Why You Should Care

19 Jan

From an entirely unscientific estimate, I would venture to say that most of the readers here are straight, non-religious, and more or less apathetic about “the gay issue”. Even if this site does indeed attract a particularly large and vocal group of people who are gay, or gay sympathizers, _you_ most likely don’t have a view about it and skip the entries whenever an issue like this comes up.

This is not an issue about gay rights. It is not an issue of your personal views towards homosexual sexual activity, and whether or not it puts you off. It is not an issue of morals. It is not about us wanting to marry and have children, or anything like that which you may not particularly care for. It is an issue which may just concern the person who sits next to you in class, the colleague you work with, the strange aunt who never married, the girls in the bars who amusedly fob off all male advances and REALLY mean it, it may even concern your brother. Or sister. Who has slept in the same bedroom as you have for the last 20 years.

You need to care this time.

You see, there is bigotry or ambivalence arising from personal experience, uninformed opinions, the lack of exposure, all of which is not necessarily homophobia. Then there is bigotry, hatred, and NO ambivalence, arising from organized groups with a religiously guided, moralistic, didactic, and deliberately misleading founding principle and resulting modus operandi. This is dangerous because it doesn’t have to be about homosexuals at all. You could swap out homosexuals for anything else which collides with their world view (wait, divine view), and the end result is the same: discrimination of the highest order. Think of it as the more organized and sophisticated equivalent of the street evangelist who runs after you, and instead of telling you to accept Jesus (even if you’re Catholic), he tells you: everything about you is flawed. Come to Jesus and drink.

Granted, these people do seem to hold the view that everything about everyone is flawed. But what if there is an element of insidious organization, and a completely erroneous approach to ‘healing’? The street evangelist now comes up, not just running after you this time, but saying: you are wrong on sexuality. You are broken. You are the lost sheep. You need salvation or forever be damned. Everything about you is flawed — and no, it isn’t Jesus who is the answer to cure these flaws — it is reparative therapy of the scientifically suspect sorts. Upsize for a ticket to eternal salvation and everlasting goodness.

You don’t need to agree with any of us on WHY homosexuals are the way they are, whether it is because of gay genes or environment. You don’t even have to find the thought of homosexual sexual intercourse inviting. You only have to be repulsed at the thought of having _someone else completely unrelated to you_ thinking he is in the best position to lift you from the miserable pit only he has the third eye to see, with skills divinely ordained, with a calling he made up for himself, to lead you towards the land of milk, honey, and interactive penises and vaginas (only with each other, and only married ones, of course).

The organization under discussion now is Liberty League, a” group which [wishes to] promote gender and sexual health for the individual, family and society”, with thinly veiled religious affiliations. It received $100 000 from the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre, with money which comes from the Ministry of Community Development and Sports (story here). Even as a self actualization program (and most self actualization schemes are complete shams), it does not appear to have much going for it, for its four core modules are, with special focus on gays and lesbians:

*Explorer*
Take off on your maiden flight to understand human sexuality. Explores core values with a biological, psychological, sociological and spiritual perspective.

*Challenger*
Develops grit and tenacity to overcome difficulties when the going gets tough. Gets down to deeper issues of hurt, bitterness, dependency, addiction and abuse.

*Achiever*
Scaling new heights to achieve goals for both short- and long-term. Becoming secure and moving beyond brokenness to love others, growth and restoration are well in sight.

*Liberator*
Focuses on the concerns of care-givers, friends and family who wish to reach out to those who struggle with sexual brokenness. Liberation of others begin with your own.

Its leader was a former transsexual man who, just before his sex change, received the (religious) epiphany, and went on to pen the book “Freedom of Choice”, in which “in which every essay preached self-hate. It even railed against masturbation. Its basic premise was that gays and lesbians had the freedom to be become ex-gay” (citing “Alex”:http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-495.htm). Now he is the leader of Liberty League, and it is known his point of reference is an American Protestant minister who was transsexual as well, “came out of it” to marry and minister. He compares the group’s mission to be somewhat akin to counselling alcoholics, or anyone with an addiction — in itself, worrying for all the right reasons. What addiction is he talking about? What ailment is he trying to treat?

For a group which seems so intimately interested in developing (straight) potential and helping to _overcome_ our “problems” (addiction and abuse, BROKENNESS), what qualified direction will it take? Qualified practitioners of psychiatry or psychology? Well, these fields have already long established their stand: that this is NOT a condition which needs such treatment, it is not a disease, AND, they make clear, that reparative therapy poses an immeasurable harm. The ‘experts’ who disagree are currently in the employ of the Bush government, which no doubt shares sentiments with ours, concocting fabulous studies and statistics which demonstrate how right they are and how wrong everyone else is. Does it then seem to be, as all evidence points towards, that Liberty League and any other equivalent movements here, are thus left to be staffed with those people _concerned enough about the gay threat_ — family counsellors? Church workers? A Reverend as a Spiritual Advisor? A celebration at the inauguration of the movement as one which helps broken people move from mourning into dancing?

The secrecy and shadiness with which the League has launched cannot be looked over. In being disingenuous over their internal structure, religious motivations, and suspect programs, and for its numerous contradictions in claiming to be for “human rights” and “freedom of choice”, they are not doing themselves any favours. Let it be said I have no quarrel with professed homosexuals “choosing” to “renounce” the “way of life”. It is not within my domain of influence or interest. I can’t help but cry “conspiracy” and “vested interests” when a group wanting to aid in the quest for sexual enlightenment and self knowledge has religious roots, more so when it hides it. But, you protest, it is good to have an avenue for the ‘confused’ to have a neutral party to turn to! Firstly — I won’t cede any neutrality credits to LL. Secondly, “confused” is not accepted terminology but a broad stroke of the same brush for anyone who doesn’t fit your idea of “normal”, so never ever use the words “confused” and “normal” in conjunction with the concept of sexuality ever again. Thirdly, if anyone really needs help, the existing infrastructure of self help gay run groups — some of which are perfectly religious, there being even one church led by a former Bishop — appears to be the more appropriate channel. So why is it that while “People Like Us”:http://www.plu.sg/ have campaigned for years to even be _recognized_ and have registered society status, a group which suddenly comes along with the clear aim to “convert” the lost sheep, is welcomed and given a pile of cash to do their job?

To witness the view of homosexuality as something “somewhat strange”, in public eyes, escalate into an organized force, is the nightmare we are well worth to avoid, if Ex Gay movements in the United States are anything to go by. That there are definite though unclear for now links between the religious fundamentalist groups in the United States and the equivalent groups here, is cause for further worry. I’m not likely to believe that people who cannot accept the separation of self from another being, are able to grasp the concept of separation of church and state — as American society is currently experiencing.

This episode further demonstrates that to the public eye there is neither room for, nor interest in, variations outside the accepted sphere of compulsory heterosexuality. While this is no secret, what is new here is the official recognition as such, in form of the formation of such an organization with such aims, aided by public money. What position is a former transsexual man in to preach to gays and lesbians — who, contrary to popular belief, are not separated at birth from transsexuals or transgenders or transvestites (between which there is also a significant distinction)? Our points of reference, and our experiences, are worlds apart. I can’t even give proper dating advice to my gay male friends, and my gay male friends can’t even give me proper pointers on room decoration. With this one sweep, it is now more clear than ever to me: anything outside compulsory heterosexuality is viewed to be part of the same blob, while I would protest our blobs are infinitely different, and not simply in consistency.

Institutionalized discrimination of this sort has long existed. I’ve made a fuss out of similar issues before, but I’m convinced this step — of granting money to a group premised so loosely (no pun intended) upon.. nothing of note, through a government body, for the public good of the society — takes us one step further down the slippery slope. One step away for those of us who, already penalized by this society for what is not within our control and which forms a fundamental part of our existence — that step away, of course, is that step towards another society which we must plan to adopt, as so many of the older gays and lesbians have chosen. When it isn’t even a stayer/quitter dilemma, because they make it so easy by taking the dilemma out of it.

With this, I conclude:

Freedom of Choice

Take my freedom, and I’ll shove it up your ass, FOC. Choice is a luxury we don’t have. What you perceive to be our bondage is not more serious than yours, the bondage of conflict and suppression.

P.S. I’ll say this one last time: I don’t care for my gayness. I care only for that I happen to love only women, and ‘gay’ is simply what everyone else calls us, since obviously my other traits like writer, photographer, geek, student, observant Christian, volunteer, awful cook, someone with a tidiness dysfunction, are not adequate points of reference, and there is nothing more important about me than what kind of hands I happen to hold.

possibly related

PLU Press Release /Like A Straw Up Your Nose /Did You Ask For It? /Virgin Post Swearing in Hokkien /One More Thing /
  • oli
    I guess there's the 'tolerance' stage where you've got to say "take it or leave it" to the 'homosexuality = sexual brokenness' posse.

    Then there's the 'respect' stage where you stamp out this kind of homophobia.


    On the legislation side of things, it seems the Government need to stop actively supporting homophobia before the official 'tolerance+ignoring the issue' stage can start. Then 20 years down the line - civil partnerships!

    If the gay community has gone from demanding 'tolerance' to 'respect', then you can expect general opinion to be a several years behind the curve, then the government behind that. It would make a nice graph.
  • popagandhi
    I can't have them care about this issue, without letting them know the full picture. It's a bigger conspiracy than it seems.
  • asparagus
    Too long. Get to the point quicker if you want people to care at all.
  • cindy
    i think...

    Take it, or leave it.
  • Hi, this is just to say that you've been linked from a post on Sg_ljers on LJ here.

    Personally, I think there are two issues here: one is the controversy around the ex-gay movement, and the other (which is rapidly being overshadowed by the former) is that the NVPC has violated its OWN RULES in funding a Christian-affilated organisation. The NVPC is only meant to fund secular programmes.

    People will argue endlessly about the legitimacy of the ex-gay movement. I don't think it's legit and I'll leave the arguments to the people who've commented above me. But the fact remains that such an organisation should not, whether or not its cause is justified, be getting government funding that violates the own laws under which such funding can be received. And that's that.

    It just smells of Focus on Family all over again. Luckily, the government recalled its grant to Focus on Family (I THINK). If we can complain (the one thing we're good at, c'mon Singapore!) enough to NVPC about this, hopefully they'll do the same with Liberty League.
  • popagandhi
    Sure, it's an opinionated and subjective issue, as I - and other gay people - are free to be opinonated and subjective about. But it's not us, but other heavily opinionated people, who have the tools, the ability, and the willingness, to throttle our throats; while we have to live with the manifestation of _their_ opinions. And help us if we ever do, because that'll be us being "militant" and "flamboyant". How do we ignore how "others" look at us (not that it has any sway over who we are)? It's like telling the victim of racism — and yes I do believe this form of discrimination to be at least comparable to racism — _it's how you want to look at it_.
  • Look at it on a smaller, more individual scale: There are so many people who are happy the way they are, and there are those who are not. Mr Leslie was part of the latter, and had decided to conform and be celibate - evidently a very difficult and painful task. Why, then, if he seems to be very concerned and wants to help, would he want to preach his ways and have others do what he did as if it's the only way? It is so obviously possible to be happy as you are, it's just how you want to look at it. Not how others want you to look at it. This is an extremely opinionated and subjective issue.
  • Dan
    Take a chill pill and digest what Einstein once said:

    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.

    People are sheep. They fear difference. They fear brilliance. They fear mavericks. Greatness comes from those who never fear sheeps. Let's be wolves.
  • rebecca
    oh & one more thing: sometimes i am appalled (and at turns AMUSED) by how naive some of these "professionals" & "social workers" are. i can't believe they still believe wholeheartedly in the idea that gay people have psychological problems. oh i can write an entire book on how gay people are EVERY BIT as sane as the next heterosexual guy in the train, but then no one would GET IT. because they are straight! i know, not all straight people are this naive, but it can be a little hard to imagine how a gay person thinks without being gay yourself. oh well, let them think all they want about how demented and twisted and in need of help we are (& how very mad, tormented, broken, depressed, suicidal we indeed will become someday just because we are gay).
  • rebecca
    exactly adri. in the 1st place who really gives so much damn abt being gay? i love women & that's that, nothing more & nothing less.. plus i'm so happy doing it that i sometimes forget if i've came out to my parents or not - which, of cos, doesn't matter at all. it's so hilarious how some people keep trying to "fix" us when we're perfectly happy & leading perfectly good lives. besides, why are they concerning themselves with OUR lives? if they've got the bloody time, spend it on building more schools for the impoverished kids in far-flung places.
  • MarriedMan
    The straw that breaks the camel's back.
    It was on this week's episode of TAB TV last night.
    The Lung Liberty League and Evelyn Tan's final
    prompt:
    Evelyn: Any final words ladies and gentleman?
    Lady Dr.:Yah,we will help genital abnormaly types of people but it is different from gays and lesbians who lead a life style and cultural thing. They need more psychological help!

    Albeit my imperfect heterosexist slant tends to sway me at times, I'm certain the program last night clearly shows affirmation of what you say.
  • jade
    i say activism brings balance to the force ;) no matter the issue (GLBT or whatever), there will always be one group or person to oppose another.
  • budak
    good point. In a sense, one can argue that the modern activist wing of the fundamentalist movement (of any religion) is really more about power than any real spiritual value. I look at it and wonder, "Where is the love?"
  • L
    I agree that people need to care about discrimination issues even though it doesn't affect them personally. But btw, how much do you care about other forms of suppression, committed by humans to humans and to animals? Do you care about the animal rights movement?

    Simple minded people will ask if I'm comparing humans to animals, well I'm not; I'm saying that the human tendency to suppress other beings can manifest itself in many forms, basically humans will suppress others, even the people who are suppressed and disciminated against aren't necessarily sympathetic to other causes and suppressed groups. That's the tragedy of the human race. People only care and fight for their own interests, and not out of fairness. So the world today is tipped in favor of the majority, the wealthy and the powerful.
  • I already have the freedom of choice :) I chose to love and cherish my sexy loving partner, who protects me and adores me, regardless of her gender.
  • offkilter
    From the telecast last night, anyone who welcomes this movement is really... ignorant... Anyone who is a qualified psychologist who states that homosexuals suffer from a psychological problem really shouldn't be taken seriously... unless by ignorant people.
  • anon
    I think the leslie guy is just preaching out of his experience just like any other gays telling people it is natural for them. If there is freedom then opposing views are usually present. Choose what you want to believe.
  • People are always trying to fix other people, not realising how 'broken' they are themselves.

    Although my problems didn't stem from sexuality, a fair number of people did try to 'help' me. And your post struck a chord with me; what right do THEY have to decide that I was 'broken'? (sure, I knew that for myself, but I was... enjoying it. Hurhur.)

    We're going up against a tidal wave here, though. The more irksome habits of the evangelical movement have started to take hold in a lot of community groups. So we'll probably see more and more zeal on the streets and in the schools.

    Don't let that stop you though. Rock on, and hold all the female hands you want.
  • budak
    I have heard the phrase "to each his own" from other parties who claim that opinions about GLBT issues are just that, opinions. And yet they go beyond mere opinioning into crusading, such as the uproar amongst church circles following PM Goh's no-civil service discrimination announcement.

    For those who have left the self-reinforcing circles of church congregations, it seems there is little that can be done to convince, much less open a mental door in those who live by very different rules and Weltanschauungs, for whom proof and free will carry specific, loaded and narrow meanings, and who deem it a mission, even their very raison d'etre, to proclaim and pursue their visions of ideality into secular realms.

    When those who insist on imposing their dogmatic views of science, origins and sexual habits upon the world at large in the guise of unaffliated cloaks, the least one could do is expose and refute these phantoms. But how can one penetrate the deeper wall of conceit that moulds a larger body of believers through captive messages and promises of divine reward?
  • onekell
    This reminds me of a discussion I had with an ex-colleague once. She asked, "why be gay if it involves so much suffering?" My first thought was: where do I begin?

    Then I tried to explain that their personal suffering arose from the social stigma associated with being gay/lesbian in our society and that it would be alleviated if society were more inclusive.

    I was angry with the idea of 'reparative therapy' because it targets people who are in pain and looking for help. A group of people ripe for exploitation, if ever any.

    After reading jade's comment, I realised that perhaps this movement was started with good intentions. Now my concern is, what is it that's said about the road to hell? Oh yes, it is paved with good intentions.

    I'm glad you wrote about this issue. I would be sorely disappointed (and angry) that our government funded them with full knowledge of their background and intentions.
  • ivan
    it's quite interesting their 'slogan' seems to be "freedom of choice", where in gay/lesbian fields, 'freedom of choice' is used to campaign for liberation, and promote awareness that man and women have a choice to be homosexual (it dispel notions that heterosexuality is a norm and the only way).
  • jade
    I write this in defense of Leslie’s work. While I have no connections whatsoever to Leslie or Liberty League I am inclined to reply to this post as a matter of conscience.

    True to his quondam history as an ex-transsexual transformed by God, Leslie is acting on the values that have shaped his life, and which he has steadfastly clung to despite having to suffer conflicting emotions and other tidings. And why believe something half-heartedly or conveniently follow values that suit my whims and fancy? There is no value in that. Instead, Leslie has taken to champion what he believes in, just as Alex Au has done for the GLBT community. To each his own. The GLBT “problem” is Leslie’s cross to bear, the thorn that was given him to endure and he is doing something about it. Does it matter that he is still attracted to men? There are many people of similar circumstance who have made the deliberate choice to abstain and obey, like Leslie. Like the Bible says, obedience is better than sacrifice. Leslie has chosen to obey what he believes is true. For his dedicated passion to his values I applaud him.

    If LL were as covert as was made out in your post, Leslie would never have made it to the news. He is a familiar figure in the ex-gay movement for one thing and his story one many of us have read or heard about. The CNA article is clear of his stance from the beginning - “Being gay and lesbian is part of it; coming out of it is part of it as well." Whatever religiosity involved in the formation of this group is obvious from Leslie’s affiliations and nothing has been done to hide them. We are not stupid people I’m certain.

    This issue has thrown the GLBT community into an uproar, firstly over the monetary sum and publicity given to this group. To be fair, the power vested into this group was made by the people from above, to be specific, MYDC. So blame this collusion on them if need be. Rant at them, not Liberty League. Your government has made the choices for your people and will continue to do so for as long as the conservative majority want it that way. The zeitgeist works against the GLBT community from all levels, starting from the home to the media to the very top level as exampled by this affair. At the end of the day, LL is yet another Christian ex-gay group but one who’s been given the opportunity (with emphasis) to make changes in the secular world.

    In my various incarnations as student, church-goer, youth volunteer, theatre practitioner and gay woman I live under different facades, speaking different tunes to different people. Born and raised in a conservative Christian family who border on homophobic, I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. My girlfriend and I live lives as clandestine as any Mr and Mrs Smith out there, and we suffer for living half-truths. Conflict and suppression are just one of the many complications of being gay in a Christian environment but is certainly not unique to the people like us. Each community will be as captious as the next so who’s right or wrong?
  • my dear

    Not that I mean to blog-lurk, for it is bloglines that helps and my late night too.

    It is too late now for anyone to sanely be incensed as you are right now, and I believe that not everyone is as intrapersonal about their views all the time.

    It has been but one night.

    I am sure folks will speak tomorrow.

    As for me (if I read properly, it really is late)-
    I have to admit to you that I am provoked by your opinions on this matter (otherwise I wouldn't be here now), but not as madly upset because: I am cynical. Clean sweep movements happen too often, to too many 'groups' of people - if we can even group people at all, we are after all unique. To me, clean sweep movements like this will occur, like fishing does: it brings in large quantities of target fish, among many other things. But it sure beats angling.

    Perhaps I have placed blinders on myself.

    Then again, clean sweep movements might have right intentions somewhere, even through imperfect modes of execution. I hate to say that I want to help people, that I am some ra-ra great missionary whatever, because I am far from qualified. (I am so far off from fabulous that if I did anything great for people, the virtue is divine and not elaine). But I am moved when I meet with someone's sadness, or brokenness, of any sort. To the point that I want to do something. Perhaps, some people that this movement you speak of wants to target, truly are broken - we never really know for sure, and we might never know.

    Not that I agree with publicly labelling people as broken.

    For God first loved us.

    There are a million and one sins in the bible. I commit them. You commit them. We know what they are. Wrongness cannot become righteousness except through forgiveness. We cannot justify them anyway else.

    Okay, I am tired. Probably gear right off-course if I continue. But I couldn't stand to have you think you lived in an apathetic world. If anything, I want you to know that we do care. Hope my comment shows some semblance of that intention.



    love,
    E
blog comments powered by Disqus