In September of 2018, the Supreme Court of India, in a landmark ruling, lifted Section 377, the Indian law that effectively made any slightest homosexual act illegal and a crime one can get persecuted for. Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said, “The LGBTQ community has the same fundamental rights as citizens. The identity of a person is very important and we have to vanquish prejudice, embrace inclusion and ensure equal rights. “History owes an apology to members of the community for the delay in ensuring their rights,” Justice Indu Malhotra, another judge said.
Does this sound oddly familiar to Singaporeans? It should, because the Penal Code of this country also has a similarly-named law, Section 377A, which also serves the same purpose of making homosexual actions illegal. Coincidence? No. Both India and Singapore were former possessions of the globe-spanning British Empire, and our colonial masters in the Victorian era with their Victorian attitudes towards “morals” and “decency” were no fans of homosexuality. Both countries, as well as a host of other Commonwealth nations, inherited these “sodomy laws” from the British, leaving a strong legacy to this very day. The Human Rights Watch report, “This Alien Legacy”, shows how laws criminalizing consensual same-sex conduct were introduced across Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the Pacific, and the Caribbean under British rule, contributing to a climate of hostility against LGBT people. Yes, the Empire did give the world railroads, cables, steamships, abolition of slavery, parliamentary democracy and the English language, but also a fair bit of homophobia!
Well, that was the Victorian era, but times must have changed right? In many ways yes. As attitudes became more tolerant and progressive in the 20th century, this archaic law became a remnant of a bygone era. The UK lifted it in the 1960s, and India is in the latest addition of countries to have called it a good riddance. What about Singapore? Since we like to pride ourselves as one of the most advanced and sophisticated countries in Asia, we should have made far more progress than a “third world country” like India, right? No, instead one will be disappointed to realise that Section 377A is not only intact, but shows no signs of going away. In fact, when Prime Minister Lee was interviewed by BBC’s Stephen Sackur who asked why would the government not, as a symbol of change, lift the law, PM Lee asserted it was something that society in Singapore would be unready for, and if a referendum was held, the law will stay. He went on to add how there would be ensuing backlash should the law be lifted, citing opposition to legalising gay marriage in the West.
Yet the lack of readiness and liberalism from “society” (which in itself is a vague term) does not change the fact that this is outright legal and institutional discrimination against the LGBT community in Singapore. It is important to ask if there even is any practical purpose in having such a law. Look at what the courts in Singapore have decided. The law is there, but we do not see men in the news persecuted for engaging in homosexual activities, because such a law is literally unenforceable. How is the police or any other form of law enforcement supposed to check up on the personal and private lives of individuals, especially when their priorities should be to crack down on crime that actually incur a great deal of social cost?
So the question stands: Should this statute be lifted? Objectively, from the greater societal point of view, definitely. Wait but isn’t society “not ready” yet and “too conservative” for these changes? Well, then we would have to delineate what even constitutes society. Who are the ones who are so vehemently opposed to decriminalising homosexuality? In PM Lee’s own words, “The society is basically a conservative one. It is changing, but it is changing gradually and there are different views, including views especially from the religious groups who push back”. Religious groups may often see tension with the concept of homosexuality, seeing it as contrary to certain “moral standards” that they traditionally uphold. And while it is difficult to answer a question like “Does homosexuality go against Christianity/Islam?”, that is irrelevant to the discussion here. The fact of the matter is that Singapore is secular, we do not have a state religion and we are certainly not a theocracy where religion can dictate the law. As such, it would be in fact outright unconstitutional to allow religion to influence the laws and policies of that state. With that said, the backlash against decriminalising homosexuality is not exclusive to the religious community. PM Lee cites the experiences of Western countries, by saying, “There is a trend in developed countries. In America, they have gay marriage. It is state by state. Not all states have agreed. In Europe, some countries have done it but there was big considerable resistance. Even in America, there is a very strong pushback from conservative groups against the idea.” Yes, it is true that there will be backlash, but the same applies for any decision made by the government. But one cannot possibly wait for unanimous support to make a decision. That is not how democracy works. Rather, change will come with the times, and while there will be some groups that are unhappy about it, society has to move on. Let’s take the example of the women’s suffrage movement in the early 20th century. Certainly, there were male chauvinists who would have resented the ability for women to vote, but society moves on and evolves progressively. The same is true for homosexuality. In certain countries (not exclusive to the West, Taiwan has legalised it as well) where gay marriage has been legalised, there is the pushback from conservative groups, but society still has to go forward, and not allow the backward-minded to dictate our laws. And lifting Section 377A is only decriminalising homosexuality per se, it is still a long way to gay marriage that we see elsewhere. Critics are really exaggerating the extent of the impact way too much when they make outlandish claims of how lifting the law will lead to a “breakdown in the family unit” or a “degradation of morals”.
But as the prime minister rightly noted, even if he were to remove the law, he would not be removing the problem. (Yet it will certainly reduce the problem in the legal and institutional aspect) Because discrimination against the LGBT community is a social issue, the heart of the problem still lies within social attitudes, which while can be influenced, is not dictated by the law. The problems I shall highlight here are definitely noy exclusive to Singapore, but can be felt more greatly here than other developed countries due to a certain rigid conservatism in such attitudes.
The most common of such attitudes we hold is that of subconscious discrimination. Let me start with a very simple experiment. Picture three images: one of a man and a lady holding hands intimately with each other, the second one with two ladies, and the third one with two men. Deep down, which I myself admit to as well, the first and second images would seem to most of us as perfectly normal, while the third will ring sirens of scandal and indecency. Yes, public displays of affection between men are a scene we have been brought up and conditioned to frown upon. In fact, any form of perceived effeminacy would be badly looked upon in a society where males still very much indulge in a certain degree (occasionally toxic) of “masculine brutalism”. There is pressure to put up a tough front, make crude jokes, and not cry or display emotion. Those who show the opposite characteristics, such as being smaller-sized, soft-spoken, high-pitched, or sometimes just being the hallmark of being a civilised man and refusing to partake in barbarism, will be a point of particular ridicule. If they are unfortunate enough, they may be labelled as “gay”, regardless of their actual sexual orientation. Firstly, such toxic masculinity is inherently discriminatory since the label “gay” is used as an insult, suggesting directly that homosexual males are a species frowned upon. Second, it displays a fundamental lack of understanding of what being gay or homosexual means. The reality? You can be a gay man, and be strong, tough, deep-voiced; you can be a straight man, and be soft-spoken, feeling, and caring. Most often, as a complex, unique individual, you are all of these things. Unnecessary restrictions on ‘acceptable’ gendered behavior are plain harmful. It is quite clear that most people do not understand the LGBT community and what those labels actually mean and what they do not mean. In fact, if you happen to personally know a friend or relative from this segment of the population, it may be easier to comprehend, but most of us are still pretty ignorant.
Anti-LGBT discrimination also finds its way into many spheres of life in Singapore, whether in an educational setting or in the military where all male citizens are conscripted into for 2 years of their youth. Growing up in this country, attended school here and currently enlisted into the military, I have certainly experienced and saw it first hand. In male environments, it is pretty common for fellow males to make unkind comments about gays, such as ridiculously suggesting that they are sexual predators intent on raping other men. Once again, a deep misunderstanding of homosexuality. By this line of reasoning, a straight man is also a sexual predator against women, in case one already does not realise the idiocy in some statements. For myself personally, as someone who prides myself in other pursuits rather than indulging in the culture of masculine brutalism, I also have encountered cases when other boys would insult me with the label “gay”. While it was easy to brush off for myself as a straight male, I could not help but be disgusted at the underlying discrimination and stereotyping so omnipresent. Into the military, most of us are all in for a significant culture shock, but it will be even greater for members of the LGBT community. “Picture your future wife, picture your future kids, picture your future house, any property of your choice—BTO, private, landed, resale. Picture that, and ask yourself, ‘Why must we serve?’” or lines with that effect are often chimed to us in the SAF. These heteronormative markers are beyond the reach of a gay man. The comments that fellow males make about gays become ever more widespread interacting with one’s fellow servicemen. “Are you gay?” is a question I have heard a few times already personally. Commanders may with the best intentions try to motivate you to run faster by saying something like, “Run faster lah, you ah kua is it?” (ah kua refers to transgender) Those who utter such words may say it is light-hearted banter, but there is some truth in every just kidding, and the things people say really reflect more on them than anyone else.
What then, is the impact of this? For most of us, this overly conservative and sometimes outright toxic mindset on the issue of our perception of the LGBT community makes this a particularly taboo topic. This is even so when Singapore tries to pride itself in being a diverse society. Multilingual, check. Multireligious, check. Multiethnic, check. But for seuxal orientation? Just don’t bring it up. In fact, in 2018, when I attended the Institute of Policy Studies’ 30th anniversary conference, which happened that year to be dedicated to the topic of diversity and equality, no one in the panel (largely composed of politicians and academics) dared to utter the problem of Section 377A, until an undistinguished member of the audience raised it up in the questionnaire. For straight people like myself, advocacy becomes extremely difficult, especially when fellow males are likely going to accuse me of being gay. For members of the LGBT community, they likely would have a psychologically unhealthy childhood growing up, and seeking help is a Herculean task.
But ultimately, how much will society actually lose, by lifting an archaic unenforceable law, and become more tolerant and accepting to our fellow humans? We do not lose anything, in fact our lives more or less go on as normal. But it does help the minority which is the LGBT community a lot, by a long shot. And yes, in case anyone forgets, they too are members of society who like me and you, make important contributions to the country.
I long for the day when the LGBT community can be respected equally and normally as citizens like the rest of us.
Comentários