status quo to advance rights for all women.
If Ms Lau and her like-minded exco members truly want to help other women within the ambit of their religious convictions, they are free to do so - from within their church.
Singapore was founded on a creed of religious tolerance - but only so long as one group's religious convictions are not imposed on others.
Dionne Sok Ling Thompson (Mrs)

 

[makapaaa]

https://repository.ntu.edu.sg/browse-title?top=10356/14409

<TABLE class=miscTable align=center summary="This table browse all dspace content"><TBODY><TR><TD class=oddRowEvenCol headers=t1>2001</TD><TD class=oddRowOddCol headers=t2>Internet and ageing: challenges and opportunities.</TD><TD class=oddRowEvenCol headers=t3>Chua, Kong Ho.; Heng, Wendy See Yee.; Kho, Dionne Sok Ling.; Lam, Jayde Chit Fui.</TD><TD class=oddRowOddCol headers=t4>Final Year Project</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Focus on issues that affect women
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I AM appalled by what I read in yesterday's Straits Times on the kind of events and programmes Aware held under the old guard leadership.
Aware is all about women. During its charity gala, it should screen films that show women overcoming adversities or something that encourages women to be strong. Like a single mother successfully raising her children in difficult times.
While society may want to move towards tolerating homosexuality, Aware should not be championing these rights. The reason is simple: Aware's objectives should not include movements or rights of homosexuals and lesbians. It should leave these to other groups whose objectives include them.
I am also puzzled why men should be allowed to vote in a society that represents women? Trying to be 'inclusive' clearly deviates from this society, which is supposed to give women a voice.
Aware also has to be careful on what it is teaching future generations about families, marriage, relationships and sex.
As a parent, I feel children can be taught to tolerate differences in sexual orientation, but not encouraged to experiment with them.
As a woman, I want Aware to focus on something more pressing that affects women in general.
I believe the new executive committee is simply trying to refocus and realign Aware's objectives.
By not focusing on homosexuals and lesbians, it is not saying it is against them. Let us not turn this issue into a saga of pro-lesbians and pro-homosexuals versus anti-lesbians and anti-homo- sexuals.
Choo Yen Hui (Mdm)

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Will new leaders impose beliefs on Aware?
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE Aware situation has left me with many disturbing thoughts as a woman, wife and mother. I have never been involved with Aware in any way, but I always felt there was a need for such an association.
It is horrible that the new executive committee (exco) members have received threats and we should not allow such behaviour in our civilised society. I hope the police can help Aware president Josie Lau and her family.
However, we should not be blindsided and link these despicable threats with the old guard.
As a parent, I am concerned about the more insidious kinds of influence and messages my child is exposed to and the environment he will grow up in. What about qualities such as honesty, respect, openness, acceptance of diversity and inclusivity?
The high-handed behaviour of the new exco members demonstrates that they lack these qualities - from the way they treat past exco members, to their keeping silent on their agenda, to the way they changed the locks and held a press conference without informing the old guard. Are these the actions of a caring society that should include and help women from all walks of life?
The new exco claimed it wanted to honour the work of the past exco, but Ms Lau now says she was 'being very polite' when she said earlier that Aware had lost its focus.
While the new exco claimed it does not have an agenda, it is clear now it does. The new leaders joined Aware under instigation or persuasion from a single source to push their agenda.
It is highly worrying that the Aware exco now comprises mainly women from a certain religious sub-group with highly conservative points of view.
It seems to me that, contrary to the new exco's claims that the old guard was focused on issues of homosexuality, it is the new committee that has an agenda to eradicate any opinions on homosexuality contrary to its own.
I find it unbelievable that Dr Thio Su Mien says she has nothing personal against homosexuals, when her understanding of them demonstrates her ignorance. The homosexual friends I know came from neither abusive nor dysfunctional families.
As a multiracial, multicultural society, we have always thrived on and celebrated diversity and inclusivity. Singapore has taken steps forward because we have shown that people of different backgrounds - be they religious, racial or sexual - can work together.
Aware, as an organisation that supports women and equality, should all the more embody these values of openness, acceptance and candidness.
Thus the situation with Aware has broader implications beyond the group itself. If it is shown - and I am just giving a hypothetical example here - that a group of people with a specific ideology can simply take over an institution that embodies acceptance of diversity and celebrates non-discrimination, what would that signal?
I am sure the new guard are all good women individually and they have the right to their own beliefs. But will they impose those beliefs and challenge the very pillars that made Aware the credible and welcoming organisation it was, and I hope still is, regardless of race, religion and sexuality? Jean Tan (Mrs)

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Shocked at old guard's programmes
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I FELT compelled to write in after following the recent developments at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).
I applaud the new team and its courageous 'mentor', Dr Thio Su Mien, for highlighting to us how the agenda of the women's group had taken a wrong turn, which included promoting lesbianism and homosexuality. I must say that I had not been aware of this change in agenda. Is Aware not a non-profit organisation to help women?
As a parent, I am appalled by Aware's comprehensive sexuality programme in schools. If this is what youngsters learn in school, what will happen to Singapore in the next few years? This programme needs to be withdrawn immediately and the damage repaired.
And what is with holding a Mother's Day event featuring lesbian-friendly mothers and lesbian daughters? Or getting a gay activist to speak on HIV and so on?
Should Aware not spend precious time and resources helping women who are retrenched, jobless and in need? Or those suffering from family violence or discrimination at work, whether or not they happen to be pregnant?
The new Aware needs to take charge and steer the organisation back towards contributing to that fabric of society - families. Rebecca Wang (Mdm)

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Wrong to say old exco promoted lesbianism and homosexuality
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->AFTER reading yesterday's article, 'Lawyer's key role in Aware coup', I have to disagree with the statement that the old Aware exco promoted lesbianism and homosexuality in Singapore because it showed the film Spider Lilies at a charity gala. Such a statement is absurd.
If that was the case, then MediaCorp and other television networks promote terrorism and crime with the programmes they broadcast.
I have watched Spider Lilies, but that does not mean I am encouraged to be a gay. I have many gay and lesbian friends. I do not detest them because I know they have their reasons for being what they are. Again, having gay and lesbian friends does not mean I am encouraged to be a gay.
Showing movies like Spider Lilies will help us understand why some turn to lesbianism or homosexuality. We should find ways to help them instead of criticising or condemning them.
It is important that Singapore becomes more open about all issues, including lesbianism and homosexuality. Being open to such issues does not mean we are promoting lesbianism and homosexuality. Also, respecting lesbianism and homosexuality is not the same as promoting or supporting them. Ace Kindred Cheong

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Schools should not invite group to give sex talks
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- 4 or less paragraphs so show all paragraphs first before showing the media and bkstry and stuffs --><!-- story content : start -->THE news about Aware is disturbing. The truth is out. Schools should not invite the group to talk about sexuality if they are pro-gay.
<!-- story content : start -->The whole saga has shown that gays are organised and infiltrating groups that may have influence on society. I call on the authorities to close Aware as it will no longer be credible after this. <!-- story content : start -->Tan Siew Cheng (Ms)